Dojo Five vs Rigado: full comparison for 2026
Quick verdict
Dojo Five (4.5/5) edges ahead of Rigado (4.3/5) overall. Dojo Five is the better choice for teams wanting automated firmware CI/CD instead of manual builds. Rigado is the stronger option for commercial IoT deployments needing pre-certified BLE modules and firmware. The right choice depends on your project size, budget, and required tech stack.
Dojo Five vs Rigado: head-to-head summary
| Criterion | Dojo Five | Rigado |
|---|---|---|
| Founded | 2018 | 2010 |
| HQ | Saint Paul, Minnesota, USA | Portland and Salem, Oregon, USA (also London, UK and Shenzhen, China) |
| Team size | 26 | 12–17 |
| Rating | 4.5 / 5 | 4.3 / 5 |
| Primary differentiator | Built specifically around bringing modern CI/CD, automated testing, and monitoring pipelines to embedded firmware teams | Pre-certified low-power wireless modules paired with edge computing and firmware for large-scale commercial IoT rollouts |
| Pricing model | Firmware engineering and DevOps-style tooling consulting | Product and firmware engagements, plus module and hardware sales |
| Min. engagement | Not published | Not published |
| Primary tech stack | C, C++, On-premise and cloud CI/CD | BLE, 802.15.4, Edge computing platforms |
| Industries served | Industrial equipment, Medical devices, Consumer electronics | Retail IoT, Smart buildings, Asset tracking |
Dojo Five vs Rigado: overview
Dojo Five
Dojo Five was founded in 2018 and is based in Saint Paul, Minnesota, with a team of roughly 26 people. Rather than positioning as a general embedded firm, the company markets itself specifically around modernizing the firmware development lifecycle: automated builds, hardware-in-the-loop testing, and monitoring pipelines that most older firmware vendors still handle manually. That focus means Dojo Five is a better fit for a team that already has a codebase and needs tooling and process discipline than for a from-scratch product build.
Rigado
Rigado was founded in 2010 by Justin Rigling and Ben Corrado and is headquartered in Portland and Salem, Oregon, with additional offices in London and Shenzhen; employee counts are reported between roughly 12 and 17 people depending on the source. The firm provides pre-certified low-power wireless modules alongside gateways, firmware, and an edge computing platform for commercial and industrial IoT deployments such as asset tracking and smart buildings. Its small team size focused on Bluetooth Low Energy and edge connectivity makes it a narrower specialist than the larger, broader-scope firms on this list.
Services and capabilities: Dojo Five vs Rigado
| Capability | Dojo Five | Rigado |
|---|---|---|
| RTOS firmware development | ✓ | ✓ |
| Bare-metal & driver development | ✗ | ✗ |
| Secure boot / OTA firmware updates | ✗ | ✗ |
| MCU & platform migration | ✗ | ✓ |
| Connectivity & IoT protocols | ✗ | ✓ |
| Functional safety / MISRA compliance | ✓ | ✗ |
| Embedded AI / on-device inference | ✗ | ✗ |
| Firmware GUI development | ✗ | ✗ |
| Staff augmentation | ✗ | ✗ |
Tech stack comparison: Dojo Five vs Rigado
| Framework / platform | Dojo Five | Rigado |
|---|---|---|
| FreeRTOS | N/A | N/A |
| Zephyr | N/A | N/A |
| STM32 | N/A | N/A |
| ARM Cortex-M | N/A | N/A |
| BLE | N/A | ✓ |
| Embedded Linux | N/A | N/A |
| Secure OTA | N/A | N/A |
| PCB | N/A | N/A |
| AWS IoT | N/A | N/A |
| RISC-V | N/A | N/A |
Pricing comparison: Dojo Five vs Rigado
| Criterion | Dojo Five | Rigado |
|---|---|---|
| Minimum engagement | Not published | Not published |
| Engagement models | Fixed project, Dedicated team | Fixed project |
| Rate transparency | Not public | Not public |
| Price tier | Mid-market | Mid-market |
Target audience comparison: Dojo Five vs Rigado
| Dimension | Dojo Five | Rigado |
|---|---|---|
| Best company size | Startup to mid-market | Startup to mid-market |
| Best industries | Industrial equipment, Medical devices, Consumer electronics | Retail IoT, Smart buildings, Asset tracking |
| Best use cases | Existing firmware codebase with no automated test coverage or CI pipeline, Medical device team needing automated regression testing ahead of a compliance audit | Large-scale commercial IoT deployment needing pre-certified BLE modules, Smart building or asset-tracking program requiring an edge computing platform alongside firmware |
| Typical project type | Fixed project | Fixed project |
Dojo Five vs Rigado: pros and cons
| Dojo Five | |
|---|---|
| + | Specific focus on firmware CI/CD and automated testing addresses a gap most other firms on this list treat as an afterthought |
| + | Team of 26 keeps every engagement senior-engineer-led rather than staffed with junior generalists |
| + | Modern tooling background reduces the manual regression-testing burden common at older firmware vendors |
| - | Team of 26 limits capacity for very large, multi-year programs |
| - | Founded in 2018, so its public track record is shorter than firms with decades of delivery history |
| Rigado | |
|---|---|
| + | Pre-certified BLE and low-power wireless modules can shorten time to certification for a new IoT product |
| + | Offices spanning Oregon, London, and Shenzhen give reach across major IoT manufacturing and deployment regions |
| + | Edge computing platform plus firmware and modules covers the full connectivity stack for large rollouts |
| - | Team size in the low teens limits capacity for large, multi-workstream programs |
| - | Narrow specialization in BLE and edge connectivity is a weaker fit for RTOS-heavy or bare-metal firmware projects outside that scope |
Who should choose Dojo Five?
