StarFish Medical vs Phillips-Medisize: full comparison for 2026
Quick verdict
StarFish Medical (4.6/5) edges ahead of Phillips-Medisize (3.9/5) overall. StarFish Medical is the better choice for startups needing design plus pilot manufacturing. Phillips-Medisize is the stronger option for drug delivery devices needing high-volume production. The right choice depends on your project size, budget, and required tech stack.
StarFish Medical vs Phillips-Medisize: head-to-head summary
| Criterion | StarFish Medical | Phillips-Medisize |
|---|---|---|
| Founded | 1999 | 1964 |
| HQ | Victoria, BC, Canada | Hudson, WI, USA |
| Team size | 201–250 | ~7,000 |
| Rating | 4.6 / 5 | 3.9 / 5 |
| Primary differentiator | Medtech-only practice that can build clinical and early commercial units in its own certified clean room | Design, molding and assembly of drug delivery devices under one global quality system |
| Pricing model | Phased fixed project, time and materials | Development contract plus manufacturing supply agreement |
| Min. engagement | Not disclosed | Not disclosed |
| Primary tech stack | ISO 13485 QMS, IEC 62304, ISO 14971 | Injection molding, Automated assembly, BLE |
| Industries served | Diagnostics & lab devices, Surgical & therapeutic devices, Wearables & remote monitoring, Drug delivery | Drug delivery, Diagnostics & lab devices, Surgical & therapeutic devices |
StarFish Medical vs Phillips-Medisize: overview
StarFish Medical
StarFish Medical was founded in Victoria, British Columbia, by Scott Phillips (the company gives 1999; some directories list 1998). It works only on medical devices, covering design, development and low-volume manufacturing in ISO 13485 certified facilities, and reports around 230 staff across Victoria, Toronto and Irvine (per company website; independently unverifiable). In November 2024 it acquired Omnica Corporation, a California medical device design firm, which added a larger US West Coast presence. Victoria remains the headquarters and its largest site.
Phillips-Medisize
Phillips-Medisize is a subsidiary of Molex, itself owned by Koch Industries, and provides outsourced design, development and manufacturing to pharma, diagnostics and medical device companies. It is based in Wisconsin and has about 7,000 employees. Molex's purchase of inhalation specialist Vectura added combination-product expertise, and the combined team includes more than 1,200 engineers and scientists across 30 sites. A $110M manufacturing campus in Katowice, Poland, opened in November 2023.
Services and capabilities: StarFish Medical vs Phillips-Medisize
| Capability | StarFish Medical | Phillips-Medisize |
|---|---|---|
| Electronics & PCB design | ✓ | ✓ |
| Firmware & embedded software | ✓ | ✗ |
| SaMD & companion apps | ✗ | ✗ |
| Connected devices & IoT | ✗ | ✗ |
| Industrial design & human factors | ✓ | ✗ |
| Mechanical engineering | ✓ | ✓ |
| Device cybersecurity | ✗ | ✗ |
| Regulatory & QMS support | ✓ | ✓ |
| Manufacturing & scale-up | ✓ | ✓ |
Tech stack comparison: StarFish Medical vs Phillips-Medisize
| Framework / platform | StarFish Medical | Phillips-Medisize |
|---|---|---|
| Embedded C/C++ | ✓ | N/A |
| Embedded Linux | N/A | N/A |
| RTOS | N/A | N/A |
| BLE | N/A | ✓ |
| Cloud (AWS/Azure) | N/A | N/A |
| IEC 62304 | ✓ | N/A |
| ISO 14971 | ✓ | N/A |
| ISO 13485 QMS | ✓ | ✓ |
| Qt | N/A | N/A |
Pricing comparison: StarFish Medical vs Phillips-Medisize
| Criterion | StarFish Medical | Phillips-Medisize |
|---|---|---|
| Minimum engagement | Not disclosed | Not disclosed |
| Engagement models | Fixed project, Manufacturing contract, Time & materials | Fixed project, Manufacturing contract |
| Rate transparency | Not public | Not public |
| Price tier | Mid-market | Mid-market |
Target audience comparison: StarFish Medical vs Phillips-Medisize
| Dimension | StarFish Medical | Phillips-Medisize |
|---|---|---|
| Best company size | Startup to mid-market | Startup to mid-market |
| Best industries | Diagnostics & lab devices, Surgical & therapeutic devices, Wearables & remote monitoring | Drug delivery, Diagnostics & lab devices, Surgical & therapeutic devices |
| Best use cases | Taking a venture-backed device from proof of concept to clinical-trial units, Designing an optical diagnostic instrument with its consumable | Autoinjector or pen injector development and production, Inhaler device for a pharma combination product |
