Settore Q

Visit Website Write a Review Claim this Company

Details

Founded:
2012
Hourly Rates:
$25 - $49 / hr
Employees:
2 - 9
Avg. Project Cost:
$2,500,000+
Ratings:
4.8 7 Reviews

Services

  • Mobile App Development
  • Web Development
  • UI-UX Design
  • Web Design
  • Social Media Marketing
  • Content Marketing
  • Advertising, Media

Industries Served

Financial Services Agriculture Fashion & Apparel Pharmaceuticals & Biotechnology Education Sports & Fitness Legal Services

Where We Specialize

24% Game Development
Game Development 24%
Ruby on Rails 23%
Web Development 22%
Cloud Computing Services 10%
Implementation Services 6%
Software Development 5%
Virtual Reality 4%
ERP Consulting 4%
Mobile App Development 2%

Industry Expertise

Entertainment100%

Typical Project Size

60% Small Business
33% Midmarket Business
7% Enterprise

About

Businesses looking for a reliable technology partner often consider Settore Q. The company's main offerings are Digital Marketing. Settore Q employs 2 - 9 people. Clients can expect pricing around $25 - $49 / hr/hr, with projects averaging about $30,000. The team is based in Roma, Italy. Overall, Settore Q is one of the options worth shortlisting for a technology project.

Settore Q Reviews

4.8 7 Reviews
Submit Review

Every line item in the scope was delivered, on schedule, and passed our review without rework

Rashid Al-Marzouqi / Chief Technology Officer | Jun 06, 2026

I went into this engagement genuinely skeptical. A previous vendor had left us with a system that technically worked but that nobody trusted, and I wasn't interested in repeating that experience. This team earned trust the slow way — solid discovery documentation, technical proposals that held up under scrutiny, sprints that landed when promised, and ultimately a production system that has simply behaved. I don't open conversations about them with caveats anymore.

Project summary

Our trading platform had been patched together for close to a decade. Latency was creeping up, technical debt was compounding, and a proper rebuild had stopped being optional.

  • Overall Rating 5.0
  • Quality 5.0
  • Schedule 4.5
  • Project Cost 5.0
  • Willing To Refer 5.0
Project Type:
Software Development
Project Cost:
$10,000 to $49,999
Project Duration:
Dec 2025 - Mar 2026
Business Type:
Financial Services
Location:
Sharjah, UAE

Questions & Answers

Please describe your company, your role, and the industry you operate in.
Beacon Digital Ventures is a Financial Services business headquartered in Sharjah, UAE. As Chief Technology Officer 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?
We had a clear product direction for our next stage of growth in Financial Services, but not the internal engineering depth to actually execute it. The Software Development piece specifically needed specialist skills we couldn't realistically hire for on the timeline our business plan demanded.
What services did the company provide for your project?
The core of it was Software 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?
A peer in the Financial Services space had used them for something similar in Software Development and recommended them without hesitation. Our own due diligence backed that up. Domain knowledge, Software 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?
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?
Yes to both. I'd quietly built in some contingency given the complexity and the number of integrations involved, and none of it ended up being needed. Delivery landed on the agreed date and the final invoice was within a rounding error of the approved budget — rarer than most people in this industry would admit.
What tangible results or business impact have you seen since the project was completed?
The ROI model we took to the board was deliberately conservative. Current performance against that model puts us on track to hit payback well ahead of the eighteen-month target we set. The operational efficiency gains in particular have outpaced the model, partly because the new platform's data quality supports decisions the old system simply couldn't.
What did you like most about working with this company?
What they did after launch. A lot of vendors treat go-live as the finish line. This team treated it as the start of a different phase — the hypercare period was substantial, the documentation held up in practice, and they checked back in at the thirty and ninety day marks to go over production metrics with us unprompted.
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.

Their architecture review steered us away from a vendor decision we would have regretted

Marcus Teo / CTO | Jun 01, 2026

What actually moved the needle wasn't their ability to follow a spec — any competent team can do that. It was their willingness to push back when a requirement didn't make sense, explain clearly why, and help us decide on something better instead. That extra layer of judgment took the final product past what we'd actually asked for and closer to what we genuinely needed, which isn't always the same thing.

