Voler Systems vs EES: full comparison for 2026
Quick verdict
Voler Systems (4.5/5) edges ahead of EES (3.8/5) overall. Voler Systems is the better choice for teams wanting long-tenured senior engineers over a fast-scaled bench. 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.
Voler Systems vs EES: head-to-head summary
| Criterion | Voler Systems | EES |
|---|---|---|
| Founded | 1979 | 2012 |
| HQ | Sunnyvale, CA, USA | Tempe / Chandler, AZ, USA |
| Team size | 22 | 3–50 |
| Rating | 4.5 / 5 | 3.8 / 5 |
| Primary differentiator | 46 years of continuous operation with a small, senior team rather than a fast-scaled workforce | Explicitly positions itself as senior-led, keeping the team small by design rather than as a growth-stage limitation |
| Pricing model | Project-based electronic and firmware design engagements | Contract engineering engagements |
| Min. engagement | Not published | Not published |
| Primary tech stack | C, C++, FPGA | C, C++, Industrial Embedded Systems |
| Industries served | Wearable technology, Medical devices, Consumer electronics | Industrial |
Voler Systems vs EES: overview
Voler Systems
Voler Systems has operated from Sunnyvale, California since 1979, a 46-year run that means most of its roughly 22 engineers have deep, overlapping tenure rather than a constantly rotating bench. The firm combines analog circuit design, FPGA programming, and embedded firmware, with a specific focus on ultra-low-power wearable and biomedical sensor products. For a client evaluating team stability, a firm that has retained its identity and core expertise for over four decades signals something different than a firm assembled quickly to staff up for a hiring surge.
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: Voler Systems vs EES
| Capability | Voler Systems | 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: Voler Systems vs EES
| Framework / platform | Voler Systems | EES |
|---|---|---|
| C | ✓ | ✓ |
| C++ | ✓ | ✓ |
| FreeRTOS | N/A | N/A |
| Zephyr | N/A | N/A |
| FPGA | ✓ | 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: Voler Systems vs EES
| Criterion | Voler Systems | EES |
|---|---|---|
| Minimum engagement | Not published | Not published |
| Engagement models | Project-based design engagements | Contract firmware and hardware engineering |
| Rate transparency | Not public | Not public |
| Price tier | Mid-market | Mid-market |
Target audience comparison: Voler Systems vs EES
| Dimension | Voler Systems | EES |
|---|---|---|
| Best company size | Startup to mid-market | Startup to mid-market |
| Best industries | Wearable technology, Medical devices, Consumer electronics | Industrial |
| Best use cases | Hiring a small, senior team for an ultra-low-power wearable sensor product, FPGA and firmware co-design needing engineers who've solved similar problems repeatedly | 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 design engagements | Contract firmware and hardware engineering |
Voler Systems vs EES: pros and cons
| Voler Systems | |
|---|---|
| + | 46 years of continuous operation suggests a team with deep institutional knowledge, not high turnover |
| + | Combines analog, FPGA, and firmware disciplines in one small team, reducing the number of specialists a client has to coordinate |
| + | Ultra-low-power design expertise built up over decades of the same core focus area |
| + | 22-person size means direct access to senior engineers, not junior staff routed through a larger organization |
| - | 22 engineers means a client needing several concurrent teams should confirm capacity before committing |
| - | Public case study volume is thinner than its tenure would suggest, worth a direct reference conversation |
| - | 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 Voler Systems?
A typical fit: hiring a small, senior team for an ultra-low-power wearable sensor product.
46 years of continuous operation with a small, senior team rather than a fast-scaled workforce. Minimum engagement is not publicly disclosed. Works best with clients in Wearable technology, Medical devices, Consumer 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: Voler Systems 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: Voler Systems (Not published) vs EES (Not published) |
| You need specialist depth in a specific vertical | Voler Systems |
| 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: Voler Systems vs EES
| Use case | Voler Systems fit | EES fit | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Hiring a small, senior team for an ultra-low-power wearable sensor product | Strong | Strong | Both equally |
| FPGA and firmware co-design needing engineers who've solved similar problems repeatedly | Strong | Limited | Voler Systems |
| 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: Voler Systems vs EES
Voler Systems (4.5/5) is the stronger overall choice for most Embedded Firmware Development projects. 46 years of continuous operation with a small, senior team rather than a fast-scaled workforce.
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
Voler Systems vs EES FAQ
Is Voler Systems better than EES?
Voler Systems (4.5/5) scores higher overall, but "better" depends on your use case. Voler Systems's strongest advantage: 46 years of continuous operation suggests a team with deep institutional knowledge, not high turnover. 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 Voler Systems and EES differ in pricing?
Voler Systems uses project-based electronic and firmware design 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: Voler Systems 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 Voler Systems and EES?
Voler Systems's primary differentiator is: 46 years of continuous operation with a small, senior team rather than a fast-scaled workforce. 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 (22 vs 3–50), minimum engagement (Not published vs Not published), and primary industries served (Wearable technology, Medical devices vs Industrial).
Verify all details directly with each developer before making a decision.