NOVO Engineering vs ARCH-Embedded: full comparison for 2026
Quick verdict
NOVO Engineering (4.1/5) edges ahead of ARCH-Embedded (3.8/5) overall. NOVO Engineering is the better choice for teams wanting engineers with an unusually high average tenure across disciplines. ARCH-Embedded is the stronger option for teams needing engineers with direct prior positioning-technology experience. The right choice depends on your project size, budget, and required tech stack.
NOVO Engineering vs ARCH-Embedded: head-to-head summary
| Criterion | NOVO Engineering | ARCH-Embedded |
|---|---|---|
| Founded | 2004 | 2022 |
| HQ | Vista, CA, USA | Amsterdam, Netherlands |
| Team size | 48–60 | 2–10 |
| Rating | 4.1 / 5 | 3.8 / 5 |
| Primary differentiator | Engineering team averaging 16 years of experience per engineer, a specific and checkable seniority claim | Team includes engineers with prior experience at TomTom and in micro-mobility products, a specific and checkable positioning-technology background |
| Pricing model | Fixed-scope product engineering engagements | Project-based embedded consultancy engagements |
| Min. engagement | Not published | Not published |
| Primary tech stack | C, C++, Embedded Systems Programming | Nordic nRF, Cellular Connectivity, RTOS |
| Industries served | Medical devices, Biotech, Printing technology, Commercial products | Micro-mobility, Positioning and location technology, Industrial IoT |
NOVO Engineering vs ARCH-Embedded: 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. That average-tenure figure is a specific, checkable claim a hiring buyer can weigh directly: it means the typical engineer assigned to a project has already spent over a decade and a half solving comparable problems. Systems engineering scope means firmware roles work alongside mechanical and electrical engineers on the same team, not in a separate silo.
ARCH-Embedded
ARCH-Embedded was founded in Amsterdam in 2022 by CEO and co-founder Mark Riemersma and operates with a team of 2 to 10 people, several with prior experience at TomTom and in micro-mobility products. As a Nordic Semiconductor partner, the team covers hardware through embedded software, RTOS, Linux, security, and connected-device architecture. For a hiring buyer building a location-aware or cellular-connected product, a team whose specific prior employer built commercial positioning technology at scale is a differentiated, checkable credential rather than a general claim of IoT experience.
Services and capabilities: NOVO Engineering vs ARCH-Embedded
| Capability | NOVO Engineering | ARCH-Embedded |
|---|---|---|
| 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: NOVO Engineering vs ARCH-Embedded
| Framework / platform | NOVO Engineering | ARCH-Embedded |
|---|---|---|
| C | ✓ | ✓ |
| C++ | ✓ | N/A |
| FreeRTOS | N/A | N/A |
| Zephyr | N/A | N/A |
| FPGA | N/A | 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: NOVO Engineering vs ARCH-Embedded
| Criterion | NOVO Engineering | ARCH-Embedded |
|---|---|---|
| Minimum engagement | Not published | Not published |
| Engagement models | Fixed-scope product engineering, Pre-production manufacturing support | Project-based consultancy, Architecture and project management |
| Rate transparency | Not public | Not public |
| Price tier | Mid-market | Mid-market |
Target audience comparison: NOVO Engineering vs ARCH-Embedded
| Dimension | NOVO Engineering | ARCH-Embedded |
|---|---|---|
| Best company size | Startup to mid-market | Startup to mid-market |
| Best industries | Medical devices, Biotech, Printing technology | Micro-mobility, Positioning and location technology, Industrial IoT |
| Best use cases | Hiring a multi-discipline team spanning mechanical, electrical, and firmware, Biotech instrumentation development needing senior, cross-discipline engineers | Hiring engineers with direct positioning-technology experience for a location-aware device, Nordic Semiconductor-based connected product architecture and firmware development |
| Typical project type | Fixed-scope product engineering | Project-based consultancy |
NOVO Engineering vs ARCH-Embedded: pros and cons
| NOVO Engineering | |
|---|---|
| + | Engineering team averages 16 years of experience per engineer, a specific, checkable seniority claim |
| + | Systems engineering scope puts firmware engineers on the same team as mechanical and electrical staff, not a separate silo |
| + | Two US locations near San Diego and Minneapolis give onsite coverage options |
| + | 21 years of operating history in medical device and biotech instrumentation work |
| - | 48 to 60 engineers caps how many large concurrent programs the team can staff at once |
| - | No published pricing or minimum engagement figure |
| - | Firmware is one discipline inside a broader systems-engineering team, not a standalone firmware-only group |
| ARCH-Embedded | |
|---|---|
| + | Team includes engineers with prior experience at TomTom, a specific and checkable positioning-technology background |
| + | Nordic Semiconductor partner status backs its cellular and positioning-technology hardware claims |
| + | Full-stack scope from hardware through RTOS, Linux, and security architecture covers more than firmware coding alone |
| + | Small team size means direct senior engineering involvement on every engagement |
| - | Founded in 2022 with 2 to 10 employees, giving it one of the shortest track records and smallest teams on this list |
| - | Capacity for large or multiple concurrent programs is limited by team size |
| - | No published pricing or minimum engagement figure |
Who should choose NOVO Engineering?
