Dojo Five vs InTechHouse: full comparison for 2026
Quick verdict
Dojo Five (4.5/5) edges ahead of InTechHouse (4.1/5) overall. Dojo Five is the better choice for FDA-ready firmware for connected medical devices and diagnostics. InTechHouse is the stronger option for RFPs requiring a publicly disclosed, EU-certified R&D partner. The right choice depends on your project size, budget, and required tech stack.
Dojo Five vs InTechHouse: head-to-head summary
| Criterion | Dojo Five | InTechHouse |
|---|---|---|
| Founded | 2018 | 2003 |
| HQ | Saint Paul, MN, USA | Bydgoszcz, Poland |
| Team size | 26 | 51–200 |
| Rating | 4.5 / 5 | 4.1 / 5 |
| Primary differentiator | Firmware delivery scoped exclusively around FDA-regulated medical device and diagnostics programs, not a general embedded practice | Publicly listed on Warsaw's NewConnect market since 2015, giving financial transparency most private competing bidders don't offer |
| Pricing model | Project-based firmware engagements for medical device programs | Project-based hardware and embedded engineering |
| Min. engagement | Not published | Not published |
| Primary tech stack | C, C++, Medical Device Firmware Standards | C, C++, Embedded Systems Programming |
| Industries served | Medical devices, Diagnostics | Industrial, Consumer electronics, Data & analytics products |
Dojo Five vs InTechHouse: 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.
InTechHouse
InTechHouse operates as SoftBlue S.A., founded in 2003 and headquartered in Bydgoszcz, Poland, listed on the Warsaw Stock Exchange's NewConnect market since 2015. Its 51 to 200-person team works across hardware design, embedded systems, and data analytics, positioning itself as an EU-certified R&D partner delivering products from concept through production. For an RFP process that weighs financial transparency and governance as part of vendor risk assessment, public-company disclosure requirements give InTechHouse a documentation trail most privately held competing bidders don't have.
Services and capabilities: Dojo Five vs InTechHouse
| Capability | Dojo Five | InTechHouse |
|---|---|---|
| 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 InTechHouse
| Framework / platform | Dojo Five | InTechHouse |
|---|---|---|
| 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 InTechHouse
| Criterion | Dojo Five | InTechHouse |
|---|---|---|
| Minimum engagement | Not published | Not published |
| Engagement models | Project-based firmware development | Project-based engineering, Concept-to-production programs |
| Rate transparency | Not public | Not public |
| Price tier | Mid-market | Mid-market |
Target audience comparison: Dojo Five vs InTechHouse
| Dimension | Dojo Five | InTechHouse |
|---|---|---|
| Best company size | Startup to mid-market | Startup to mid-market |
| Best industries | Medical devices, Diagnostics | Industrial, Consumer electronics, Data & analytics products |
| 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 | Concept-to-production hardware and firmware RFP requiring public vendor disclosure, Embedded systems program requiring integrated data analytics |
| Typical project type | Project-based firmware development | Project-based engineering |
Dojo Five vs InTechHouse: 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 |
| InTechHouse | |
|---|---|
| + | Public listing on the Warsaw Stock Exchange's NewConnect market since 2015 gives financial disclosure most competing bidders don't provide |
| + | 22 years of operating history under the SoftBlue S.A. legal entity |
| + | Combined hardware design, embedded systems, and data analytics capability covers connected-product RFPs beyond firmware alone |
| + | EU-certified R&D partner status can simplify grant-funded or EU-based procurement processes |
| - | 51 to 200 employees is spread across hardware, embedded, and data analytics work, not a dedicated firmware-only bench |
| - | Public listing means quarterly disclosure obligations, a governance factor rather than a delivery one, but worth noting in procurement due diligence |
| - | No published pricing or minimum engagement figure |
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 InTechHouse?
A typical fit: concept-to-production hardware and firmware RFP requiring public vendor disclosure.
Publicly listed on Warsaw's NewConnect market since 2015, giving financial transparency most private competing bidders don't offer. Minimum engagement is not publicly disclosed. Works best with clients in Industrial, Consumer electronics, Data & analytics products.
Decision matrix: Dojo Five vs InTechHouse
| 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 InTechHouse (Not published) |
| You need specialist depth in a specific vertical | InTechHouse |
| 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 InTechHouse
| Use case | Dojo Five fit | InTechHouse 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 |
| Concept-to-production hardware and firmware RFP requiring public vendor disclosure | Limited | Strong | InTechHouse |
| Embedded systems program requiring integrated data analytics | Limited | Strong | InTechHouse |
| Fixed-price build | Limited | Limited | Both equally |
| Staff augmentation | Limited | Limited | Both equally |
Verdict: Dojo Five vs InTechHouse
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.
InTechHouse (4.1/5) is worth a look if you need embedded systems program requiring integrated data analytics. If your situation matches that, InTechHouse is a competitive option.
Related comparisons
Dojo Five vs InTechHouse FAQ
Is Dojo Five better than InTechHouse?
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. InTechHouse's strongest advantage: public listing on the Warsaw Stock Exchange's NewConnect market since 2015 gives financial disclosure most competing bidders don't provide.
How do Dojo Five and InTechHouse differ in pricing?
Dojo Five uses project-based firmware engagements for medical device programs pricing. InTechHouse uses project-based hardware and embedded engineering 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 InTechHouse?
InTechHouse 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 InTechHouse?
Dojo Five's primary differentiator is: firmware delivery scoped exclusively around FDA-regulated medical device and diagnostics programs, not a general embedded practice. InTechHouse's primary differentiator is: publicly listed on Warsaw's NewConnect market since 2015, giving financial transparency most private competing bidders don't offer. They also differ in team size (26 vs 51–200), minimum engagement (Not published vs Not published), and primary industries served (Medical devices, Diagnostics vs Industrial, Consumer electronics).
Verify all details directly with each service provider before making a decision.