Dojo Five vs Enginuity Inc.: full comparison for 2026
Quick verdict
Dojo Five (4.5/5) edges ahead of Enginuity Inc. (4.0/5) overall. Dojo Five is the better choice for FDA-ready firmware for connected medical devices and diagnostics. Enginuity Inc. is the stronger option for Defence, marine, and industrial automation RFPs where firmware is one line item. The right choice depends on your project size, budget, and required tech stack.
Dojo Five vs Enginuity Inc.: head-to-head summary
| Criterion | Dojo Five | Enginuity Inc. |
|---|---|---|
| Founded | 2018 | 2003 |
| HQ | Saint Paul, MN, USA | Halifax, Canada |
| Team size | 26 | 156 |
| Rating | 4.5 / 5 | 4.0 / 5 |
| Primary differentiator | Firmware delivery scoped exclusively around FDA-regulated medical device and diagnostics programs, not a general embedded practice | Multidisciplinary aerospace, defence, and marine engineering scope with firmware integrated alongside PLC, SCADA, and robotics work |
| Pricing model | Project-based firmware engagements for medical device programs | Project-based multidisciplinary engineering engagements |
| Min. engagement | Not published | Not published |
| Primary tech stack | C, C++, Medical Device Firmware Standards | C, C++, PLC Programming |
| Industries served | Medical devices, Diagnostics | Aerospace, Defence, Marine, Advanced manufacturing |
Dojo Five vs Enginuity Inc.: overview
Dojo Five
Dojo Five was founded in 2018 and is headquartered in Saint Paul, Minnesota with a team of 26 engineers. The firm's stated scope is narrow and deliberate: production-ready embedded firmware for connected medical devices and diagnostics, delivered on time and on budget, without the broader industrial or consumer electronics work that dilutes focus at larger firms. For an RFP built around a specific medical device program, that narrowness reads as depth rather than a limitation, since every engineer on the team works inside the same regulatory and reliability constraints day to day.
Enginuity Inc.
Enginuity Inc. was founded in Halifax, Nova Scotia in 2003 and has grown to roughly 156 employees serving aerospace, defence, marine, and advanced manufacturing clients across Canada, the United States, and international markets. Its embedded and real-time firmware capability sits alongside PCB design, industrial automation and controls, robotics integration, SCADA and HMI development, and PLC programming, reflecting a firm built around full-program industrial and defence engineering rather than firmware as a standalone bid item. That breadth suits an RFP where firmware is one line among controls, robotics, and systems integration rather than the entire scope.
Services and capabilities: Dojo Five vs Enginuity Inc.
| Capability | Dojo Five | Enginuity Inc. |
|---|---|---|
| Firmware development | ✓ | ✓ |
| Hardware / PCB co-design | ✗ | ✓ |
| Functional safety / certification | ✓ | ✗ |
| Defense / aerospace credentials | ✗ | ✓ |
| Medical device firmware | ✓ | ✗ |
| Secure firmware updates | ✗ | ✗ |
| IoT connectivity | ✗ | ✓ |
| Embedded Linux | ✗ | ✗ |
| Staff augmentation | ✗ | ✗ |
Tech stack comparison: Dojo Five vs Enginuity Inc.
| Framework / platform | Dojo Five | Enginuity Inc. |
|---|---|---|
| C | ✓ | ✓ |
| C++ | ✓ | ✓ |
| Embedded Linux | N/A | N/A |
| PCB Design | N/A | N/A |
| FPGA | N/A | N/A |
| MISRA C | N/A | N/A |
| ITAR | N/A | N/A |
| AWS IoT | N/A | N/A |
| ASIL | N/A | N/A |
Pricing comparison: Dojo Five vs Enginuity Inc.
| Criterion | Dojo Five | Enginuity Inc. |
|---|---|---|
| Minimum engagement | Not published | Not published |
| Engagement models | Project-based firmware development | Project-based multidisciplinary engineering |
| Rate transparency | Not public | Not public |
| Price tier | Mid-market | Mid-market |
Target audience comparison: Dojo Five vs Enginuity Inc.
