CodeFirst

Visit Website Write a Review Claim this Company

Details

Founded:
2012
Hourly Rates:
$50 - $99 / hr
Employees:
2 - 9
Avg. Project Cost:
$50,000+
Ratings:
4.8 7 Reviews

Services

  • Mobile App Development
  • Web Development
  • UI-UX Design
  • Enterprise App Modernization
  • Web Design

Industries Served

Advertising & Marketing Manufacturing Energy & Utilities Mining & Metals Telecommunications Information Technology Sports & Fitness

Where We Specialize

17% Web Design
Web Design 17%
Python 17%
Web Development 16%
Deep Learning 12%
Metaverse Development 11%
Express.js 8%
IT Services 7%
AI Development 6%
DevOps 4%
Game Development 2%

Industry Expertise

SaaS63% Food29% Travel8%

Typical Project Size

56% Enterprise
30% Midmarket Business
14% Small Business

About

CodeFirst is a software development company that turns ideas into working products. CodeFirst focuses on Mobile App Development. Its team includes 2 - 9 specialists working across design, development, and delivery. Typical hourly rates run around $50 - $99/hr, with an average project cost near $10,000. This gives a quick snapshot of what to expect when working with CodeFirst.

CodeFirst Reviews

4.8 7 Reviews
Submit Review

They clearly understood the gap between an AI demo and an AI that survives production

Airi Kobayashi / Head of Product Development | Jun 03, 2026

Our stakeholder list for this project included board members, operations leads, compliance, and end users, all with wildly different levels of technical fluency and different definitions of success. Managing that mix well is genuinely hard, and this team did it better than any vendor we've worked with. They shifted register depending on who they were talking to without ever dumbing down the substance, kept expectations honest the whole way through, and delivered something each group could point to as meeting their own bar. That range is rare.

Project summary

Multi-touch attribution across our media mix was the single most requested capability from clients across our whole portfolio, and we couldn't deliver it without rebuilding the data layer underneath.

  • Overall Rating 5.0
  • Quality 5.0
  • Schedule 5.0
  • Project Cost 5.0
  • Willing To Refer 5.0
Project Type:
AI & Machine Learning
Project Cost:
$10,000 to $49,999
Project Duration:
Nov 2025 - Apr 2026
Business Type:
Advertising & Marketing
Location:
Nagoya, Japan

Questions & Answers

Please describe your company, your role, and the industry you operate in.
I run technology for Rising Sun Commerce KK, a growth-stage Advertising & Marketing company based in Nagoya, Japan. My role as Head of Product Development covers product engineering, platform operations, and our vendor relationships. We'd hit a point where our internal capacity just couldn't keep pace with what the roadmap demanded.
What specific problem or business challenge led you to hire this company?
A competitor move forced our hand and compressed a roadmap item we'd planned for the following year. The AI & Machine Learning investment we'd scheduled twelve months out suddenly needed to happen in six, and building it internally in that window wasn't realistic.
What services did the company provide for your project?
The scope ran the full AI & Machine Learning lifecycle — discovery, requirements, architecture, development across roughly a dozen sprints, integration testing, performance validation, deployment, and a four-week hypercare window afterward. They also handed over full documentation and ran a knowledge transfer session for our internal team.
Why did you choose this company over other providers you considered?
We were coming off a failed engagement and went into vendor selection this time with a lot more scrutiny. We asked pointed questions about how they handle scope changes, how they estimate, how they communicate bad news. The answers were specific and consistent across everyone we spoke to on their team, which gave us confidence it wasn't a rehearsed pitch.
How clearly did the company understand your requirements and business goals?
Very well. The discovery phase was more thorough than anything we'd been through with prior vendors. They pushed back on requirements that were vague or contradictory, suggested better alternatives where our own thinking was limited, and produced a spec our internal stakeholders agreed was the clearest version of the product they'd ever seen written down.
How was your overall experience with their communication and project management?
Proactive and well-calibrated. Technical detail for the engineering side, plain summaries for the steering group, and risk flags that came with a proposed fix attached rather than just a problem statement. The biweekly sprint reviews kept our stakeholders in the loop without requiring them to sit in on every working session.
Did the company deliver the project on time and within your expected budget?
On time and inside the approved budget. Their estimating was notably accurate — they'd broken the work down in enough detail during discovery that the forecast held up the whole way through, instead of drifting with every small change. We had exactly one change request, and it was for scope we added ourselves.
What tangible results or business impact have you seen since the project was completed?
We went live about three months ago. User adoption beat the target we'd set by roughly 20 percent in the first month, and support ticket volume has dropped noticeably since. Features we'd shelved because the old architecture made them too expensive to build are now back on the roadmap.
What did you like most about working with this company?
Their instinct for never losing the business goal in the middle of technical decisions. I've worked with technically strong teams before who lose that thread once things get complicated. This team kept every architectural call tied back to the outcome we'd actually agreed to, which made the harder trade-off conversations a lot easier.
Would you recommend this company to others, and would you work with them again?
Without reservation. We're already in early conversations about a second engagement, and I expect this to turn into a multi-year relationship. Anyone in Advertising & Marketing looking for real AI & Machine Learning depth paired with actual delivery discipline should have this team near the top of their list.