A typical fit: existing firmware codebase with no automated test coverage or CI pipeline.
Built specifically around bringing modern CI/CD, automated testing, and monitoring pipelines to embedded firmware teams. Minimum engagement is not publicly disclosed. Works best with clients in Industrial equipment, Medical devices, Consumer electronics.
Who should choose Rigado?
A typical fit: large-scale commercial IoT deployment needing pre-certified BLE modules.
Pre-certified low-power wireless modules paired with edge computing and firmware for large-scale commercial IoT rollouts. Minimum engagement is not publicly disclosed. Works best with clients in Retail IoT, Smart buildings, Asset tracking.
Decision matrix: Dojo Five vs Rigado
| Your situation | Recommended choice |
|---|---|
| You need full-ownership delivery on a defined project scope | Dojo Five |
| You need a large dedicated team for an ongoing programme | Dojo Five |
| Your budget is at the lower end | Compare: Dojo Five (Not published) vs Rigado (Not published) |
| You need specialist depth in a specific vertical | Dojo Five |
| 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 Rigado
| Use case | Dojo Five fit | Rigado fit | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Existing firmware codebase with no automated test coverage or CI pipeline | Strong | Limited | Dojo Five |
| Medical device team needing automated regression testing ahead of a compliance audit | Strong | Limited | Dojo Five |
| Large-scale commercial IoT deployment needing pre-certified BLE modules | Limited | Strong | Rigado |
| Smart building or asset-tracking program requiring an edge computing platform alongside firmware | Limited | Strong | Rigado |
| Fixed-price build | Limited | Limited | Both equally |
| Staff augmentation | Limited | Limited | Both equally |
Verdict: Dojo Five vs Rigado
Dojo Five (4.5/5) is the stronger overall choice for most Firmware Development projects. Built specifically around bringing modern CI/CD, automated testing, and monitoring pipelines to embedded firmware teams.
Rigado (4.3/5) is worth a look if you need smart building or asset-tracking program requiring an edge computing platform alongside firmware. If your situation matches that, Rigado is a competitive option.
Related comparisons
Dojo Five vs Rigado FAQ
Is Dojo Five better than Rigado?
Dojo Five (4.5/5) scores higher overall, but "better" depends on your use case. Dojo Five's strongest advantage: specific focus on firmware CI/CD and automated testing addresses a gap most other firms on this list treat as an afterthought. Rigado's strongest advantage: pre-certified BLE and low-power wireless modules can shorten time to certification for a new IoT product.
How do Dojo Five and Rigado differ in pricing?
Dojo Five uses firmware engineering and devops-style tooling consulting pricing. Rigado uses product and firmware engagements, plus module and hardware sales 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 Rigado?
Rigado is the larger team and typically the better enterprise-scale choice. For very large programmes, verify team size and compliance coverage directly with each company before shortlisting.
What are the main differences between Dojo Five and Rigado?
Dojo Five's primary differentiator is: built specifically around bringing modern CI/CD, automated testing, and monitoring pipelines to embedded firmware teams. Rigado's primary differentiator is: pre-certified low-power wireless modules paired with edge computing and firmware for large-scale commercial IoT rollouts. They also differ in team size (26 vs 12–17), minimum engagement (Not published vs Not published), and primary industries served (Industrial equipment, Medical devices vs Retail IoT, Smart buildings).
Verify all details directly with each company before making a decision.