USA Firmware vs EES: full comparison for 2026
Quick verdict
USA Firmware (4.0/5) edges ahead of EES (3.8/5) overall. USA Firmware is the better choice for small teams wanting senior, multi-discipline engineers without separate specialist hires. EES is the stronger option for teams deliberately avoiding a large delivery organization in favor of senior-led staff. The right choice depends on your project size, budget, and required tech stack.
USA Firmware vs EES: head-to-head summary
| Criterion | USA Firmware | EES |
|---|---|---|
| Founded | 2011 | 2012 |
| HQ | Brecksville, OH, USA | Tempe / Chandler, AZ, USA |
| Team size | 17 | 3–50 |
| Rating | 4.0 / 5 | 3.8 / 5 |
| Primary differentiator | 150-plus combined years of leadership experience concentrated in a 17-person team, an unusually high seniority ratio | Explicitly positions itself as senior-led, keeping the team small by design rather than as a growth-stage limitation |
| Pricing model | Managed design service engagements | Contract engineering engagements |
| Min. engagement | Not published | Not published |
| Primary tech stack | C, C++, FPGA Design | C, C++, Industrial Embedded Systems |
| Industries served | Industrial products, Commercial electronics | Industrial |
USA Firmware vs EES: overview
USA Firmware
USA Firmware was founded in 2011 by Bob Scaccia and operates from Brecksville, Ohio with a team of around 17 people. Leadership brings a stated 150-plus combined years of experience concentrated in a small team, which for a hiring buyer means the average tenure and seniority per engineer is unusually high for a firm this size. The managed design process bundles electrical engineering, firmware, FPGA design, and Linux work, so a client hiring this team gets multi-discipline coverage without assembling separate specialists.
EES
Embedded Engineering Solutions (EES) was launched in 2012 and is based in Tempe, Arizona, with reported headcount varying across sources from roughly 3 to 50 employees, most consistently described as a small, senior-led firm. The company specializes in contract firmware, embedded systems, and hardware design engineering for the industrial sector, and its own positioning leans on being senior-led rather than layered with junior staff. For a hiring buyer specifically avoiding a large delivery organization, that's the stated value proposition, not an incidental trait.
Services and capabilities: USA Firmware vs EES
| Capability | USA Firmware | EES |
|---|---|---|
| Firmware development | ✓ | ✓ |
| RTOS development | ✗ | ✗ |
| Hardware co-design | ✓ | ✓ |
| Embedded GUI development | ✗ | ✗ |
| Medical device firmware | ✗ | ✗ |
| Functional safety | ✗ | ✗ |
| Technical training | ✗ | ✗ |
| Expert-witness services | ✗ | ✗ |
| Staff augmentation | ✗ | ✗ |
Tech stack comparison: USA Firmware vs EES
| Framework / platform | USA Firmware | EES |
|---|---|---|
| C | ✓ | ✓ |
| C++ | ✓ | ✓ |
| FreeRTOS | N/A | N/A |
| Zephyr | N/A | N/A |
| FPGA | ✓ | N/A |
| Embedded Linux | ✓ | N/A |
| LVGL | N/A | N/A |
| AWS IoT | N/A | N/A |
| ARM Cortex-M | N/A | N/A |
Pricing comparison: USA Firmware vs EES
| Criterion | USA Firmware | EES |
|---|---|---|
| Minimum engagement | Not published | Not published |
| Engagement models | Managed design services | Contract firmware and hardware engineering |
| Rate transparency | Not public | Not public |
| Price tier | Mid-market | Mid-market |
Target audience comparison: USA Firmware vs EES
| Dimension | USA Firmware | EES |
|---|---|---|
| Best company size | Startup to mid-market | Startup to mid-market |
| Best industries | Industrial products, Commercial electronics | Industrial |
| Best use cases | Hiring a small, senior multi-discipline team spanning electrical, firmware, and FPGA, Production-enablement support following an in-house design phase | Hiring a deliberately small, senior-led team for an industrial firmware program, Combined hardware and firmware engineering without separate specialist vendors |
| Typical project type | Managed design services | Contract firmware and hardware engineering |
USA Firmware vs EES: pros and cons
| USA Firmware | |
|---|---|
| + | 150-plus combined years of leadership experience in a 17-person team is an unusually high seniority ratio |
| + | Bundles electrical engineering, firmware, and FPGA capability, so a client doesn't need to hire separate specialists |
| + | Discovery-through-production-enablement scope covers the full program, not just firmware coding |
| + | 14 years of operating history under its founder |
| - | 17 employees is among the smallest teams on this list, limiting capacity for large parallel workstreams |
| - | Public case study detail is limited, so verifying past engagements requires direct outreach |
| - | No published pricing or minimum engagement figure |
| EES | |
|---|---|
| + | Explicit senior-led positioning means the small team size is a deliberate choice, not just a growth-stage limitation |
| + | 13 years of operating history as a contract engineering firm for the industrial sector |
| + | Combines firmware, embedded systems, and hardware design in one team, covering multiple disciplines without separate specialist hires |
| + | Small size means a client's engagement represents a meaningful share of the firm's total capacity |
| - | Reported employee counts vary widely across sources, from roughly 3 to 50, worth confirming current headcount directly |
| - | Small team size caps capacity for a large or multi-workstream program |
| - | No published pricing or minimum engagement figure |
Who should choose USA Firmware?