Fulfilment and finance are as satisfied with this build as our customers are

Marcus Teo / CTO | May 24, 2026

Going in, the integration work was what worried me most. Our systems landscape is messy, a couple of the third-party APIs we depend on are barely documented, and one of those vendors has a well-earned reputation for slow, inconsistent support. This team absorbed all of that. They documented what the upstream providers wouldn't, built in resilience wherever the upstream behavior was flaky, and shipped something that has worked exactly as specified since go-live. I genuinely couldn't have asked for more on that front.

Project summary

Unplanned downtime had become our biggest single cost line, and our own data suggested predictive maintenance could fix most of it — if we had the infrastructure to act on the signal.

  • Overall Rating 4.5
  • Quality 4.0
  • Schedule 5.0
  • Project Cost 5.0
  • Willing To Refer 5.0
Project Type:
E-commerce Development
Project Cost:
$50,000 to $149,999
Project Duration:
Jul 2025 - Apr 2026
Business Type:
Manufacturing
Location:
Singapore

Questions & Answers

Please describe your company, your role, and the industry you operate in.
Sentosa Ventures Pte Ltd has been operating in Manufacturing for a while now, headquartered in Singapore. As CTO I sit across both strategic planning and day-to-day technology delivery. We hold our vendors to a high bar because our own clients hold us to one — it's only fair to expect the same discipline from partners.
What specific problem or business challenge led you to hire this company?
Our previous vendor had maintained this platform for a few years, and the technical debt had piled up to the point where our delivery speed had dropped to a fraction of what it used to be. We needed fresh engineering eyes and an actual plan to deal with the underlying mess.
What services did the company provide for your project?
Full E-commerce Development delivery, with particular depth on the integration and data migration pieces — the riskiest parts of the whole program. On top of that, they kept a dedicated QA person on the project throughout and left our operations team with a proper runbook at handover.
Why did you choose this company over other providers you considered?
We shortlisted five vendors through a structured process. The technical review knocked two out right away. Of the remaining three, this team stood out because their E-commerce Development approach was specific rather than generic, backed by actual reference projects in Manufacturing — not just case studies pulled off a website. The reference calls confirmed everything the proposal claimed.
How clearly did the company understand your requirements and business goals?
Better than we understood them ourselves, honestly. The workshops they ran surfaced assumptions we'd never questioned and exposed a few requirements that flatly contradicted each other. Sorting that out before development started saved us from what would have been serious rework later.
How was your overall experience with their communication and project management?
Professional throughout. The project manager always had a clear view of the critical path and flagged changes to it honestly, without spin. The one significant scope change we made mid-project went through a clean process — fairly priced, clearly documented, and absorbed without knocking the rest of the timeline off course.
Did the company deliver the project on time and within your expected budget?
The project came in on schedule. Budget stayed within the agreed ceiling, including one scope addition we asked for ourselves, which was quoted fairly and handled without disturbing the rest of the timeline. Nothing about the invoice came as a surprise.
What tangible results or business impact have you seen since the project was completed?
Hard to isolate perfectly given everything else going on in the business, but the numbers we can attribute directly to the E-commerce Development work are solid: session duration up, conversion up, error rate down, and our NPS for that touchpoint has moved noticeably. Our account managers say it's coming up positively in client conversations now too.
What did you like most about working with this company?
The team stayed the same the whole way through. The engineers in the discovery sessions were the same ones who built the system. That continuity matters more than people expect, and you really only notice it when it's missing. Every conversation picked up where the last one left off.
Would you recommend this company to others, and would you work with them again?
Absolutely, with one caveat worth mentioning: the value really starts in discovery, so clients who take that phase seriously will get the most out of it. We put real effort in upfront and it clearly paid off in what got delivered.

