Dojo Five vs DE Design Works: full comparison for 2026
Quick verdict
Dojo Five (4.5/5) edges ahead of DE Design Works (4.3/5) overall. Dojo Five is the better choice for FDA-ready firmware for connected medical devices and diagnostics. DE Design Works is the stronger option for rugged industrial, medical, or military RFPs needing PCB plus firmware. The right choice depends on your project size, budget, and required tech stack.
Dojo Five vs DE Design Works: head-to-head summary
| Criterion | Dojo Five | DE Design Works |
|---|---|---|
| Founded | 2018 | 2002 |
| HQ | Saint Paul, MN, USA | Chesterfield, MO, USA |
| Team size | 26 | 11–50 |
| Rating | 4.5 / 5 | 4.3 / 5 |
| Primary differentiator | Firmware delivery scoped exclusively around FDA-regulated medical device and diagnostics programs, not a general embedded practice | 23 years of combined PCB, hardware, and firmware design specifically for rugged industrial, medical, and military applications |
| Pricing model | Project-based firmware engagements for medical device programs | Project-based electronics and firmware engagements |
| Min. engagement | Not published | Not published |
| Primary tech stack | C, C++, Medical Device Firmware Standards | C, C++, Embedded Linux |
| Industries served | Medical devices, Diagnostics | Industrial, Medical devices, Military/defense, Consumer electronics |
Dojo Five vs DE Design Works: 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.
DE Design Works
DE Design Works was founded in 2002 and operates from Chesterfield, Missouri with a team in the 11 to 50 employee range. Its scope centers on PCB and hardware design for rugged industrial, medical, and military applications alongside embedded software and firmware, including secure OTA update signing, staging, and rollback, and embedded Linux board support package bring-up. For an RFP built around a ruggedized or regulated product, having electronics and firmware design under one small, senior vendor reduces the integration risk of coordinating separate hardware and software contractors.
Services and capabilities: Dojo Five vs DE Design Works
| Capability | Dojo Five | DE Design Works |
|---|---|---|
| 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 DE Design Works
| Framework / platform | Dojo Five | DE Design Works |
|---|---|---|
| C | ✓ | ✓ |
| C++ | ✓ | ✓ |
| Embedded Linux | N/A | ✓ |
| PCB Design | 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 DE Design Works
| Criterion | Dojo Five | DE Design Works |
|---|---|---|
| Minimum engagement | Not published | Not published |
| Engagement models | Project-based firmware development | Project-based engineering |
| Rate transparency | Not public | Not public |
| Price tier | Mid-market | Mid-market |
Target audience comparison: Dojo Five vs DE Design Works
| Dimension | Dojo Five | DE Design Works |
|---|---|---|
| Best company size | Startup to mid-market | Startup to mid-market |
| Best industries | Medical devices, Diagnostics | Industrial, Medical devices, Military/defense |
| 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 | Combined PCB and firmware design for a ruggedized industrial or military device, Secure OTA update infrastructure RFP for a fielded product |
| Typical project type | Project-based firmware development | Project-based engineering |
Dojo Five vs DE Design Works: 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 |
| DE Design Works | |
|---|---|
| + | PCB and hardware design for rugged, regulated applications sits alongside firmware in the same firm, not a separate contractor |
| + | Secure OTA update work covering signing, staging, and rollback is a specific, verifiable technical capability for a security-conscious RFP |
| + | 23 years of operating history gives a track record to reference-check against |
| + | Rugged industrial, medical, and military application experience matches vendor-qualification requirements common in those RFPs |
| - | 11 to 50 employees limits concurrent capacity compared to larger competing bidders |
| - | Public case studies naming specific past programs are limited, so verifying track record needs direct reference requests |
| - | No published pricing or minimum engagement threshold |
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 DE Design Works?
A typical fit: combined PCB and firmware design for a ruggedized industrial or military device.
23 years of combined PCB, hardware, and firmware design specifically for rugged industrial, medical, and military applications. Minimum engagement is not publicly disclosed. Works best with clients in Industrial, Medical devices, Military/defense, Consumer electronics.
Decision matrix: Dojo Five vs DE Design Works
| 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 DE Design Works (Not published) |
| You need specialist depth in a specific vertical | DE Design Works |
| 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 DE Design Works
| Use case | Dojo Five fit | DE Design Works 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 |
| Combined PCB and firmware design for a ruggedized industrial or military device | Limited | Strong | DE Design Works |
| Secure OTA update infrastructure RFP for a fielded product | Limited | Strong | DE Design Works |
| Fixed-price build | Limited | Limited | Both equally |
| Staff augmentation | Limited | Limited | Both equally |
Verdict: Dojo Five vs DE Design Works
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.
DE Design Works (4.3/5) is worth a look if you need secure OTA update infrastructure RFP for a fielded product. If your situation matches that, DE Design Works is a competitive option.
Related comparisons
Dojo Five vs DE Design Works FAQ
Is Dojo Five better than DE Design Works?
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. DE Design Works's strongest advantage: PCB and hardware design for rugged, regulated applications sits alongside firmware in the same firm, not a separate contractor.
How do Dojo Five and DE Design Works differ in pricing?
Dojo Five uses project-based firmware engagements for medical device programs pricing. DE Design Works uses project-based electronics and firmware 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 DE Design Works?
DE Design Works 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 DE Design Works?
Dojo Five's primary differentiator is: firmware delivery scoped exclusively around FDA-regulated medical device and diagnostics programs, not a general embedded practice. DE Design Works's primary differentiator is: 23 years of combined PCB, hardware, and firmware design specifically for rugged industrial, medical, and military applications. They also differ in team size (26 vs 11–50), minimum engagement (Not published vs Not published), and primary industries served (Medical devices, Diagnostics vs Industrial, Medical devices).
Verify all details directly with each service provider before making a decision.