A typical fit: hiring a small, senior multi-discipline team spanning electrical, firmware, and FPGA.
150-plus combined years of leadership experience concentrated in a 17-person team, an unusually high seniority ratio. Minimum engagement is not publicly disclosed. Works best with clients in Industrial products, Commercial electronics.
Who should choose EES?
A typical fit: hiring a deliberately small, senior-led team for an industrial firmware program.
Explicitly positions itself as senior-led, keeping the team small by design rather than as a growth-stage limitation. Minimum engagement is not publicly disclosed. Works best with clients in Industrial.
Decision matrix: USA Firmware vs EES
| 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: USA Firmware (Not published) vs EES (Not published) |
| You need specialist depth in a specific vertical | USA Firmware |
| You need staff augmentation or team extension | Neither; consider alternatives that offer staff aug |
| You need consulting before committing to a build | USA Firmware |
Use case fit: USA Firmware vs EES
| Use case | USA Firmware fit | EES fit | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Hiring a small, senior multi-discipline team spanning electrical, firmware, and FPGA | Strong | Strong | Both equally |
| Production-enablement support following an in-house design phase | Strong | Limited | USA Firmware |
| Hiring a deliberately small, senior-led team for an industrial firmware program | Strong | Strong | Both equally |
| Combined hardware and firmware engineering without separate specialist vendors | Limited | Strong | EES |
| Fixed-price build | Limited | Limited | Both equally |
| Staff augmentation | Limited | Limited | Both equally |
Verdict: USA Firmware vs EES
USA Firmware (4.0/5) is the stronger overall choice for most Embedded Firmware Development projects. 150-plus combined years of leadership experience concentrated in a 17-person team, an unusually high seniority ratio.
EES (3.8/5) is worth a look if you need combined hardware and firmware engineering without separate specialist vendors. If your situation matches that, EES is a competitive option.
Related comparisons
USA Firmware vs EES FAQ
Is USA Firmware better than EES?
USA Firmware (4.0/5) scores higher overall, but "better" depends on your use case. USA Firmware's strongest advantage: 150-plus combined years of leadership experience in a 17-person team is an unusually high seniority ratio. EES's strongest advantage: explicit senior-led positioning means the small team size is a deliberate choice, not just a growth-stage limitation.
How do USA Firmware and EES differ in pricing?
USA Firmware uses managed design service engagements pricing. EES uses contract engineering engagements pricing. Neither firm publishes a full rate card; a discovery call is required for project-specific quotes.
Which is better for enterprise: USA Firmware or EES?
EES is the larger team and typically the better enterprise-scale choice. For very large programmes, verify team size and compliance coverage directly with each developer before shortlisting.
What are the main differences between USA Firmware and EES?
USA Firmware's primary differentiator is: 150-plus combined years of leadership experience concentrated in a 17-person team, an unusually high seniority ratio. EES's primary differentiator is: explicitly positions itself as senior-led, keeping the team small by design rather than as a growth-stage limitation. They also differ in team size (17 vs 3–50), minimum engagement (Not published vs Not published), and primary industries served (Industrial products, Commercial electronics vs Industrial).
Verify all details directly with each developer before making a decision.