The return on this investment outpaced the business case we originally approved

Kenji Watanabe / Director of IT Strategy | May 24, 2026

We handed this team an aggressive deadline, a genuinely complicated scope, and a client-side team on our end that was stretched thin and slow to respond at times. They handled all of it without complaint. When they needed something from us they asked precisely and on time. When they didn't, they just kept moving. The project still landed on schedule despite our side being the weaker link for a good chunk of it, which tells you something about how they operate under pressure.

Project summary

Grid modernization funding required us to prove demand-response capability. The models existed on paper — we needed engineers to actually build and run them in production.

  • Overall Rating 5.0
  • Quality 5.0
  • Schedule 5.0
  • Project Cost 5.0
  • Willing To Refer 5.0
Project Type:
Low-Code / No-Code Development
Project Cost:
$500,000+
Project Duration:
Sep 2025 - Apr 2026
Business Type:
Energy & Utilities
Location:
Yokohama, Japan

Questions & Answers

Please describe your company, your role, and the industry you operate in.
Kirin Digital KK is a Energy & Utilities business headquartered in Yokohama, Japan. As Director of IT Strategy I'm responsible for the whole technology agenda — infrastructure, product, and how we pick vendors. Every decision we make on the technology side has to tie back to a clear business case before it gets approved.
What specific problem or business challenge led you to hire this company?
Our previous vendor had maintained this platform for a few years, and the technical debt had piled up to the point where our delivery speed had dropped to a fraction of what it used to be. We needed fresh engineering eyes and an actual plan to deal with the underlying mess.
What services did the company provide for your project?
The scope ran the full Low-Code / No-Code Development lifecycle — discovery, requirements, architecture, development across roughly a dozen sprints, integration testing, performance validation, deployment, and a four-week hypercare window afterward. They also handed over full documentation and ran a knowledge transfer session for our internal team.
Why did you choose this company over other providers you considered?
A peer in the Energy & Utilities space had used them for something similar in Low-Code / No-Code Development and recommended them without hesitation. Our own due diligence backed that up. Domain knowledge, Low-Code / No-Code Development depth, and a track record of actually delivering — that combination made the decision easy.
How clearly did the company understand your requirements and business goals?
Very well. The discovery phase was more thorough than anything we'd been through with prior vendors. They pushed back on requirements that were vague or contradictory, suggested better alternatives where our own thinking was limited, and produced a spec our internal stakeholders agreed was the clearest version of the product they'd ever seen written down.
How was your overall experience with their communication and project management?
Professional throughout. The project manager always had a clear view of the critical path and flagged changes to it honestly, without spin. The one significant scope change we made mid-project went through a clean process — fairly priced, clearly documented, and absorbed without knocking the rest of the timeline off course.
Did the company deliver the project on time and within your expected budget?
Both, yes. One sprint hit a one-week delay from a third-party API dependency outside anyone's control. The team flagged it three weeks ahead of time, laid out two options, and we picked an approach that clawed the schedule back within the same sprint. That's the kind of foresight that separates real project management from just reacting to problems.
What tangible results or business impact have you seen since the project was completed?
The clearest measure is how the system's actually performing in production. In the four months since go-live we've had zero major incidents, our page performance scores improved across every Core Web Vitals metric, and two enterprise clients who'd previously flagged our old platform's limits during renewal talks signed again without raising it.
What did you like most about working with this company?
Their willingness to just be direct. If our requirements were unclear, they said so. If our priorities contradicted each other, they explained why. If an approach we'd assumed was right actually had real downsides, they told us before we'd committed to it. That kind of honesty is exactly what I look for in a long-term partner.
Would you recommend this company to others, and would you work with them again?
Without reservation. We're already in early conversations about a second engagement, and I expect this to turn into a multi-year relationship. Anyone in Energy & Utilities looking for real Low-Code / No-Code Development depth paired with actual delivery discipline should have this team near the top of their list.

