Dojo Five vs Very: full comparison for 2026
Quick verdict
Dojo Five (4.6/5) edges ahead of Very (3.8/5) overall. Dojo Five is the better choice for product teams wanting firmware with CI and test automation. 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.
Dojo Five vs Very: head-to-head summary
| Criterion | Dojo Five | Very |
|---|---|---|
| Founded | 2018 | 2011 |
| HQ | Saint Paul, MN, USA | USA (fully distributed) |
| Team size | 11–50 | 51–200 |
| Rating | 4.6 / 5 | 3.8 / 5 |
| Primary differentiator | Firmware-only consultancy that also sells its own embedded DevOps product, EmbedOps | Product-strategy-led IoT development with Nerves and Elixir experience |
| Pricing model | Time & materials, fixed project | Time & materials, fixed project |
| Min. engagement | Not disclosed | Not disclosed |
| Primary tech stack | C, C++, Zephyr | C, Elixir, Nerves |
| Industries served | Medical devices, Consumer electronics, Industrial IoT | Industrial IoT, Consumer electronics, Energy & EV charging |
Dojo Five vs Very: overview
Dojo Five
Where most vendors on this list sell hardware and firmware together, Dojo Five sells only firmware, plus the tooling around it. The Saint Paul, Minnesota company was set up in 2018 and employs a few dozen engineers, most of them working remotely across North America. Alongside contract development it sells EmbedOps, a DevOps product for embedded teams that runs containerized builds, unit tests and static analysis in CI. Dojo Five is a Nordic Semiconductor partner, and its client work leans toward connected medical, consumer and industrial devices built on Cortex-M parts.
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: Dojo Five vs Very
| Capability | Dojo Five | 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: Dojo Five vs Very
| Framework / platform | Dojo Five | 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: Dojo Five vs Very
| Criterion | Dojo Five | Very |
|---|---|---|
| Minimum engagement | Not disclosed | Not disclosed |
| Engagement models | Consulting, Fixed project, Time & materials | Fixed project, Time & materials |
| Rate transparency | Not public | Not public |
| Price tier | Mid-market | Mid-market |
Target audience comparison: Dojo Five vs Very
| Dimension | Dojo Five | Very |
|---|---|---|
| Best company size | Startup to mid-market | Startup to mid-market |
| Best industries | Medical devices, Consumer electronics, Industrial IoT | Industrial IoT, Consumer electronics, Energy & EV charging |
| Best use cases | Setting up automated firmware builds, unit tests and static analysis for an in-house team, Writing Zephyr firmware for a Nordic-based Bluetooth LE wearable | Taking a first IoT product from concept to pilot, Building Nerves-based device software on embedded Linux |
| Typical project type | Consulting | Fixed project |
Dojo Five vs Very: pros and cons
| Dojo Five | |
|---|---|
| + | Every engineer works on firmware, so you never get a web developer reassigned to your bootloader |
| + | Clients keep the CI setup, unit-test harness and Docker build images after the engagement ends |
| + | Nordic partner status and heavy Zephyr use suit Bluetooth LE and cellular IoT products |
| + | Remote model makes it easy to embed a Dojo Five engineer inside an existing in-house firmware team |
| - | No in-house PCB or electrical design, so hardware has to come from you or another partner |
| - | A team of a few dozen people limits how many parallel workstreams it can staff |
| - | Delivery is North America–focused, which can mean limited overlap for European or Asian clients |
| 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 Dojo Five?
A typical fit: setting up automated firmware builds, unit tests and static analysis for an in-house team.
Firmware-only consultancy that also sells its own embedded DevOps product, EmbedOps. Minimum engagement is not publicly disclosed. Works best with clients in Medical devices, Consumer electronics, Industrial IoT.
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: Dojo Five vs Very
| Your situation | Recommended choice |
|---|---|
| You need full-ownership delivery on a defined project scope | Dojo Five |
| You need a large dedicated team for an ongoing programme | Check each company's engagement model |
| Your budget is at the lower end | Compare: Dojo Five (Not disclosed) vs Very (Not disclosed) |
| You need specialist depth in a specific vertical | Dojo Five |
| You need engineers to extend your own firmware team | Neither lists a dedicated-team model |
| You need consulting before committing to a build | Dojo Five |
Use case fit: Dojo Five vs Very
| Use case | Dojo Five fit | Very fit | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Setting up automated firmware builds, unit tests and static analysis for an in-house team | Strong | Limited | Dojo Five |
| Writing Zephyr firmware for a Nordic-based Bluetooth LE wearable | Strong | Limited | Dojo Five |
| 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: Dojo Five vs Very
Dojo Five (4.6/5) is the stronger overall choice for most Firmware Development projects. Firmware-only consultancy that also sells its own embedded DevOps product, EmbedOps.
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
Dojo Five vs Very FAQ
Is Dojo Five better than Very?
Dojo Five (4.6/5) scores higher overall, but "better" depends on your use case. Dojo Five's strongest advantage: every engineer works on firmware, so you never get a web developer reassigned to your bootloader. Very's strongest advantage: combines product strategy, design and engineering for teams new to hardware.
How do Dojo Five and Very differ in pricing?
Dojo Five uses time & materials, fixed project 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: Dojo Five or Very?
Very 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 Dojo Five and Very?
Dojo Five's primary differentiator is: firmware-only consultancy that also sells its own embedded DevOps product, EmbedOps. Very's primary differentiator is: product-strategy-led IoT development with Nerves and Elixir experience. They also differ in team size (11–50 vs 51–200), minimum engagement (Not disclosed vs Not disclosed), and primary industries served (Medical devices, Consumer electronics vs Industrial IoT, Consumer electronics).
Verify all details directly with each service provider before making a decision.