A typical fit: hiring a multi-discipline team spanning mechanical, electrical, and firmware.
Engineering team averaging 16 years of experience per engineer, a specific and checkable seniority claim. Minimum engagement is not publicly disclosed. Works best with clients in Medical devices, Biotech, Printing technology, Commercial products.
Who should choose ARCH-Embedded?
A typical fit: hiring engineers with direct positioning-technology experience for a location-aware device.
Team includes engineers with prior experience at TomTom and in micro-mobility products, a specific and checkable positioning-technology background. Minimum engagement is not publicly disclosed. Works best with clients in Micro-mobility, Positioning and location technology, Industrial IoT.
Decision matrix: NOVO Engineering vs ARCH-Embedded
| 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 ARCH-Embedded (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 ARCH-Embedded
| Use case | NOVO Engineering fit | ARCH-Embedded fit | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Hiring a multi-discipline team spanning mechanical, electrical, and firmware | Strong | Strong | Both equally |
| Biotech instrumentation development needing senior, cross-discipline engineers | Strong | Limited | NOVO Engineering |
| Hiring engineers with direct positioning-technology experience for a location-aware device | Strong | Strong | Both equally |
| Nordic Semiconductor-based connected product architecture and firmware development | Limited | Strong | ARCH-Embedded |
| Fixed-price build | Limited | Limited | Both equally |
| Staff augmentation | Limited | Limited | Both equally |
Verdict: NOVO Engineering vs ARCH-Embedded
NOVO Engineering (4.1/5) is the stronger overall choice for most Embedded Firmware Development projects. Engineering team averaging 16 years of experience per engineer, a specific and checkable seniority claim.
ARCH-Embedded (3.8/5) is worth a look if you need nordic Semiconductor-based connected product architecture and firmware development. If your situation matches that, ARCH-Embedded is a competitive option.
Related comparisons
NOVO Engineering vs ARCH-Embedded FAQ
Is NOVO Engineering better than ARCH-Embedded?
NOVO Engineering (4.1/5) 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 specific, checkable seniority claim. ARCH-Embedded's strongest advantage: team includes engineers with prior experience at TomTom, a specific and checkable positioning-technology background.
How do NOVO Engineering and ARCH-Embedded differ in pricing?
NOVO Engineering uses fixed-scope product engineering engagements pricing. ARCH-Embedded uses project-based embedded consultancy 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 ARCH-Embedded?
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 developer before shortlisting.
What are the main differences between NOVO Engineering and ARCH-Embedded?
NOVO Engineering's primary differentiator is: engineering team averaging 16 years of experience per engineer, a specific and checkable seniority claim. ARCH-Embedded's primary differentiator is: team includes engineers with prior experience at TomTom and in micro-mobility products, a specific and checkable positioning-technology background. They also differ in team size (48–60 vs 2–10), minimum engagement (Not published vs Not published), and primary industries served (Medical devices, Biotech vs Micro-mobility, Positioning and location technology).
Verify all details directly with each developer before making a decision.