Solved a trust problem between our partners that we'd been arguing about for three years

Tanner Ridgeway / VP of Operations Technology | Apr 26, 2026

Going in, the integration work was what worried me most. Our systems landscape is messy, a couple of the third-party APIs we depend on are barely documented, and one of those vendors has a well-earned reputation for slow, inconsistent support. This team absorbed all of that. They documented what the upstream providers wouldn't, built in resilience wherever the upstream behavior was flaky, and shipped something that has worked exactly as specified since go-live. I genuinely couldn't have asked for more on that front.

Project summary

Our product thinking internally was solid, but our execution depth in this particular technical domain wasn't. We needed real specialists, not another generalist team.

  • Overall Rating 5.0
  • Quality 5.0
  • Schedule 5.0
  • Project Cost 5.0
  • Willing To Refer 5.0
Project Type:
Blockchain Development
Project Cost:
$500,000+
Project Duration:
May 2025 - Mar 2026
Business Type:
Mining & Metals
Location:
Salt Lake City, USA

Questions & Answers

Please describe your company, your role, and the industry you operate in.
Summit Line Logistics has been operating in Mining & Metals for a while now, headquartered in Salt Lake City, USA. As VP of Operations Technology I sit across both strategic planning and day-to-day technology delivery. We hold our vendors to a high bar because our own clients hold us to one — it's only fair to expect the same discipline from partners.
What specific problem or business challenge led you to hire this company?
Regulation in our Mining & Metals segment shifted and the compliance deadline came from the regulator, not from us. The scale of the Blockchain Development changes required justified bringing in a specialist rather than pulling our internal team off the product roadmap to handle it.
What services did the company provide for your project?
The scope ran the full Blockchain Development lifecycle — discovery, requirements, architecture, development across roughly a dozen sprints, integration testing, performance validation, deployment, and a four-week hypercare window afterward. They also handed over full documentation and ran a knowledge transfer session for our internal team.
Why did you choose this company over other providers you considered?
A peer in the Mining & Metals space had used them for something similar in Blockchain Development and recommended them without hesitation. Our own due diligence backed that up. Domain knowledge, Blockchain Development depth, and a track record of actually delivering — that combination made the decision easy.
How clearly did the company understand your requirements and business goals?
Very well. The discovery phase was more thorough than anything we'd been through with prior vendors. They pushed back on requirements that were vague or contradictory, suggested better alternatives where our own thinking was limited, and produced a spec our internal stakeholders agreed was the clearest version of the product they'd ever seen written down.
How was your overall experience with their communication and project management?
Genuinely excellent, especially given the time difference between Salt Lake City, USA and the delivery team. Written updates were consistent and specific, anything needing a decision got same-day turnaround, and nothing slipped through the cracks across the whole engagement.
Did the company deliver the project on time and within your expected budget?
Both, yes. One sprint hit a one-week delay from a third-party API dependency outside anyone's control. The team flagged it three weeks ahead of time, laid out two options, and we picked an approach that clawed the schedule back within the same sprint. That's the kind of foresight that separates real project management from just reacting to problems.
What tangible results or business impact have you seen since the project was completed?
The clearest measure is how the system's actually performing in production. In the four months since go-live we've had zero major incidents, our page performance scores improved across every Core Web Vitals metric, and two enterprise clients who'd previously flagged our old platform's limits during renewal talks signed again without raising it.
What did you like most about working with this company?
Their willingness to just be direct. If our requirements were unclear, they said so. If our priorities contradicted each other, they explained why. If an approach we'd assumed was right actually had real downsides, they told us before we'd committed to it. That kind of honesty is exactly what I look for in a long-term partner.
Would you recommend this company to others, and would you work with them again?
Absolutely, with one caveat worth mentioning: the value really starts in discovery, so clients who take that phase seriously will get the most out of it. We put real effort in upfront and it clearly paid off in what got delivered.

