WebbyLab vs EES: full comparison for 2026
Quick verdict
WebbyLab (3.8/5) edges ahead of EES (3.8/5) overall. WebbyLab is the better choice for teams needing full-cycle staffing from hardware selection through the connected application layer. 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.
WebbyLab vs EES: head-to-head summary
| Criterion | WebbyLab | EES |
|---|---|---|
| Founded | 2011 | 2012 |
| HQ | Kyiv, Ukraine (also London, UK) | Tempe / Chandler, AZ, USA |
| Team size | 120+ | 3–50 |
| Rating | 3.8 / 5 | 3.8 / 5 |
| Primary differentiator | Grew from a small graduate-student founding team to 120+ engineers over 14 years, with Fortune 500 client relationships along the way | Explicitly positions itself as senior-led, keeping the team small by design rather than as a growth-stage limitation |
| Pricing model | Project-based full-cycle IoT engagements | Contract engineering engagements |
| Min. engagement | Not published | Not published |
| Primary tech stack | C, C++, IoT Connectivity Protocols | C, C++, Industrial Embedded Systems |
| Industries served | IoT hardware products, Fintech, E-commerce | Industrial |
WebbyLab vs EES: overview
WebbyLab
WebbyLab was founded in 2011 by Anton Morozov and Viktor Turskyi, who started the company as graduate students with a handful of people and limited resources, and now operates from Kyiv and London with more than 120 engineers across hardware, firmware, and software disciplines. That growth story, from a small founding team to a 120-plus person organization over 14 years, matters to a hiring buyer weighing whether a team can scale with a growing program while Fortune 500 client relationships indicate the team has already handled large-organization hiring processes.
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: WebbyLab vs EES
| Capability | WebbyLab | 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: WebbyLab vs EES
| Framework / platform | WebbyLab | EES |
|---|---|---|
| C | ✓ | ✓ |
| C++ | ✓ | ✓ |
| FreeRTOS | N/A | N/A |
| Zephyr | N/A | N/A |
| FPGA | N/A | N/A |
| Embedded Linux | N/A | N/A |
| LVGL | N/A | N/A |
| AWS IoT | N/A | N/A |
| ARM Cortex-M | N/A | N/A |
Pricing comparison: WebbyLab vs EES
| Criterion | WebbyLab | EES |
|---|---|---|
| Minimum engagement | Not published | Not published |
| Engagement models | Project-based full-cycle development | Contract firmware and hardware engineering |
| Rate transparency | Not public | Not public |
| Price tier | Mid-market | Mid-market |
Target audience comparison: WebbyLab vs EES
| Dimension | WebbyLab | EES |
|---|---|---|
| Best company size | Startup to mid-market | Startup to mid-market |
| Best industries | IoT hardware products, Fintech, E-commerce | Industrial |
| Best use cases | Hiring a full-cycle team spanning hardware selection through firmware and its companion mobile app, Staffing an embedded firmware program requiring cloud integration | Hiring a deliberately small, senior-led team for an industrial firmware program, Combined hardware and firmware engineering without separate specialist vendors |
| Typical project type | Project-based full-cycle development | Contract firmware and hardware engineering |
WebbyLab vs EES: pros and cons
| WebbyLab | |
|---|---|
| + | Growth from a small graduate-student founding team to 120+ engineers over 14 years demonstrates an ability to scale hiring while retaining quality |
| + | Full-cycle scope from hardware selection through the connected application layer reduces the vendor count a client needs to coordinate |
| + | Fortune 500 client relationships indicate prior experience with large-organization hiring and procurement processes |
| + | 14 years of operating history under its original two founders |
| - | IoT and embedded is one specialty alongside fintech and e-commerce work, not the firm's sole focus |
| - | Specific named case studies with verifiable project details are limited in public materials |
| - | No published pricing or minimum engagement threshold |
| 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 WebbyLab?
A typical fit: hiring a full-cycle team spanning hardware selection through firmware and its companion mobile app.
Grew from a small graduate-student founding team to 120+ engineers over 14 years, with Fortune 500 client relationships along the way. Minimum engagement is not publicly disclosed. Works best with clients in IoT hardware products, Fintech, E-commerce.
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: WebbyLab 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: WebbyLab (Not published) vs EES (Not published) |
| You need specialist depth in a specific vertical | WebbyLab |
| 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: WebbyLab vs EES
| Use case | WebbyLab fit | EES fit | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Hiring a full-cycle team spanning hardware selection through firmware and its companion mobile app | Strong | Strong | Both equally |
| Staffing an embedded firmware program requiring cloud integration | Strong | Limited | WebbyLab |
| 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 | Strong | Limited | WebbyLab |
Verdict: WebbyLab vs EES
WebbyLab (3.8/5) is the stronger overall choice for most Embedded Firmware Development projects. Grew from a small graduate-student founding team to 120+ engineers over 14 years, with Fortune 500 client relationships along the way.
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
WebbyLab vs EES FAQ
Is WebbyLab better than EES?
WebbyLab (3.8/5) scores higher overall, but "better" depends on your use case. WebbyLab's strongest advantage: growth from a small graduate-student founding team to 120+ engineers over 14 years demonstrates an ability to scale hiring while retaining quality. 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 WebbyLab and EES differ in pricing?
WebbyLab uses project-based full-cycle iot 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: WebbyLab 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 WebbyLab and EES?
WebbyLab's primary differentiator is: grew from a small graduate-student founding team to 120+ engineers over 14 years, with Fortune 500 client relationships along the way. 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 (120+ vs 3–50), minimum engagement (Not published vs Not published), and primary industries served (IoT hardware products, Fintech vs Industrial).
Verify all details directly with each developer before making a decision.