Cardinal Peak vs Very: full comparison for 2026
Quick verdict
Cardinal Peak (4.2/5) edges ahead of Very (3.8/5) overall. Cardinal Peak is the better choice for US consumer and media devices needing onshore engineers. 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.
Cardinal Peak vs Very: head-to-head summary
| Criterion | Cardinal Peak | Very |
|---|---|---|
| Founded | 2002 | 2011 |
| HQ | Lafayette, Colorado, USA | USA (fully distributed) |
| Team size | 51–200 | 51–200 |
| Rating | 4.2 / 5 | 3.8 / 5 |
| Primary differentiator | US-based device engineering with audio and video depth, now backed by FPT | 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++, Embedded Linux | C, Elixir, Nerves |
| Industries served | Consumer electronics, Telecom & broadcast, Medical devices | Industrial IoT, Consumer electronics, Energy & EV charging |
Cardinal Peak vs Very: overview
Cardinal Peak
Cardinal Peak has built connected devices out of Lafayette, Colorado since 2002, covering electrical design, embedded firmware, cloud back ends and mobile apps. Its longest-running specialities are audio, video and connected home products. FPT Corporation, the Vietnamese IT group, acquired it in November 2023, adding about 100 experts and a US office to FPT's North American business; Cardinal Peak now describes itself as a wholly owned FPT subsidiary. The acquisition gives it access to FPT's offshore capacity for larger programmes.
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: Cardinal Peak vs Very
| Capability | Cardinal Peak | 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: Cardinal Peak vs Very
| Framework / platform | Cardinal Peak | Very |
|---|---|---|
| FreeRTOS | ✓ | N/A |
| Zephyr | N/A | N/A |
| Embedded Linux | ✓ | ✓ |
| Yocto | N/A | N/A |
| AUTOSAR | N/A | N/A |
| STM32 | N/A | N/A |
| Nordic | N/A | ✓ |
| NXP | ✓ | N/A |
| FPGA | N/A | N/A |
Pricing comparison: Cardinal Peak vs Very
| Criterion | Cardinal Peak | 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: Cardinal Peak vs Very
| Dimension | Cardinal Peak | Very |
|---|---|---|
| Best company size | Startup to mid-market | Startup to mid-market |
| Best industries | Consumer electronics, Telecom & broadcast, Medical devices | Industrial IoT, Consumer electronics, Energy & EV charging |
| Best use cases | Building firmware for a smart speaker or video doorbell, Delivering a connected device with firmware, cloud and app from one US vendor | Taking a first IoT product from concept to pilot, Building Nerves-based device software on embedded Linux |
| Typical project type | Fixed project | Fixed project |
Cardinal Peak vs Very: pros and cons
| Cardinal Peak | |
|---|---|
| + | Onshore US engineers for clients who need them for IP or export-control reasons |
| + | Audio and video streaming firmware is a long-standing strength |
| + | FPT ownership adds offshore capacity when a programme grows |
| - | Acquired by FPT in 2023, so check how much of a project will be staffed from the US versus offshore |
| - | US rates make small firmware fixes relatively expensive |
| - | Firmware is one part of a broader product-engineering offer |
| 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 Cardinal Peak?
A typical fit: building firmware for a smart speaker or video doorbell.
US-based device engineering with audio and video depth, now backed by FPT. Minimum engagement is not publicly disclosed. Works best with clients in Consumer electronics, Telecom & broadcast, 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: Cardinal Peak vs Very
| Your situation | Recommended choice |
|---|---|
| You need full-ownership delivery on a defined project scope | Cardinal Peak |
| You need a large dedicated team for an ongoing programme | Check each company's engagement model |
| Your budget is at the lower end | Compare: Cardinal Peak (Not disclosed) vs Very (Not disclosed) |
| You need specialist depth in a specific vertical | Cardinal Peak |
| 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: Cardinal Peak vs Very
| Use case | Cardinal Peak fit | Very fit | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Building firmware for a smart speaker or video doorbell | Strong | Limited | Cardinal Peak |
| Delivering a connected device with firmware, cloud and app from one US vendor | Strong | Limited | Cardinal Peak |
| 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: Cardinal Peak vs Very
Cardinal Peak (4.2/5) is the stronger overall choice for most Firmware Development projects. US-based device engineering with audio and video depth, now backed by FPT.
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
Cardinal Peak vs Very FAQ
Is Cardinal Peak better than Very?
Cardinal Peak (4.2/5) scores higher overall, but "better" depends on your use case. Cardinal Peak's strongest advantage: onshore US engineers for clients who need them for IP or export-control reasons. Very's strongest advantage: combines product strategy, design and engineering for teams new to hardware.
How do Cardinal Peak and Very differ in pricing?
Cardinal Peak 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: Cardinal Peak or Very?
Cardinal Peak 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 Cardinal Peak and Very?
Cardinal Peak's primary differentiator is: US-based device engineering with audio and video depth, now backed by FPT. 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 (Consumer electronics, Telecom & broadcast vs Industrial IoT, Consumer electronics).
Verify all details directly with each service provider before making a decision.