Turned years of siloed spreadsheets into one dataset people actually trust

Étienne Marchand / CTO | Apr 17, 2026

Looking back, the thing that stands out most is how uneventful the whole project was. Technology projects of this size tend to generate their share of fire drills and awkward escalation calls. This one really didn't. Issues got flagged early enough that they never became incidents, scope changes went through an actual process instead of a tense phone call, and risks were tracked rather than just hoped away. That kind of quiet competence is unusual in my experience, and it made the whole thing feel easier on our end than I know it was on theirs.

Project summary

Portal usability complaints were showing up disproportionately among the B2B accounts we were about to lose at renewal. The self-service experience needed a full rebuild before that cycle hit.

  • Overall Rating 4.5
  • Quality 4.5
  • Schedule 4.0
  • Project Cost 4.5
  • Willing To Refer 5.0
Project Type:
Data & Analytics
Project Cost:
$500,000+
Project Duration:
Nov 2025 - Mar 2026
Business Type:
Telecommunications
Location:
Ottawa, Canada

Questions & Answers

Please describe your company, your role, and the industry you operate in.
Aurora Systems Inc has been operating in Telecommunications for a while now, headquartered in Ottawa, Canada. As CTO I sit across both strategic planning and day-to-day technology delivery. We hold our vendors to a high bar because our own clients hold us to one — it's only fair to expect the same discipline from partners.
What specific problem or business challenge led you to hire this company?
Regulation in our Telecommunications segment shifted and the compliance deadline came from the regulator, not from us. The scale of the Data & Analytics changes required justified bringing in a specialist rather than pulling our internal team off the product roadmap to handle it.
What services did the company provide for your project?
Full Data & Analytics delivery, with particular depth on the integration and data migration pieces — the riskiest parts of the whole program. On top of that, they kept a dedicated QA person on the project throughout and left our operations team with a proper runbook at handover.
Why did you choose this company over other providers you considered?
We were coming off a failed engagement and went into vendor selection this time with a lot more scrutiny. We asked pointed questions about how they handle scope changes, how they estimate, how they communicate bad news. The answers were specific and consistent across everyone we spoke to on their team, which gave us confidence it wasn't a rehearsed pitch.
How clearly did the company understand your requirements and business goals?
Very well. The discovery phase was more thorough than anything we'd been through with prior vendors. They pushed back on requirements that were vague or contradictory, suggested better alternatives where our own thinking was limited, and produced a spec our internal stakeholders agreed was the clearest version of the product they'd ever seen written down.
How was your overall experience with their communication and project management?
The most structured project management I've dealt with from any outside vendor. Sprint planning was tight, acceptance criteria were specific, and retrospectives actually led to changes rather than just being a box to tick. The backlog and risk register were both treated as live tools, not paperwork. I never once had to chase a status update.
Did the company deliver the project on time and within your expected budget?
Both, yes. One sprint hit a one-week delay from a third-party API dependency outside anyone's control. The team flagged it three weeks ahead of time, laid out two options, and we picked an approach that clawed the schedule back within the same sprint. That's the kind of foresight that separates real project management from just reacting to problems.
What tangible results or business impact have you seen since the project was completed?
We went live about three months ago. User adoption beat the target we'd set by roughly 20 percent in the first month, and support ticket volume has dropped noticeably since. Features we'd shelved because the old architecture made them too expensive to build are now back on the roadmap.
What did you like most about working with this company?
Their willingness to just be direct. If our requirements were unclear, they said so. If our priorities contradicted each other, they explained why. If an approach we'd assumed was right actually had real downsides, they told us before we'd committed to it. That kind of honesty is exactly what I look for in a long-term partner.
Would you recommend this company to others, and would you work with them again?
Absolutely, with one caveat worth mentioning: the value really starts in discovery, so clients who take that phase seriously will get the most out of it. We put real effort in upfront and it clearly paid off in what got delivered.

