NOVO Engineering vs Klika Tech: full comparison for 2026
Quick verdict
NOVO Engineering (4.3/5) edges ahead of Klika Tech (4.0/5) overall. NOVO Engineering is the better choice for multi-discipline RFPs spanning mechanical, electrical, and firmware. Klika Tech is the stronger option for RFPs needing multi-continent delivery for AWS-integrated IoT hardware programs. The right choice depends on your project size, budget, and required tech stack.
NOVO Engineering vs Klika Tech: head-to-head summary
| Criterion | NOVO Engineering | Klika Tech |
|---|---|---|
| Founded | 2004 | 2013 |
| HQ | Vista, CA, USA | North Miami Beach, FL, USA |
| Team size | 48–60 | Not published |
| Rating | 4.3 / 5 | 4.0 / 5 |
| Primary differentiator | Systems-engineering scope built for programs that bundle mechanical, electrical, and firmware requirements into one vendor relationship | AWS IoT and DevOps competency partner status combined with STMicroelectronics hardware partnership and multi-continent delivery centers |
| Pricing model | Fixed-scope product engineering engagements | Project-based IoT and cloud-embedded engagements |
| Min. engagement | Not published | Not published |
| Primary tech stack | C, C++, Embedded Systems Programming | AWS IoT, C, C++ |
| Industries served | Medical devices, Biotech, Printing technology, Commercial products | Industrial IoT, Consumer IoT, Cloud-connected devices |
NOVO Engineering vs Klika Tech: overview
NOVO Engineering
NOVO Engineering was founded in 2004 and is headquartered in Vista, California near San Diego, with a second location near Minneapolis and a team reported between 48 and 60 engineers averaging 16 years of experience each. The firm's engagement scope covers hardware and software development, systems engineering, custom automation, and pre-production manufacturing support across medical devices, biotech instrumentation, and commercial products. For an RFP that bundles mechanical, electrical, and firmware requirements into one program, NOVO's systems-engineering framing is built specifically for that kind of multi-discipline scope.
Klika Tech
Klika Tech was founded in 2013 and is headquartered in North Miami Beach, Florida, with delivery centers across North America, Europe, and Asia including a Wrocław, Poland office opened in 2021. The company builds IoT, cloud, and embedded product solutions together, holding AWS IoT and DevOps competencies alongside STMicroelectronics partner status, positioning itself for RFPs where firmware, hardware, and an AWS-based backend need to be scoped as one program. That multi-continent delivery footprint can matter for an RFP with distributed team or timezone-coverage requirements.
Services and capabilities: NOVO Engineering vs Klika Tech
| Capability | NOVO Engineering | Klika Tech |
|---|---|---|
| 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: NOVO Engineering vs Klika Tech
| Framework / platform | NOVO Engineering | Klika Tech |
|---|---|---|
| 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 | ✓ |
| ASIL | N/A | N/A |
Pricing comparison: NOVO Engineering vs Klika Tech
| Criterion | NOVO Engineering | Klika Tech |
|---|---|---|
| Minimum engagement | Not published | Not published |
| Engagement models | Fixed-scope product engineering, Pre-production manufacturing support | Project-based IoT and cloud-embedded engineering |
| Rate transparency | Not public | Not public |
| Price tier | Mid-market | Mid-market |
Target audience comparison: NOVO Engineering vs Klika Tech
| Dimension | NOVO Engineering | Klika Tech |
|---|---|---|
| Best company size | Startup to mid-market | Startup to mid-market |
| Best industries | Medical devices, Biotech, Printing technology | Industrial IoT, Consumer IoT, Cloud-connected devices |
| Best use cases | Multi-discipline RFP bundling mechanical, electrical, and firmware requirements, Biotech instrumentation program requiring custom automation alongside firmware | IoT hardware RFP requiring integration with an AWS IoT backend, Multi-continent delivery requirement for a distributed embedded team |
| Typical project type | Fixed-scope product engineering | Project-based IoT and cloud-embedded engineering |
NOVO Engineering vs Klika Tech: pros and cons
| NOVO Engineering | |
|---|---|
| + | Engineering team averages 16 years of experience per engineer, a strong bench-depth signal for a technical evaluation |
| + | Systems engineering scope covers mechanical, electrical, and firmware together, matching how many hardware RFPs are actually structured |
| + | Two US locations near San Diego and Minneapolis give onsite coverage options for a geographically constrained RFP |
| + | Pre-production manufacturing support extends past firmware delivery into getting a product built |
| - | 48 to 60 engineers caps how many large concurrent RFP-scale programs the firm can run simultaneously |
| - | No published pricing or minimum engagement figure |
| - | Firmware is one discipline inside a broader systems-engineering practice, not a standalone firmware specialist brand |
| Klika Tech | |
|---|---|
| + | AWS IoT and DevOps competency status is a verifiable AWS partner credential relevant to a cloud-integrated IoT RFP |
| + | STMicroelectronics partner status pairs cloud integration with direct chip-vendor support |
| + | Delivery centers across North America, Europe, and Asia can satisfy RFP timezone or nearshore requirements |
| + | 12 years of operating history with continuous multi-region expansion |
| - | AWS-centric positioning is a narrower fit for an RFP requiring cloud-agnostic or Azure/GCP-specific delivery |
| - | Public team size figures are not published, making bench-depth verification harder ahead of a large RFP |
| - | No published pricing or minimum engagement figure |
Who should choose NOVO Engineering?
