Byte Lab vs Very: full comparison for 2026
Quick verdict
Byte Lab (4.3/5) edges ahead of Very (3.8/5) overall. Byte Lab is the better choice for EU buyers wanting firmware plus low-volume boards. Very is the stronger option for US companies building a first connected product. The right choice depends on your project size, budget, and required tech stack.
Byte Lab vs Very: head-to-head summary
| Criterion | Byte Lab | Very |
|---|---|---|
| Founded | 2011 | 2011 |
| HQ | Zagreb, Croatia | USA (fully distributed) |
| Team size | 51–200 | 51–200 |
| Rating | 4.3 / 5 | 3.8 / 5 |
| Primary differentiator | ST and Nordic design partner that also offers low-volume manufacturing in-house | Product-strategy-led IoT development with Nerves and Elixir experience |
| Pricing model | Fixed project, time & materials | Time & materials, fixed project |
| Min. engagement | Not disclosed | Not disclosed |
| Primary tech stack | C, C++, Zephyr | C, Elixir, Nerves |
| Industries served | Industrial IoT, Consumer electronics, Medical devices | Industrial IoT, Consumer electronics, Energy & EV charging |
Byte Lab vs Very: overview
Byte Lab
Byte Lab began in Zagreb in 2011 and has grown into a group of roughly 150 people with offices in Croatia and Austria (per company website; independently unverifiable). It is a design partner for both STMicroelectronics and Nordic Semiconductor, and its services include embedded hardware design, firmware and embedded software development, GUI work and low-volume manufacturing. That last point is unusual among firmware vendors: a client can receive working boards in small quantities from the same company that wrote the code. Clutch reviews describe IoT, industrial and consumer device projects.
Very
Very is a US IoT engineering firm that grew out of a design and development agency founded in 2011 and now works as a distributed team, with its earlier base in Chattanooga, Tennessee. Directory listings put its size at 51 to 200 people. It builds IoT products across hardware engineering, firmware, mobile apps and data, and it hired a co-author of the Nerves project, which runs Elixir on embedded Linux. Reviews mention hardware, firmware, React Native and AI feature work, so firmware is one part of a broader product offer.
Services and capabilities: Byte Lab vs Very
| Capability | Byte Lab | Very |
|---|---|---|
| Bare-metal & RTOS firmware | ✓ | ✗ |
| Embedded Linux & BSP | ✗ | ✓ |
| Electronics & PCB design | ✓ | ✓ |
| Wireless & IoT connectivity | ✓ | ✓ |
| Secure boot & OTA | ✗ | ✗ |
| FPGA development | ✗ | ✗ |
| Firmware testing & HIL | ✓ | ✗ |
| Dedicated team model | ✗ | ✗ |
Tech stack comparison: Byte Lab vs Very
| Framework / platform | Byte Lab | Very |
|---|---|---|
| FreeRTOS | ✓ | N/A |
| Zephyr | ✓ | N/A |
| Embedded Linux | N/A | ✓ |
| Yocto | N/A | N/A |
| AUTOSAR | N/A | N/A |
| STM32 | ✓ | N/A |
| Nordic | ✓ | ✓ |
| NXP | N/A | N/A |
| FPGA | N/A | N/A |
Pricing comparison: Byte Lab vs Very
| Criterion | Byte Lab | Very |
|---|---|---|
| Minimum engagement | Not disclosed | Not disclosed |
| Engagement models | Fixed project, Time & materials | Fixed project, Time & materials |
| Rate transparency | Not public | Not public |
| Price tier | Mid-market | Mid-market |
Target audience comparison: Byte Lab vs Very
| Dimension | Byte Lab | Very |
|---|---|---|
| Best company size | Startup to mid-market | Startup to mid-market |
| Best industries | Industrial IoT, Consumer electronics, Medical devices | Industrial IoT, Consumer electronics, Energy & EV charging |
| Best use cases | Building 50–500 pilot units of a Nordic-based sensor with firmware, Developing a TouchGFX interface for an STM32 appliance controller | Taking a first IoT product from concept to pilot, Building Nerves-based device software on embedded Linux |
| Typical project type | Fixed project | Fixed project |
Byte Lab vs Very: pros and cons
| Byte Lab | |
|---|---|
| + | Low-volume production lets a startup get pilot units without finding a separate manufacturer |
| + | Design partner status with ST and Nordic covers the two MCU families most IoT products use |
| + | Croatian base means EU contracts and rates below Western European design houses |
| + | GUI work on LVGL and TouchGFX suits products with small touch displays |
| - | Low-volume manufacturing stops well short of mass production, so a contract manufacturer is still needed later |
| - | Less public material on regulated medical or automotive safety projects than larger firms |
| Very | |
|---|---|
| + | Combines product strategy, design and engineering for teams new to hardware |
| + | Nerves experience is rare and useful for Elixir-based device software |
| + | Delivers the device, app and data platform together |
| - | Firmware is one part of a product agency offer |
| - | US rates without a lower-cost offshore option |
| - | Office location and headcount details vary between sources |
Who should choose Byte Lab?