Execution matched the proposal on every dimension that actually mattered to us

Rodrigo Cardoso / VP of Technology | Apr 05, 2026

We had proposals in hand ranging from roughly half to well over double what we eventually paid this team. What set their proposal apart wasn't the price — it was that the number matched what they actually delivered, almost line for line. I've been burned before by proposals that were really just opening offers in a negotiation that continues throughout the project. That wasn't the case here, and I don't say that lightly.

Project summary

Our headcount had grown faster than our platform engineering depth. We needed an experienced team to close that gap while we hired, without letting quality or the roadmap slip in the meantime.

  • Overall Rating 4.5
  • Quality 4.5
  • Schedule 5.0
  • Project Cost 5.0
  • Willing To Refer 5.0
Project Type:
Low-Code / No-Code Development
Project Cost:
$10,000 to $49,999
Project Duration:
May 2025 - Mar 2026
Business Type:
Information Technology
Location:
Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

Questions & Answers

Please describe your company, your role, and the industry you operate in.
I run technology for Costa Verde Digital Ltda, a growth-stage Information Technology company based in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. My role as VP of Technology covers product engineering, platform operations, and our vendor relationships. We'd hit a point where our internal capacity just couldn't keep pace with what the roadmap demanded.
What specific problem or business challenge led you to hire this company?
Regulation in our Information Technology segment shifted and the compliance deadline came from the regulator, not from us. The scale of the Low-Code / No-Code Development changes required justified bringing in a specialist rather than pulling our internal team off the product roadmap to handle it.
What services did the company provide for your project?
Full Low-Code / No-Code Development delivery, with particular depth on the integration and data migration pieces — the riskiest parts of the whole program. On top of that, they kept a dedicated QA person on the project throughout and left our operations team with a proper runbook at handover.
Why did you choose this company over other providers you considered?
We were coming off a failed engagement and went into vendor selection this time with a lot more scrutiny. We asked pointed questions about how they handle scope changes, how they estimate, how they communicate bad news. The answers were specific and consistent across everyone we spoke to on their team, which gave us confidence it wasn't a rehearsed pitch.
How clearly did the company understand your requirements and business goals?
Very well. The discovery phase was more thorough than anything we'd been through with prior vendors. They pushed back on requirements that were vague or contradictory, suggested better alternatives where our own thinking was limited, and produced a spec our internal stakeholders agreed was the clearest version of the product they'd ever seen written down.
How was your overall experience with their communication and project management?
Proactive and well-calibrated. Technical detail for the engineering side, plain summaries for the steering group, and risk flags that came with a proposed fix attached rather than just a problem statement. The biweekly sprint reviews kept our stakeholders in the loop without requiring them to sit in on every working session.
Did the company deliver the project on time and within your expected budget?
Both, yes. One sprint hit a one-week delay from a third-party API dependency outside anyone's control. The team flagged it three weeks ahead of time, laid out two options, and we picked an approach that clawed the schedule back within the same sprint. That's the kind of foresight that separates real project management from just reacting to problems.
What tangible results or business impact have you seen since the project was completed?
Hard to isolate perfectly given everything else going on in the business, but the numbers we can attribute directly to the Low-Code / No-Code Development work are solid: session duration up, conversion up, error rate down, and our NPS for that touchpoint has moved noticeably. Our account managers say it's coming up positively in client conversations now too.
What did you like most about working with this company?
Their instinct for never losing the business goal in the middle of technical decisions. I've worked with technically strong teams before who lose that thread once things get complicated. This team kept every architectural call tied back to the outcome we'd actually agreed to, which made the harder trade-off conversations a lot easier.
Would you recommend this company to others, and would you work with them again?
Absolutely, with one caveat worth mentioning: the value really starts in discovery, so clients who take that phase seriously will get the most out of it. We put real effort in upfront and it clearly paid off in what got delivered.