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 5.0
  • Project Cost 5.0
  • Willing To Refer 5.0
Project Type:
IT Consulting
Project Cost:
$150,000 to $499,999
Project Duration:
May 2025 - Mar 2026
Business Type:
Agriculture
Location:
Singapore

Questions & Answers

Please describe your company, your role, and the industry you operate in.
Sentosa Ventures Pte Ltd is a Agriculture business headquartered in Singapore. As CTO 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?
A competitor move forced our hand and compressed a roadmap item we'd planned for the following year. The IT Consulting 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?
Full IT Consulting 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 IT Consulting approach was specific rather than generic, backed by actual reference projects in Agriculture — 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?
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 ROI model we took to the board was deliberately conservative. Current performance against that model puts us on track to hit payback well ahead of the eighteen-month target we set. The operational efficiency gains in particular have outpaced the model, partly because the new platform's data quality supports decisions the old system simply couldn't.
What did you like most about working with this company?
What they did after launch. A lot of vendors treat go-live as the finish line. This team treated it as the start of a different phase — the hypercare period was substantial, the documentation held up in practice, and they checked back in at the thirty and ninety day marks to go over production metrics with us unprompted.
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.

Firmware, cloud layer, and dashboard actually talk to each other cleanly — rarer than it should be

Alexis Faraday / Chief Digital Officer | Apr 19, 2026

The easiest thing to praise is the technical output itself — solid test coverage, a deployment pipeline that just works, documentation that people actually reference instead of ignoring. But what I keep coming back to is the number of conversations we haven't had to have since launch. No 2am incident calls. No emergency patches. No post-mortems about what went sideways. That absence is really the whole pitch, if you ask me.

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 4.5
  • Quality 4.5
  • Schedule 4.0
  • Project Cost 4.5
  • Willing To Refer 5.0
Project Type:
IoT Development
Project Cost:
$150,000 to $499,999
Project Duration:
Sep 2025 - Jan 2026
Business Type:
Fashion & Apparel
Location:
Miami, USA

Questions & Answers

Please describe your company, your role, and the industry you operate in.
I run technology for Coastline Retail Group, a growth-stage Fashion & Apparel company based in Miami, USA. My role as Chief Digital Officer 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?
Our IoT Development capability had become the thing slowing everything else down. New feature requests, client asks, internal initiatives — all of it kept queuing up behind a platform that had been stretched way past what it was originally built for. We needed a proper rebuild, not another patch.
What services did the company provide for your project?
Mainly IoT Development, with some adjacent architecture and QA work folded in. They owned the whole thing from requirements to go-live, including hooking it into four of our existing systems. Not needing a second vendor to cover that ground was genuinely useful, both cost-wise and logistically.
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 IoT Development approach was specific rather than generic, backed by actual reference projects in Fashion & Apparel — 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?
Really well, partly because they already had Fashion & Apparel 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?
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?
The ROI model we took to the board was deliberately conservative. Current performance against that model puts us on track to hit payback well ahead of the eighteen-month target we set. The operational efficiency gains in particular have outpaced the model, partly because the new platform's data quality supports decisions the old system simply couldn't.
What did you like most about working with this company?
What they did after launch. A lot of vendors treat go-live as the finish line. This team treated it as the start of a different phase — the hypercare period was substantial, the documentation held up in practice, and they checked back in at the thirty and ninety day marks to go over production metrics with us unprompted.
Would you recommend this company to others, and would you work with them again?
Yes — though I'll add that they're not the cheapest option out there and they're selective about what they take on. If price is your main filter, look elsewhere. If you need a partner you can trust with a serious IoT Development program in Fashion & Apparel and expect them to actually deliver against the brief, this is the team.

Went live on the date we agreed to, which anyone who's done an ERP rollout knows is rare

Reem Al-Ghamdi / VP of Engineering | Apr 03, 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 regulatory submission timelines needed a document platform that could handle version control, permissions, and audit trails at a scale our existing tools were never built for.