| Dimension | Dojo Five | Enginuity Inc. |
|---|---|---|
| Best company size | Startup to mid-market | Startup to mid-market |
| Best industries | Medical devices, Diagnostics | Aerospace, Defence, Marine |
| Best use cases | Firmware development for a connected diagnostic device ahead of FDA submission, Production-ready firmware handoff for a medical device already through concept and hardware design | Defence or marine RFP requiring firmware alongside SCADA and controls engineering, Industrial automation program bundling PLC programming and embedded firmware |
| Typical project type | Project-based firmware development | Project-based multidisciplinary engineering |
Dojo Five vs Enginuity Inc.: pros and cons
| Dojo Five | |
|---|---|
| + | Sole focus on connected medical devices and diagnostics means the entire team works inside FDA-relevant constraints, not a fraction of it |
| + | Stated commitment to on-time, on-budget delivery is a specific procurement claim, not a generic marketing line |
| + | 7 years of operating history built entirely around this one vertical |
| + | Small team size gives a procurement contact direct access to senior firmware engineers rather than account layers |
| - | 26 engineers caps concurrent capacity; an RFP needing parallel workstreams across several device programs may need to confirm bench depth first |
| - | Its medical-device-only focus is a narrower fit for an RFP spanning non-medical hardware categories |
| - | No published pricing or minimum engagement figure |
| Enginuity Inc. | |
|---|---|
| + | 22 years of operating history and roughly 156 employees give substantial capacity for large, multi-discipline RFPs |
| + | Aerospace, defence, and marine client base indicates experience with high-scrutiny government and defense procurement processes |
| + | Firmware sits alongside PLC programming, SCADA/HMI, and robotics integration, useful when an RFP spans embedded and industrial automation together |
| + | Serves clients across Canada, the US, and international markets, giving broader geographic reach than a regional firm |
| - | Firmware is one of many engineering capabilities rather than the firm's primary specialty, so dedicated firmware-only depth may be thinner than at a boutique specialist |
| - | No published pricing or minimum engagement figure |
| - | Public case studies naming specific firmware projects, as opposed to its broader engineering portfolio, are limited |
Who should choose Dojo Five?
A typical fit: firmware development for a connected diagnostic device ahead of FDA submission.
Firmware delivery scoped exclusively around FDA-regulated medical device and diagnostics programs, not a general embedded practice. Minimum engagement is not publicly disclosed. Works best with clients in Medical devices, Diagnostics.
Who should choose Enginuity Inc.?
A typical fit: defence or marine RFP requiring firmware alongside SCADA and controls engineering.
Multidisciplinary aerospace, defence, and marine engineering scope with firmware integrated alongside PLC, SCADA, and robotics work. Minimum engagement is not publicly disclosed. Works best with clients in Aerospace, Defence, Marine, Advanced manufacturing.
Decision matrix: Dojo Five vs Enginuity Inc.
| Your situation | Recommended choice |
|---|---|
| You need full-ownership delivery on a defined project scope | Both offer fixed-price models |
| 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 published) vs Enginuity Inc. (Not published) |
| You need specialist depth in a specific vertical | Enginuity Inc. |
| You need staff augmentation or team extension | Neither; consider alternatives that offer staff aug |
| You need consulting before committing to a build | Dojo Five |
Use case fit: Dojo Five vs Enginuity Inc.
| Use case | Dojo Five fit | Enginuity Inc. fit | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Firmware development for a connected diagnostic device ahead of FDA submission | Strong | Strong | Both equally |
| Production-ready firmware handoff for a medical device already through concept and hardware design | Strong | Limited | Dojo Five |
| Defence or marine RFP requiring firmware alongside SCADA and controls engineering | Limited | Strong | Enginuity Inc. |
| Industrial automation program bundling PLC programming and embedded firmware | Limited | Strong | Enginuity Inc. |
| Fixed-price build | Limited | Limited | Both equally |
| Staff augmentation | Limited | Limited | Both equally |
Verdict: Dojo Five vs Enginuity Inc.
Dojo Five (4.5/5) is the stronger overall choice for most Embedded Firmware projects. Firmware delivery scoped exclusively around FDA-regulated medical device and diagnostics programs, not a general embedded practice.
Enginuity Inc. (4.0/5) is worth a look if you need industrial automation program bundling PLC programming and embedded firmware. If your situation matches that, Enginuity Inc. is a competitive option.
Related comparisons
Dojo Five vs Enginuity Inc. FAQ
Is Dojo Five better than Enginuity Inc.?
Dojo Five (4.5/5) scores higher overall, but "better" depends on your use case. Dojo Five's strongest advantage: sole focus on connected medical devices and diagnostics means the entire team works inside FDA-relevant constraints, not a fraction of it. Enginuity Inc.'s strongest advantage: 22 years of operating history and roughly 156 employees give substantial capacity for large, multi-discipline RFPs.
How do Dojo Five and Enginuity Inc. differ in pricing?
Dojo Five uses project-based firmware engagements for medical device programs pricing. Enginuity Inc. uses project-based multidisciplinary engineering engagements 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 Enginuity Inc.?
Enginuity Inc. 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 Enginuity Inc.?
Dojo Five's primary differentiator is: firmware delivery scoped exclusively around FDA-regulated medical device and diagnostics programs, not a general embedded practice. Enginuity Inc.'s primary differentiator is: multidisciplinary aerospace, defence, and marine engineering scope with firmware integrated alongside PLC, SCADA, and robotics work. They also differ in team size (26 vs 156), minimum engagement (Not published vs Not published), and primary industries served (Medical devices, Diagnostics vs Aerospace, Defence).
Verify all details directly with each service provider before making a decision.