Details
| Founded: | 2015 |
|---|---|
| Hourly Rates: | $50 - $99 |
| Employees: | 2 - 9 |
| Avg. Project Cost: | $50,000+ |
| Ratings: |
4.1
8 Reviews
|
Industries Served
About
They are a software development company. They are the most qualified IT professionals. They always ready to use their expertise & consultant skills. They have worked on every type of projects. Their years of mobile app development expertise & internal procedures assure the quality of their products. They offer best prices for their top quality mobile app development services.
Properos Software Development Reviews
Treated our product's quality like it was their own reputation on the line
Anton Berggren / Chief Technology Officer | May 08, 2026Looking 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
Years of incremental patches had left us with a platform that technically worked but was quietly holding the business back strategically. A proper rebuild was the agreed way forward.
| 4.5 Overall Rating |
| 4.0 Quality |
| 5.0 Schedule |
| 4.5 Project Cost |
| 5.0 Willing To Refer |
| Project Type: | Quality Assurance & Testing |
|---|---|
| Project Cost: | $50,000 to $149,999 |
| Project Duration: | Jun 2025 - Apr 2026 |
| Business Type: | Sports & Fitness |
|---|---|
| Location: | Malmö, Sweden |
Questions & Answers
A real single source of truth — rarer in practice than it sounds on paper
Mahnoor Sheikh / Head of Technology | Apr 09, 2026We 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
Years of incremental patches had left us with a platform that technically worked but was quietly holding the business back strategically. A proper rebuild was the agreed way forward.
| 4.0 Overall Rating |
| 4.0 Quality |
| 4.5 Schedule |
| 4.0 Project Cost |
| 5.0 Willing To Refer |
| Project Type: | Data & Analytics |
|---|---|
| Project Cost: | $50,000 to $149,999 |
| Project Duration: | Apr 2025 - Feb 2026 |
| Business Type: | Environmental Services |
|---|---|
| Location: | Faisalabad, Pakistan |
Questions & Answers
Designed around how our users actually behave, not the persona slide we'd been assuming
Kenji Watanabe / Director of IT Strategy | Mar 30, 2026Going 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
How long it took us to launch a new tariff had become a genuine competitive disadvantage, and the product configuration layer was the obvious bottleneck to fix first.
| 4.0 Overall Rating |
| 3.5 Quality |
| 4.0 Schedule |
| 4.5 Project Cost |
| 5.0 Willing To Refer |
| Project Type: | UI/UX Design |
|---|---|
| Project Cost: | $50,000 to $149,999 |
| Project Duration: | Oct 2025 - Mar 2026 |
| Business Type: | Telecommunications |
|---|---|
| Location: | Yokohama, Japan |
Questions & Answers
Execution matched the proposal on every dimension that actually mattered to us
Hamish Bellamy / GM of Technology | Mar 18, 2026Going 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.
| 4.0 Overall Rating |
| 4.5 Quality |
| 4.5 Schedule |
| 3.5 Project Cost |
| 5.0 Willing To Refer |
| Project Type: | Low-Code / No-Code Development |
|---|---|
| Project Cost: | Less than $10,000 |
| Project Duration: | May 2025 - Jan 2026 |
| Business Type: | Manufacturing |
|---|---|
| Location: | Melbourne, Australia |
Questions & Answers
The research surfaced friction points we'd stopped noticing because they'd always been there
Preston Locke / Director of Technology | Mar 11, 2026We 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 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.
| 4.0 Overall Rating |
| 4.0 Quality |
| 4.5 Schedule |
| 4.0 Project Cost |
| 5.0 Willing To Refer |
| Project Type: | UI/UX Design |
|---|---|
| Project Cost: | $50,000 to $149,999 |
| Project Duration: | Aug 2025 - Dec 2025 |
| Business Type: | Gaming & Gambling |
|---|---|
| Location: | Philadelphia, USA |
Questions & Answers
Outperformed our old in-house desk on every SLA metric we track
Percy Wren / Director of eCommerce | Jan 21, 2026We 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 product thinking internally was solid, but our execution depth in this particular technical domain wasn't. We needed real specialists, not another generalist team.
| 4.0 Overall Rating |
| 4.0 Quality |
| 4.5 Schedule |
| 4.5 Project Cost |
| 5.0 Willing To Refer |
| Project Type: | IT Managed Services |
|---|---|
| Project Cost: | $50,000 to $149,999 |
| Project Duration: | Mar 2025 - Oct 2025 |
| Business Type: | Fashion & Apparel |
|---|---|
| Location: | Birmingham, UK |
Questions & Answers
Two years post-launch and our engineers still hold this codebase up as the standard to match
Sameer Kapoor / Chief Data Officer | Jan 20, 2026We 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
A previous project had worked fine in staging and fallen apart in production. We approached vendor selection this time with a lot more scrutiny as a direct result.
| 4.0 Overall Rating |
| 4.0 Quality |
| 4.5 Schedule |
| 3.5 Project Cost |
| 5.0 Willing To Refer |
| Project Type: | Software Development |
|---|---|
| Project Cost: | $10,000 to $49,999 |
| Project Duration: | Mar 2025 - Dec 2025 |
| Business Type: | Food & Beverage |
|---|---|
| Location: | Gurugram, India |
Questions & Answers
Got our board, our CTO, and engineering aligned on strategy for the first time in years
Ananya Raman / Director of Engineering | Jan 13, 2026Our 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 product thinking internally was solid, but our execution depth in this particular technical domain wasn't. We needed real specialists, not another generalist team.
| 4.5 Overall Rating |
| 4.0 Quality |
| 4.5 Schedule |
| 4.0 Project Cost |
| 5.0 Willing To Refer |
| Project Type: | IT Consulting |
|---|---|
| Project Cost: | $150,000 to $499,999 |
| Project Duration: | Feb 2025 - Oct 2025 |
| Business Type: | Agriculture |
|---|---|
| Location: | Kochi, India |
Questions & Answers
Frequently Asked Questions
Got questions about our specialized technology solutions? We have the answers to help you make informed decisions.

