Waverley Software

Details

Founded: 1992
Hourly Rates: $25 - $49
Employees: 50 - 249
Avg. Project Cost: $25,000+
Ratings:
4.8
6 Reviews

Services

  • Mobile App Development
  • Web Development
  • UI-UX Design
  • Custom Software Development
  • Internet of Things
  • AI Development
  • Enterprise App Development
  • Blockchain Development

Industries Served

Environmental Services Human Resources Insurance Legal Services Nonprofit & NGO Financial Services

About

Waverley is a software engineering firm providing the full cycle of software development services to companies globally. They are a leading web and mobile app development company. They can help you combine complex back-end technologies to make the seamless cross-channel client experience. They bring fresh ideas to organizations and pass on industry trends and new techniques.

Waverley Software Reviews

4.8 6 Reviews

Explained the blockchain concepts in plain terms instead of burying us in jargon

Elin Holmqvist / Head of Product Engineering | May 22, 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

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.

5.0   Overall Rating
5.0   Quality
5.0   Schedule
5.0   Project Cost
5.0   Willing To Refer

Project Type:Blockchain Development
Project Cost:$150,000 to $499,999
Project Duration:Oct 2025 - Apr 2026
Business Type:Environmental Services
Location:Uppsala, Sweden

Questions & Answers

Please describe your company, your role, and the industry you operate in.
Vinter Digital AB is a Environmental Services business headquartered in Uppsala, Sweden. As Head of Product Engineering 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 Environmental Services 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?
Full Blockchain 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?
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?
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?
Hard to isolate perfectly given everything else going on in the business, but the numbers we can attribute directly to the Blockchain 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.

Headless CMS let our designers and developers finally work in parallel instead of in sequence

Anjali Raghunathan / VP of Data Science | Apr 16, 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

This project had a board-facing deadline tied to a wider strategic push. We needed a partner who'd treat that date like it was their own problem, not just ours.

4.5   Overall Rating
4.0   Quality
4.0   Schedule
4.0   Project Cost
5.0   Willing To Refer

Project Type:CMS Development
Project Cost:$150,000 to $499,999
Project Duration:Nov 2025 - Mar 2026
Business Type:Human Resources
Location:Seattle, USA

Questions & Answers

Please describe your company, your role, and the industry you operate in.
Clearwave Analytics Inc is a Human Resources business headquartered in Seattle, USA. As VP of Data Science 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?
Full CMS 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?
A peer in the Human Resources space had used them for something similar in CMS Development and recommended them without hesitation. Our own due diligence backed that up. Domain knowledge, CMS 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?
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?
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?
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 Human Resources looking for real CMS Development depth paired with actual delivery discipline should have this team near the top of their list.

Post-release incidents dropped by half within three months of this program starting

Percy Wren / Director of eCommerce | Apr 14, 2026

This was our fourth agency in three years, and I say that with some embarrassment. Every previous engagement had looked promising on paper and fallen apart somewhere in delivery. What was different here was the sequencing: they spent real time understanding the actual problem before proposing anything, rather than pattern-matching to a solution they already knew how to sell. The build ran to schedule, our own engineers had genuinely positive things to say during handover, and four months into live operation we haven't had a single critical incident. We're already talking about the next phase with them.


Project summary

First notice of loss was taking us three days on average against a market benchmark of under four hours. Automating that intake and triage step became the clear priority.

4.5   Overall Rating
4.5   Quality
4.5   Schedule
4.5   Project Cost
5.0   Willing To Refer

Project Type:Quality Assurance & Testing
Project Cost:$150,000 to $499,999
Project Duration:Sep 2025 - Feb 2026
Business Type:Insurance
Location:Birmingham, UK

Questions & Answers

Please describe your company, your role, and the industry you operate in.
I run technology for Wren & Holt Retail PLC, a growth-stage Insurance company based in Birmingham, UK. My role as Director of eCommerce 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 Quality Assurance & Testing 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 Quality Assurance & Testing 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 Quality Assurance & Testing approach was specific rather than generic, backed by actual reference projects in Insurance — 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?
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?
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?
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?
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 Quality Assurance & Testing program in Insurance and expect them to actually deliver against the brief, this is the team.

Their pen test found gaps our previous vendor had missed two years running

Margaux Lefèvre / Head of Digital Products | Mar 26, 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

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.

5.0   Overall Rating
4.5   Quality
5.0   Schedule
5.0   Project Cost
5.0   Willing To Refer

Project Type:Cybersecurity
Project Cost:$10,000 to $49,999
Project Duration:Apr 2025 - Jan 2026
Business Type:Legal Services
Location:Nice, France

Questions & Answers

Please describe your company, your role, and the industry you operate in.
Horizon Digital SAS is a Legal Services business headquartered in Nice, France. As Head of Digital Products 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 Cybersecurity 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 Cybersecurity, 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?
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?
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?
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?
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.