Started as a single project and earned a permanent spot on our preferred vendor list

Min-Jun Kang / VP of Engineering | Jan 28, 2026

Our stakeholder list for this project included board members, operations leads, compliance, and end users, all with wildly different levels of technical fluency and different definitions of success. Managing that mix well is genuinely hard, and this team did it better than any vendor we've worked with. They shifted register depending on who they were talking to without ever dumbing down the substance, kept expectations honest the whole way through, and delivered something each group could point to as meeting their own bar. That range is rare.

Project summary

Our internal engineering capacity was fully committed to keeping existing systems running, with no room for a build of this size. An outside partner with the right depth was really our only option.

  • Overall Rating 5.0
  • Quality 5.0
  • Schedule 4.5
  • Project Cost 4.5
  • Willing To Refer 5.0
Project Type:
Embedded Systems Development
Project Cost:
Less than $10,000
Project Duration:
May 2025 - Dec 2025
Business Type:
Sports & Fitness
Location:
Busan, South Korea

Questions & Answers

Please describe your company, your role, and the industry you operate in.
As VP of Engineering at Han River Digital Corp I oversee technology spend and delivery across our Sports & Fitness operations out of Busan, South Korea. We're a commercially minded business, so every technology decision gets judged on what it actually contributes to the bottom line, not on how elegant it looks on paper.
What specific problem or business challenge led you to hire this company?
Regulation in our Sports & Fitness segment shifted and the compliance deadline came from the regulator, not from us. The scale of the Embedded Systems Development changes required justified bringing in a specialist rather than pulling our internal team off the product roadmap to handle it.
What services did the company provide for your project?
The core of it was Embedded Systems Development, though their involvement grew to include technical consulting during discovery that meaningfully sharpened our own requirements. They also took full ownership of the third-party integration work, which had been a coordination headache on past projects, and just handled it themselves.
Why did you choose this company over other providers you considered?
The questions they asked during the briefing stage told us most of what we needed to know. Vendors who ask sharp questions during sales tend to bring that same rigor into delivery, and that held up. The technical proposal had real substance, the team was senior from the start, and the pricing was straightforward.
How clearly did the company understand your requirements and business goals?
Really well, partly because they already had Sports & Fitness experience that cut down on the amount of context we had to provide. They knew the terminology, asked the right questions, and translated our business requirements into technical specs accurately enough that development barely needed any clarification cycles.
How was your overall experience with their communication and project management?
Proactive and well-calibrated. Technical detail for the engineering side, plain summaries for the steering group, and risk flags that came with a proposed fix attached rather than just a problem statement. The biweekly sprint reviews kept our stakeholders in the loop without requiring them to sit in on every working session.
Did the company deliver the project on time and within your expected budget?
On time and inside the approved budget. Their estimating was notably accurate — they'd broken the work down in enough detail during discovery that the forecast held up the whole way through, instead of drifting with every small change. We had exactly one change request, and it was for scope we added ourselves.
What tangible results or business impact have you seen since the project was completed?
The clearest measure is how the system's actually performing in production. In the four months since go-live we've had zero major incidents, our page performance scores improved across every Core Web Vitals metric, and two enterprise clients who'd previously flagged our old platform's limits during renewal talks signed again without raising it.
What did you like most about working with this company?
Their instinct for never losing the business goal in the middle of technical decisions. I've worked with technically strong teams before who lose that thread once things get complicated. This team kept every architectural call tied back to the outcome we'd actually agreed to, which made the harder trade-off conversations a lot easier.
Would you recommend this company to others, and would you work with them again?
Without reservation. We're already in early conversations about a second engagement, and I expect this to turn into a multi-year relationship. Anyone in Sports & Fitness looking for real Embedded Systems Development depth paired with actual delivery discipline should have this team near the top of their list.
FAQ