  • Overall Rating 4.5
  • Quality 4.0
  • Schedule 4.0
  • Project Cost 4.0
  • Willing To Refer 5.0
Project Type:
ERP Development
Project Cost:
$10,000 to $49,999
Project Duration:
May 2025 - Jan 2026
Business Type:
Pharmaceuticals & Biotechnology
Location:
Riyadh, Saudi Arabia

Questions & Answers

Please describe your company, your role, and the industry you operate in.
I run technology for Hijaz Digital Solutions, a growth-stage Pharmaceuticals & Biotechnology company based in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. My role as VP of Engineering 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?
We had a clear product direction for our next stage of growth in Pharmaceuticals & Biotechnology, but not the internal engineering depth to actually execute it. The ERP Development piece specifically needed specialist skills we couldn't realistically hire for on the timeline our business plan demanded.
What services did the company provide for your project?
Mainly ERP Development, with some adjacent architecture and QA work folded in. They owned the whole thing from requirements to go-live, including hooking it into four of our existing systems. Not needing a second vendor to cover that ground was genuinely useful, both cost-wise and logistically.
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?
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?
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?
What they did after launch. A lot of vendors treat go-live as the finish line. This team treated it as the start of a different phase — the hypercare period was substantial, the documentation held up in practice, and they checked back in at the thirty and ninety day marks to go over production metrics with us unprompted.
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.

Our distributed team has effectively adopted the virtual space as its default meeting room

Karthik Iyengar / Head of Platform | Mar 17, 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 LMS had been designed for a classroom-only world, and two years of declining satisfaction scores made the hybrid-delivery gaps impossible to ignore any longer.

  • Overall Rating 5.0
  • Quality 5.0
  • Schedule 5.0
  • Project Cost 5.0
  • Willing To Refer 5.0
Project Type:
AR/VR Development
Project Cost:
$150,000 to $499,999
Project Duration:
Mar 2025 - Jan 2026
Business Type:
Education
Location:
Coimbatore, India

Questions & Answers

Please describe your company, your role, and the industry you operate in.
As Head of Platform at Novus EdTech Solutions I oversee technology spend and delivery across our Education operations out of Coimbatore, India. 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 Education segment shifted and the compliance deadline came from the regulator, not from us. The scale of the AR/VR 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?
Mainly AR/VR Development, with some adjacent architecture and QA work folded in. They owned the whole thing from requirements to go-live, including hooking it into four of our existing systems. Not needing a second vendor to cover that ground was genuinely useful, both cost-wise and logistically.
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?
Really well, partly because they already had Education 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?
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?
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?
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 Education looking for real AR/VR Development depth paired with actual delivery discipline should have this team near the top of their list.

This engagement shifted our culture as much as it shifted our tooling

Amal Al-Hosani / Head of Digital Strategy | Feb 27, 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

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.

  • Overall Rating 4.5
  • Quality 4.5
  • Schedule 5.0
  • Project Cost 5.0
  • Willing To Refer 5.0
Project Type:
DevOps Services
Project Cost:
Less than $10,000
Project Duration:
Apr 2025 - Dec 2025
Business Type:
Sports & Fitness
Location:
Dubai, UAE

Questions & Answers

Please describe your company, your role, and the industry you operate in.
Pearl Coast FinTech is a Sports & Fitness business headquartered in Dubai, UAE. As Head of Digital 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?
We had a clear product direction for our next stage of growth in Sports & Fitness, but not the internal engineering depth to actually execute it. The DevOps Services piece specifically needed specialist skills we couldn't realistically hire for on the timeline our business plan demanded.
What services did the company provide for your project?
The core of it was DevOps Services, 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?
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?
Thoroughly. The requirements document was detailed enough that our own QA team used it directly to build acceptance criteria. Every user story had a clear business reason attached, and nothing was left open to interpretation. That discipline early on paid off through the rest of development and testing.
How was your overall experience with their communication and project management?
Genuinely excellent, especially given the time difference between Dubai, UAE 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?
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?
Yes, no hesitation. I've already referred them twice within my own Sports & Fitness network, both times to people facing DevOps Services problems similar to ours. I made those referrals confidently because I know the experience I had was repeatable, not a one-off stroke of luck on our project.

Took our security posture from a known weakness to something we now lead with in sales calls

Bianca Alvarado / Chief Product Officer | Feb 25, 2026

Five months post-launch, we're running at roughly double the transaction volume we'd specified in the original scope document, and the platform hasn't needed a single structural change to handle it. That's the real tell for whether a team designed for what you told them versus what you were actually going to need. We're now scoping a second phase and I expect this to be a multi-year relationship at this point.