The infrastructure paid for itself inside of two quarters

Delphine Rousseau / Director of Platform Engineering | Feb 09, 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

This project had a board-facing deadline tied to a wider strategic push. We needed a partner who'd treat that date like it was their own problem, not just ours.

5.0   Overall Rating
5.0   Quality
5.0   Schedule
5.0   Project Cost
5.0   Willing To Refer

Project Type:IoT Development
Project Cost:$10,000 to $49,999
Project Duration:Sep 2025 - Dec 2025
Business Type:Nonprofit & NGO
Location:Vancouver, Canada

Questions & Answers

Please describe your company, your role, and the industry you operate in.
Pacific Crest Ventures has been operating in Nonprofit & NGO for a while now, headquartered in Vancouver, Canada. As Director of Platform Engineering 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 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?
A peer in the Nonprofit & NGO space had used them for something similar in IoT Development and recommended them without hesitation. Our own due diligence backed that up. Domain knowledge, IoT 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 Vancouver, Canada 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?
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 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?
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 Nonprofit & NGO looking for real IoT Development depth paired with actual delivery discipline should have this team near the top of their list.

Polish level on the app has generated unprompted compliments from our own customers

Femke Visser / Head of Platform Engineering | Jan 17, 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

New open banking rules meant our API layer needed rebuilding from scratch, with compliance designed in from the start rather than patched on afterward.

5.0   Overall Rating
5.0   Quality
5.0   Schedule
4.5   Project Cost
5.0   Willing To Refer

Project Type:Mobile App Development
Project Cost:$10,000 to $49,999
Project Duration:Jul 2025 - Nov 2025
Business Type:Financial Services
Location:The Hague, Netherlands

Questions & Answers

Please describe your company, your role, and the industry you operate in.
Polder Digital BV is a Financial Services business headquartered in The Hague, Netherlands. As Head of Platform Engineering 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 Mobile App 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 Mobile App 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?
A peer in the Financial Services space had used them for something similar in Mobile App Development and recommended them without hesitation. Our own due diligence backed that up. Domain knowledge, Mobile App 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?
Really well, partly because they already had Financial Services 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?
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?
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?
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 Mobile App Development program in Financial 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.

What Waverley Software charges comes down to a handful of variables — how complex the project is, the number of development hours involved, the tech stack required, team size, and which engagement model you pick. Based on available data, Waverley Software's typical hourly rate is around $25 - $49.

Waverley Software has delivered projects across a range of different industries, including Gaming & Gambling, Mining & Metals, Retail & E-commerce, Government & Public Sector, Insurance and Pharmaceuticals & Biotechnology.

The exact stack shifts by project, but Waverley Software 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, its listed capabilities span AI Development, Blockchain Development, Custom Software Development, Enterprise App Development and Internet of Things, and it has experience across industries such as Gaming & Gambling, Mining & Metals, Retail & E-commerce, Government & Public Sector, Insurance and Pharmaceuticals & Biotechnology.

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 50 - 249 professionals, Waverley Software can scale resources based on project urgency.

That depends on where Waverley Software 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 Gaming & Gambling, Mining & Metals, Retail & E-commerce, Government & Public Sector, Insurance and Pharmaceuticals & Biotechnology, and it reports a team size of 50 - 249 professionals.

Usually, yes — a dedicated developer arrangement is a common option with firms like Waverley Software, 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 Gaming & Gambling, Mining & Metals, Retail & E-commerce, Government & Public Sector, Insurance and Pharmaceuticals & Biotechnology, and its typical hourly rate is around $25 - $49.

Most companies structured like Waverley Software give you a choice between a fixed-price contract, a dedicated team arrangement, or time-and-materials billing, so you can pick whichever lines up with your budget and how well-defined your scope already is. For context, it has experience across industries such as Gaming & Gambling, Mining & Metals, Retail & E-commerce, Government & Public Sector, Insurance and Pharmaceuticals & Biotechnology, and it has been operating since 1992.

Most professional shops, including Waverley Software, expect to sign a Non-Disclosure Agreement before getting into specifics — it's a fairly standard ask and a reasonable one to make before sharing anything sensitive. For context, it has experience across industries such as Gaming & Gambling, Mining & Metals, Retail & E-commerce, Government & Public Sector, Insurance and Pharmaceuticals & Biotechnology, and it has been operating since 1992.

The most reliable route is giving Waverley Software 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, it has experience across industries such as Gaming & Gambling, Mining & Metals, Retail & E-commerce, Government & Public Sector, Insurance and Pharmaceuticals & Biotechnology, and its typical hourly rate is around $25 - $49.
Get Listed