Frequently Asked Questions

Got questions about our specialized technology solutions? We have the answers to help you make informed decisions.

CodeFirst typically covers the standard range of software development work — mobile apps, web platforms, custom internal tools, UI/UX design, cloud infrastructure, AI integrations, and larger enterprise builds. Its core focus areas include Enterprise App Modernization, Mobile App Development, UI-UX Design, Web Design and Web Development.

Generally, yes — companies like CodeFirst tend to work well with startups because of what they typically offer: MVP builds, product strategy input, architecture that can scale later, and dedicated teams that keep costs manageable while still moving fast. For context, it has experience across industries such as Education, Energy & Utilities, Logistics & Supply Chain, Agriculture, Sports & Fitness and Manufacturing, and it has been operating since 2012.

It depends heavily on scope. A lean MVP might be a matter of weeks, while a full enterprise system or a larger digital transformation project can stretch into months once you factor in development, testing, and deployment. With a team of 2 - 9 professionals, CodeFirst can scale resources based on project urgency.

What tends to set CodeFirst apart usually comes down to some mix of technical depth, relevant industry experience, how clients describe working with them, their development approach, communication habits, and whether they can actually deliver something that scales. Founded in 2012, the company has built a track record of delivering projects across various industries.

Like most established software teams, CodeFirst typically sticks around post-launch for ongoing maintenance — bug fixes, performance tuning, security patching, new feature work, and general technical support. For context, it has experience across industries such as Education, Energy & Utilities, Logistics & Supply Chain, Agriculture, Sports & Fitness and Manufacturing, and it reports a team size of 2 - 9 professionals.

Most businesses reach CodeFirst through its website, a direct email, or a contact form — any of which works for discussing what you need, booking an initial conversation, or asking for a rough estimate. For context, its listed capabilities span Enterprise App Modernization, Mobile App Development, UI-UX Design, Web Design and Web Development, and its typical hourly rate is around $50 - $99.

That depends on where CodeFirst is based and who they primarily serve — some firms like this operate fully offshore, some are local-first, and plenty run a hybrid model that mixes both. For context, it has experience across industries such as Education, Energy & Utilities, Logistics & Supply Chain, Agriculture, Sports & Fitness and Manufacturing, and it has been operating since 2012.

Plenty of modern software teams, CodeFirst included, now build real AI and machine learning features — chatbots, predictive models, computer vision, and automation that goes beyond simple rule-based scripts. For context, it has experience across industries such as Education, Energy & Utilities, Logistics & Supply Chain, Agriculture, Sports & Fitness and Manufacturing, and it reports a team size of 2 - 9 professionals.

It's a common line of work for a company like CodeFirst — multi-tenant architecture, subscription billing hooked up properly, and cloud-native deployment built for a product meant to scale as a service rather than a one-off build. For context, its listed capabilities span Enterprise App Modernization, Mobile App Development, UI-UX Design, Web Design and Web Development, and it reports a team size of 2 - 9 professionals.

The most reliable route is giving CodeFirst a clear, specific brief up front — through their website form, a direct email, or a call — since a vague ask tends to get a vague answer back, while a concrete one usually gets a proper estimate. For context, its listed capabilities span Enterprise App Modernization, Mobile App Development, UI-UX Design, Web Design and Web Development, and its typical hourly rate is around $50 - $99.
Get Listed