A typical fit: building 50–500 pilot units of a Nordic-based sensor with firmware.
ST and Nordic design partner that also offers low-volume manufacturing in-house. Minimum engagement is not publicly disclosed. Works best with clients in Industrial IoT, Consumer electronics, Medical devices.
Who should choose Very?
A typical fit: taking a first IoT product from concept to pilot.
Product-strategy-led IoT development with Nerves and Elixir experience. Minimum engagement is not publicly disclosed. Works best with clients in Industrial IoT, Consumer electronics, Energy & EV charging.
Decision matrix: Byte Lab vs Very
| Your situation | Recommended choice |
|---|---|
| You need full-ownership delivery on a defined project scope | Byte Lab |
| You need a large dedicated team for an ongoing programme | Check each company's engagement model |
| Your budget is at the lower end | Compare: Byte Lab (Not disclosed) vs Very (Not disclosed) |
| You need specialist depth in a specific vertical | Byte Lab |
| You need engineers to extend your own firmware team | Neither lists a dedicated-team model |
| You need consulting before committing to a build | Both may offer discovery engagements |
Use case fit: Byte Lab vs Very
| Use case | Byte Lab fit | Very fit | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Building 50–500 pilot units of a Nordic-based sensor with firmware | Strong | Limited | Byte Lab |
| Developing a TouchGFX interface for an STM32 appliance controller | Strong | Limited | Byte Lab |
| Taking a first IoT product from concept to pilot | Limited | Strong | Very |
| Building Nerves-based device software on embedded Linux | Limited | Strong | Very |
| Fixed-price firmware build | Strong | Strong | Both |
| Extending an in-house firmware team | Strong | Strong | Both |
Verdict: Byte Lab vs Very
Byte Lab (4.3/5) is the stronger overall choice for most Firmware Development projects. ST and Nordic design partner that also offers low-volume manufacturing in-house.
Very (3.8/5) is worth a look if you need building Nerves-based device software on embedded Linux. If your situation matches that, Very is a competitive option.
Related comparisons
Byte Lab vs Very FAQ
Is Byte Lab better than Very?
Byte Lab (4.3/5) scores higher overall, but "better" depends on your use case. Byte Lab's strongest advantage: low-volume production lets a startup get pilot units without finding a separate manufacturer. Very's strongest advantage: combines product strategy, design and engineering for teams new to hardware.
How do Byte Lab and Very differ in pricing?
Byte Lab uses fixed project, time & materials pricing. Very uses time & materials, fixed project pricing. Neither firm publishes a full rate card; a discovery call is required for project-specific quotes.
Which is better for enterprise: Byte Lab or Very?
Byte Lab is the larger team and typically the better enterprise-scale choice. For very large programmes, verify team size and compliance coverage directly with each service provider before shortlisting.
What are the main differences between Byte Lab and Very?
Byte Lab's primary differentiator is: ST and Nordic design partner that also offers low-volume manufacturing in-house. Very's primary differentiator is: product-strategy-led IoT development with Nerves and Elixir experience. They also differ in team size (51–200 vs 51–200), minimum engagement (Not disclosed vs Not disclosed), and primary industries served (Industrial IoT, Consumer electronics vs Industrial IoT, Consumer electronics).
Verify all details directly with each service provider before making a decision.