Ignitarium vs Very: full comparison for 2026
Quick verdict
Ignitarium (3.9/5) edges ahead of Very (3.8/5) overall. Ignitarium is the better choice for chip makers and edge AI device builders. 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.
Ignitarium vs Very: head-to-head summary
| Criterion | Ignitarium | Very |
|---|---|---|
| Founded | 2012 | 2011 |
| HQ | Bengaluru, India | USA (fully distributed) |
| Team size | 201–500 | 51–200 |
| Rating | 3.9 / 5 | 3.8 / 5 |
| Primary differentiator | Firmware and drivers tied closely to semiconductor design and edge AI | 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 | Semiconductors, Automotive, Industrial IoT | Industrial IoT, Consumer electronics, Energy & EV charging |
Ignitarium vs Very: overview
Ignitarium
Ignitarium was founded in Bengaluru in 2012 and built a reputation as a boutique product engineering house covering semiconductor design, embedded software, multimedia and AI, with a second large centre in Kochi and offices in the US and Japan. Headcount estimates range from about 250 to 500. In November 2025 it became part of Neurealm, which now markets its services. Its firmware work is strongest where it meets silicon: drivers and firmware for new chips, sensor fusion, and putting vision models on edge hardware.
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: Ignitarium vs Very
| Capability | Ignitarium | 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: Ignitarium vs Very
| Framework / platform | Ignitarium | Very |
|---|---|---|
| FreeRTOS | N/A | 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 |
Pricing comparison: Ignitarium vs Very
| Criterion | Ignitarium | 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: Ignitarium vs Very
| Dimension | Ignitarium | Very |
|---|---|---|
| Best company size | Startup to mid-market | Startup to mid-market |
| Best industries | Semiconductors, Automotive, Industrial IoT | Industrial IoT, Consumer electronics, Energy & EV charging |
| Best use cases | Writing drivers and SDK firmware for a new semiconductor product, Deploying a vision model on an edge device for industrial inspection | Taking a first IoT product from concept to pilot, Building Nerves-based device software on embedded Linux |
| Typical project type | Fixed project | Fixed project |
Ignitarium vs Very: pros and cons
| Ignitarium | |
|---|---|
| + | Silicon-level experience suits firmware for new chips and evaluation boards |
| + | Edge AI and computer vision skills on embedded hardware |
| + | EtherCAT membership and industrial automation projects |
| - | Acquired by Neurealm in November 2025; branding, contracts and leadership are still in transition |
| - | Less aimed at small consumer IoT products |
| 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 Ignitarium?
A typical fit: writing drivers and SDK firmware for a new semiconductor product.
Firmware and drivers tied closely to semiconductor design and edge AI. Minimum engagement is not publicly disclosed. Works best with clients in Semiconductors, Automotive, 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: Ignitarium vs Very
| Your situation | Recommended choice |
|---|---|
| You need full-ownership delivery on a defined project scope | Ignitarium |
| You need a large dedicated team for an ongoing programme | Check each company's engagement model |
| Your budget is at the lower end | Compare: Ignitarium (Not disclosed) vs Very (Not disclosed) |
| You need specialist depth in a specific vertical | Ignitarium |
| 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: Ignitarium vs Very
| Use case | Ignitarium fit | Very fit | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Writing drivers and SDK firmware for a new semiconductor product | Strong | Limited | Ignitarium |
| Deploying a vision model on an edge device for industrial inspection | Strong | Limited | Ignitarium |
| 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: Ignitarium vs Very
Ignitarium (3.9/5) is the stronger overall choice for most Firmware Development projects. Firmware and drivers tied closely to semiconductor design and edge AI.
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
Ignitarium vs Very FAQ
Is Ignitarium better than Very?
Ignitarium (3.9/5) scores higher overall, but "better" depends on your use case. Ignitarium's strongest advantage: silicon-level experience suits firmware for new chips and evaluation boards. Very's strongest advantage: combines product strategy, design and engineering for teams new to hardware.
How do Ignitarium and Very differ in pricing?
Ignitarium 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: Ignitarium or Very?
Ignitarium 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 Ignitarium and Very?
Ignitarium's primary differentiator is: firmware and drivers tied closely to semiconductor design and edge AI. Very's primary differentiator is: product-strategy-led IoT development with Nerves and Elixir experience. They also differ in team size (201–500 vs 51–200), minimum engagement (Not disclosed vs Not disclosed), and primary industries served (Semiconductors, Automotive vs Industrial IoT, Consumer electronics).
Verify all details directly with each service provider before making a decision.