Punch Through vs Very: full comparison for 2026
Quick verdict
Punch Through (4.3/5) edges ahead of Very (3.8/5) overall. Punch Through is the better choice for bluetooth LE products with companion mobile apps. 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.
Punch Through vs Very: head-to-head summary
| Criterion | Punch Through | Very |
|---|---|---|
| Founded | 2009 | 2011 |
| HQ | Minneapolis–Saint Paul, MN, USA | USA (fully distributed) |
| Team size | 11–50 | 51–200 |
| Rating | 4.3 / 5 | 3.8 / 5 |
| Primary differentiator | Bluetooth LE firmware and mobile apps built by the same team, with deep radio-level debugging experience | 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, Zephyr, FreeRTOS | C, Elixir, Nerves |
| Industries served | Medical devices, Consumer electronics | Industrial IoT, Consumer electronics, Energy & EV charging |
Punch Through vs Very: overview
Punch Through
Few firms go as deep on Bluetooth LE as Punch Through. The Minnesota company was founded in 2009 by Colin Karpfinger and employs somewhere between 11 and 50 people according to directory listings. It builds connected products where the radio link is the hard part: device firmware on Nordic, Silicon Labs and TI chips, plus the iOS and Android apps that pair with them. Its public guides on BLE throughput, pairing and power use are widely read by embedded engineers. A large share of its client work is medical and consumer health devices.
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: Punch Through vs Very
| Capability | Punch Through | 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: Punch Through vs Very
| Framework / platform | Punch Through | Very |
|---|---|---|
| FreeRTOS | ✓ | N/A |
| Zephyr | ✓ | N/A |
| Embedded Linux | N/A | ✓ |
| Yocto | N/A | N/A |
| AUTOSAR | N/A | N/A |
| STM32 | N/A | N/A |
| Nordic | ✓ | ✓ |
| NXP | N/A | N/A |
| FPGA | N/A | N/A |
Pricing comparison: Punch Through vs Very
| Criterion | Punch Through | 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: Punch Through vs Very
| Dimension | Punch Through | Very |
|---|---|---|
| Best company size | Startup to mid-market | Startup to mid-market |
| Best industries | Medical devices, Consumer electronics | Industrial IoT, Consumer electronics, Energy & EV charging |
| Best use cases | Fixing dropped connections between a BLE wearable and its iOS app, Building firmware and a companion app for a connected glucose or heart-rate device | Taking a first IoT product from concept to pilot, Building Nerves-based device software on embedded Linux |
| Typical project type | Consulting | Fixed project |
Punch Through vs Very: pros and cons
| Punch Through | |
|---|---|
| + | Firmware and mobile apps from one team removes the usual finger-pointing over BLE connection bugs |
| + | Published technical guides show real depth in BLE throughput, pairing and power optimization |
| + | Experience with connected medical products and their data-integrity requirements |
| - | Narrow focus on Bluetooth LE makes it a weaker fit for cellular, wired or Linux-class products |
| - | Small team, so availability can be limited |
| - | US rates are among the higher ones on this list |
| 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 Punch Through?
A typical fit: fixing dropped connections between a BLE wearable and its iOS app.
Bluetooth LE firmware and mobile apps built by the same team, with deep radio-level debugging experience. Minimum engagement is not publicly disclosed. Works best with clients in Medical devices, Consumer electronics.
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: Punch Through vs Very
| Your situation | Recommended choice |
|---|---|
| You need full-ownership delivery on a defined project scope | Punch Through |
| You need a large dedicated team for an ongoing programme | Check each company's engagement model |
| Your budget is at the lower end | Compare: Punch Through (Not disclosed) vs Very (Not disclosed) |
| You need specialist depth in a specific vertical | Very |
| 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: Punch Through vs Very
| Use case | Punch Through fit | Very fit | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Fixing dropped connections between a BLE wearable and its iOS app | Strong | Limited | Punch Through |
| Building firmware and a companion app for a connected glucose or heart-rate device | Strong | Limited | Punch Through |
| 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: Punch Through vs Very
Punch Through (4.3/5) is the stronger overall choice for most Firmware Development projects. Bluetooth LE firmware and mobile apps built by the same team, with deep radio-level debugging experience.
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
Punch Through vs Very FAQ
Is Punch Through better than Very?
Punch Through (4.3/5) scores higher overall, but "better" depends on your use case. Punch Through's strongest advantage: firmware and mobile apps from one team removes the usual finger-pointing over BLE connection bugs. Very's strongest advantage: combines product strategy, design and engineering for teams new to hardware.
How do Punch Through and Very differ in pricing?
Punch Through 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: Punch Through 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 Punch Through and Very?
Punch Through's primary differentiator is: bluetooth LE firmware and mobile apps built by the same team, with deep radio-level debugging experience. 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.