Project summary

Matter management had quietly become a real drag on our fee earners' time — every hour on admin was an hour not spent on billable work. The case for fixing it wrote itself.

  • Overall Rating 5.0
  • Quality 5.0
  • Schedule 5.0
  • Project Cost 5.0
  • Willing To Refer 5.0
Project Type:
Cybersecurity
Project Cost:
$150,000 to $499,999
Project Duration:
Apr 2025 - Dec 2025
Business Type:
Legal Services
Location:
San Diego, USA

Questions & Answers

Please describe your company, your role, and the industry you operate in.
Lumen Media Collective is a Legal Services business headquartered in San Diego, USA. As Chief Product Officer 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?
Regulation in our Legal Services segment shifted and the compliance deadline came from the regulator, not from us. The scale of the Cybersecurity 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 Cybersecurity, 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?
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?
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?
The ROI model we took to the board was deliberately conservative. Current performance against that model puts us on track to hit payback well ahead of the eighteen-month target we set. The operational efficiency gains in particular have outpaced the model, partly because the new platform's data quality supports decisions the old system simply couldn't.
What did you like most about working with this company?
What they did after launch. A lot of vendors treat go-live as the finish line. This team treated it as the start of a different phase — the hypercare period was substantial, the documentation held up in practice, and they checked back in at the thirty and ninety day marks to go over production metrics with us unprompted.
Would you recommend this company to others, and would you work with them again?
Yes — though I'll add that they're not the cheapest option out there and they're selective about what they take on. If price is your main filter, look elsewhere. If you need a partner you can trust with a serious Cybersecurity program in Legal Services and expect them to actually deliver against the brief, this is the team.
FAQ

Frequently Asked Questions

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

Settore Q 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 Advertising, Media, Content Marketing, Mobile App Development, Social Media Marketing and UI-UX Design.

Settore Q has delivered projects across a range of different industries, including Insurance, Fashion & Apparel, Environmental Services, Nonprofit & NGO, Aerospace & Defense and Advertising & Marketing.

Generally, yes — companies like Settore Q 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 Insurance, Fashion & Apparel, Environmental Services, Nonprofit & NGO, Aerospace & Defense and Advertising & Marketing, and its listed capabilities span Advertising, Media, Content Marketing, Mobile App Development, Social Media Marketing and UI-UX Design.

The exact stack shifts by project, but Settore Q commonly works across things like React, Angular, Vue.js, Node.js, Python, .NET, Java, PHP, Flutter, React Native, native iOS and Android, and cloud platforms like AWS and Azure. For context, it has experience across industries such as Insurance, Fashion & Apparel, Environmental Services, Nonprofit & NGO, Aerospace & Defense and Advertising & Marketing, and its typical hourly rate is around $25 - $49.

What tends to set Settore Q 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, Settore Q 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 Insurance, Fashion & Apparel, Environmental Services, Nonprofit & NGO, Aerospace & Defense and Advertising & Marketing, and its typical hourly rate is around $25 - $49.

Most businesses reach Settore Q 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 Advertising, Media, Content Marketing, Mobile App Development, Social Media Marketing and UI-UX Design, and it has experience across industries such as Insurance, Fashion & Apparel, Environmental Services, Nonprofit & NGO, Aerospace & Defense and Advertising & Marketing.

That depends on where Settore Q 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 Insurance, Fashion & Apparel, Environmental Services, Nonprofit & NGO, Aerospace & Defense and Advertising & Marketing, and its typical hourly rate is around $25 - $49.

Usually, yes — a dedicated developer arrangement is a common option with firms like Settore Q, where you get engineers working exclusively on your project as an extension of your in-house team rather than as a separate outsourced unit. For context, it has experience across industries such as Insurance, Fashion & Apparel, Environmental Services, Nonprofit & NGO, Aerospace & Defense and Advertising & Marketing, and its typical hourly rate is around $25 - $49.

The most reliable route is giving Settore Q 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 Advertising, Media, Content Marketing, Mobile App Development, Social Media Marketing and UI-UX Design, and its typical hourly rate is around $25 - $49.
Get Listed