A typical fit: multi-discipline RFP bundling mechanical, electrical, and firmware requirements.
Systems-engineering scope built for programs that bundle mechanical, electrical, and firmware requirements into one vendor relationship. Minimum engagement is not publicly disclosed. Works best with clients in Medical devices, Biotech, Printing technology, Commercial products.
Who should choose Klika Tech?
A typical fit: IoT hardware RFP requiring integration with an AWS IoT backend.
AWS IoT and DevOps competency partner status combined with STMicroelectronics hardware partnership and multi-continent delivery centers. Minimum engagement is not publicly disclosed. Works best with clients in Industrial IoT, Consumer IoT, Cloud-connected devices.
Decision matrix: NOVO Engineering vs Klika Tech
| Your situation | Recommended choice |
|---|---|
| You need full-ownership delivery on a defined project scope | NOVO Engineering |
| You need a large dedicated team for an ongoing programme | Check each company's engagement model |
| Your budget is at the lower end | Compare: NOVO Engineering (Not published) vs Klika Tech (Not published) |
| You need specialist depth in a specific vertical | NOVO Engineering |
| You need staff augmentation or team extension | Neither; consider alternatives that offer staff aug |
| You need consulting before committing to a build | Both may offer discovery engagements |
Use case fit: NOVO Engineering vs Klika Tech
| Use case | NOVO Engineering fit | Klika Tech fit | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Multi-discipline RFP bundling mechanical, electrical, and firmware requirements | Strong | Limited | NOVO Engineering |
| Biotech instrumentation program requiring custom automation alongside firmware | Strong | Limited | NOVO Engineering |
| IoT hardware RFP requiring integration with an AWS IoT backend | Strong | Strong | Both equally |
| Multi-continent delivery requirement for a distributed embedded team | Limited | Strong | Klika Tech |
| Fixed-price build | Limited | Limited | Both equally |
| Staff augmentation | Limited | Limited | Both equally |
Verdict: NOVO Engineering vs Klika Tech
NOVO Engineering (4.3/5) is the stronger overall choice for most Embedded Firmware projects. Systems-engineering scope built for programs that bundle mechanical, electrical, and firmware requirements into one vendor relationship.
Klika Tech (4.0/5) is worth a look if you need multi-continent delivery requirement for a distributed embedded team. If your situation matches that, Klika Tech is a competitive option.
Related comparisons
NOVO Engineering vs Klika Tech FAQ
Is NOVO Engineering better than Klika Tech?
NOVO Engineering (4.3/5) scores higher overall, but "better" depends on your use case. NOVO Engineering's strongest advantage: engineering team averages 16 years of experience per engineer, a strong bench-depth signal for a technical evaluation. Klika Tech's strongest advantage: AWS IoT and DevOps competency status is a verifiable AWS partner credential relevant to a cloud-integrated IoT RFP.
How do NOVO Engineering and Klika Tech differ in pricing?
NOVO Engineering uses fixed-scope product engineering engagements pricing. Klika Tech uses project-based iot and cloud-embedded engagements pricing. Neither firm publishes a full rate card; a discovery call is required for project-specific quotes.
Which is better for enterprise: NOVO Engineering or Klika Tech?
NOVO Engineering 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 NOVO Engineering and Klika Tech?
NOVO Engineering's primary differentiator is: systems-engineering scope built for programs that bundle mechanical, electrical, and firmware requirements into one vendor relationship. Klika Tech's primary differentiator is: AWS IoT and DevOps competency partner status combined with STMicroelectronics hardware partnership and multi-continent delivery centers. They also differ in team size (48–60 vs Not published), minimum engagement (Not published vs Not published), and primary industries served (Medical devices, Biotech vs Industrial IoT, Consumer IoT).
Verify all details directly with each service provider before making a decision.