Oxalis Design vs CMD MedTech: full comparison for 2026
Quick verdict
Oxalis Design (4.0/5) edges ahead of CMD MedTech (4.0/5) overall. Oxalis Design is the better choice for very small teams wanting direct, ongoing access to the founding engineers. CMD MedTech is the stronger option for small teams needing close, senior-level medical device engineering with supplier-diversity credentials. The right choice depends on your project size, budget, and required tech stack.
Oxalis Design vs CMD MedTech: head-to-head summary
| Criterion | Oxalis Design | CMD MedTech |
|---|---|---|
| Founded | 2019 | 2016 |
| HQ | Bristol, UK | Columbus, OH, USA |
| Team size | 2–10 | 13 |
| Rating | 4.0 / 5 | 4.0 / 5 |
| Primary differentiator | Founder-led team where both founders remain personally involved in client engineering work, not just management | Woman-owned small business built specifically around medical device systems, software, and regulatory support |
| Pricing model | Project-based electronics and embedded engagements | Project-based medical device engineering engagements |
| Min. engagement | Not published | Not published |
| Primary tech stack | C, C++, RF Design | C, C++, Medical Device Software Standards |
| Industries served | Medical devices, Consumer electronics, Industrial | Medical devices |
Oxalis Design vs CMD MedTech: overview
Oxalis Design
Oxalis Design is a Bristol, UK electronics and embedded systems consultancy founded by Alex Turner and Alex Thornicroft, both experienced electronics and software engineers who remain personally involved in client work rather than having moved fully into management. For a client evaluating team fit at the smallest scale, this means the people making architecture decisions are the same people who will be reachable throughout the engagement, not a sales contact who hands the work to unnamed staff.
CMD MedTech
CMD MedTech was founded in 2016 and is headquartered in Columbus, Ohio, with roughly 13 employees as of mid-2025. The firm specializes entirely in medical device development, covering systems engineering, software and firmware, and regulatory and quality support. Its status as a woman-owned small business can matter to a hiring buyer with supplier-diversity requirements, and the small team structure means a client works directly with the senior engineers doing the work rather than being routed through a larger delivery organization.
Services and capabilities: Oxalis Design vs CMD MedTech
| Capability | Oxalis Design | CMD MedTech |
|---|---|---|
| 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: Oxalis Design vs CMD MedTech
| Framework / platform | Oxalis Design | CMD MedTech |
|---|---|---|
| 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: Oxalis Design vs CMD MedTech
| Criterion | Oxalis Design | CMD MedTech |
|---|---|---|
| Minimum engagement | Not published | Not published |
| Engagement models | Project-based engineering, concept through pilot build | Project-based engineering with regulatory support |
| Rate transparency | Not public | Not public |
| Price tier | Mid-market | Mid-market |
Target audience comparison: Oxalis Design vs CMD MedTech
| Dimension | Oxalis Design | CMD MedTech |
|---|---|---|
| Best company size | Startup to mid-market | Startup to mid-market |
| Best industries | Medical devices, Consumer electronics, Industrial | Medical devices |
| Best use cases | Hiring a very small team where the founders personally do the engineering, RF and firmware co-design for a new connected consumer device | Hiring a small, senior medical device engineering team with regulatory expertise, Systems and firmware engineering for a medical device FDA submission |
| Typical project type | Project-based engineering, concept through pilot build | Project-based engineering with regulatory support |
Oxalis Design vs CMD MedTech: pros and cons
| Oxalis Design | |
|---|---|
| + | Both founders remain personally involved in engineering work, not just business development |
| + | Focus on electronics and embedded firmware exclusively, without a broader IT practice diluting attention |
| + | RF design capability in-house means wireless connectivity work doesn't require a separate specialist |
| + | Serves medical, consumer, and industrial clients from concept through pilot build |
| - | A team of 2 to 10 people limits capacity to a small number of concurrent client programs at any time |
| - | Publicly verifiable founding date and detailed case study history are limited |
| - | No published pricing or minimum engagement figure |
| CMD MedTech | |
|---|---|
| + | Medical device development is the firm's sole focus, not one vertical among several |
| + | Woman-owned small business status can satisfy supplier-diversity requirements in enterprise and government hiring |
| + | Regulatory and quality support is built into the delivery process rather than treated as a separate service |
| + | Small team size gives direct access to senior engineers rather than being routed through account layers |
| - | 13 employees is one of the smallest teams on this list, which caps how many concurrent programs the firm can run |
| - | 9 years of operating history is shorter than several competitors with 20-plus years in medical device work |
| - | No published pricing or minimum engagement figure |
Who should choose Oxalis Design?
A typical fit: hiring a very small team where the founders personally do the engineering.
Founder-led team where both founders remain personally involved in client engineering work, not just management. Minimum engagement is not publicly disclosed. Works best with clients in Medical devices, Consumer electronics, Industrial.
Who should choose CMD MedTech?
A typical fit: hiring a small, senior medical device engineering team with regulatory expertise.
Woman-owned small business built specifically around medical device systems, software, and regulatory support. Minimum engagement is not publicly disclosed. Works best with clients in Medical devices.
Decision matrix: Oxalis Design vs CMD MedTech
| 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: Oxalis Design (Not published) vs CMD MedTech (Not published) |
| You need specialist depth in a specific vertical | Oxalis Design |
| You need staff augmentation or team extension | Neither; consider alternatives that offer staff aug |
| You need consulting before committing to a build | CMD MedTech |
Use case fit: Oxalis Design vs CMD MedTech
| Use case | Oxalis Design fit | CMD MedTech fit | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Hiring a very small team where the founders personally do the engineering | Strong | Strong | Both equally |
| RF and firmware co-design for a new connected consumer device | Strong | Limited | Oxalis Design |
| Hiring a small, senior medical device engineering team with regulatory expertise | Strong | Strong | Both equally |
| Systems and firmware engineering for a medical device FDA submission | Limited | Strong | CMD MedTech |
| Fixed-price build | Limited | Limited | Both equally |
| Staff augmentation | Limited | Limited | Both equally |
Verdict: Oxalis Design vs CMD MedTech
Oxalis Design (4.0/5) is the stronger overall choice for most Embedded Firmware Development projects. Founder-led team where both founders remain personally involved in client engineering work, not just management.
CMD MedTech (4.0/5) is worth a look if you need systems and firmware engineering for a medical device FDA submission. If your situation matches that, CMD MedTech is a competitive option.
Related comparisons
Oxalis Design vs CMD MedTech FAQ
Is Oxalis Design better than CMD MedTech?
Oxalis Design (4.0/5) scores higher overall, but "better" depends on your use case. Oxalis Design's strongest advantage: both founders remain personally involved in engineering work, not just business development. CMD MedTech's strongest advantage: medical device development is the firm's sole focus, not one vertical among several.
How do Oxalis Design and CMD MedTech differ in pricing?
Oxalis Design uses project-based electronics and embedded engagements pricing. CMD MedTech uses project-based medical device engineering engagements pricing. Neither firm publishes a full rate card; a discovery call is required for project-specific quotes.
Which is better for enterprise: Oxalis Design or CMD MedTech?
Oxalis Design 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 Oxalis Design and CMD MedTech?
Oxalis Design's primary differentiator is: founder-led team where both founders remain personally involved in client engineering work, not just management. CMD MedTech's primary differentiator is: woman-owned small business built specifically around medical device systems, software, and regulatory support. They also differ in team size (2–10 vs 13), minimum engagement (Not published vs Not published), and primary industries served (Medical devices, Consumer electronics vs Medical devices).
Verify all details directly with each developer before making a decision.