| Typical project type | Fixed project | Fixed project |
StarFish Medical vs Phillips-Medisize: pros and cons
| StarFish Medical | |
|---|---|
| + | Every project is a medical device, so design reviews, risk files and documentation follow medtech practice by default |
| + | Prototype and pilot production happen in its own ISO 13485 facility, avoiding an early transfer to a contract manufacturer |
| + | The Omnica acquisition adds Southern California capacity for US clients |
| + | Multidisciplinary teams cover industrial design, mechanics, electronics, software and human factors |
| - | Volume manufacturing beyond pilot quantities still needs a larger contract manufacturer |
| - | North American cost base makes it more expensive than Eastern European or Asian engineering teams |
| - | The Omnica integration is recent, so cross-site processes are still settling |
| Phillips-Medisize | |
|---|---|
| + | Very large manufacturing footprint across the US, Europe and Asia |
| + | Vectura deal added deep inhalation and combination-product skills |
| + | Development and manufacturing under one quality system |
| + | Experience with connected drug delivery |
| - | Owned by Molex and Koch Industries, so it suits large pharma more than small startups |
| - | Development work is usually tied to a manufacturing agreement |
| - | Less suited to software-heavy or early research projects |
Who should choose StarFish Medical?
A typical fit: taking a venture-backed device from proof of concept to clinical-trial units.
Medtech-only practice that can build clinical and early commercial units in its own certified clean room. Minimum engagement is not publicly disclosed. Works best with clients in Diagnostics & lab devices, Surgical & therapeutic devices, Wearables & remote monitoring, Drug delivery.
Who should choose Phillips-Medisize?
A typical fit: autoinjector or pen injector development and production.
Design, molding and assembly of drug delivery devices under one global quality system. Minimum engagement is not publicly disclosed. Works best with clients in Drug delivery, Diagnostics & lab devices, Surgical & therapeutic devices.
Decision matrix: StarFish Medical vs Phillips-Medisize
| Your situation | Recommended choice |
|---|---|
| You need full-ownership delivery on a defined project scope | StarFish Medical |
| You need a large dedicated team for an ongoing programme | Check each company's engagement model |
| Your budget is at the lower end | Compare: StarFish Medical (Not disclosed) vs Phillips-Medisize (Not disclosed) |
| You need specialist depth in a specific vertical | StarFish Medical |
| You need staff augmentation or team extension | Neither; consider alternatives that offer staff aug |
| You need consulting before committing to a build | Both may offer discovery engagements |
Use case fit: StarFish Medical vs Phillips-Medisize
| Use case | StarFish Medical fit | Phillips-Medisize fit | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Taking a venture-backed device from proof of concept to clinical-trial units | Strong | Limited | StarFish Medical |
| Designing an optical diagnostic instrument with its consumable | Strong | Limited | StarFish Medical |
| Autoinjector or pen injector development and production | Limited | Strong | Phillips-Medisize |
| Inhaler device for a pharma combination product | Limited | Strong | Phillips-Medisize |
Verdict: StarFish Medical vs Phillips-Medisize
StarFish Medical (4.6/5) is the stronger overall choice for most Medical Device Development projects. Medtech-only practice that can build clinical and early commercial units in its own certified clean room.
Phillips-Medisize (3.9/5) is worth a look if you need inhaler device for a pharma combination product. If your situation matches that, Phillips-Medisize is a competitive option.
Related comparisons
StarFish Medical vs Phillips-Medisize FAQ
Is StarFish Medical better than Phillips-Medisize?
StarFish Medical (4.6/5) scores higher overall, but "better" depends on your use case. StarFish Medical's strongest advantage: every project is a medical device, so design reviews, risk files and documentation follow medtech practice by default. Phillips-Medisize's strongest advantage: very large manufacturing footprint across the US, Europe and Asia.
How do StarFish Medical and Phillips-Medisize differ in pricing?
StarFish Medical uses phased fixed project, time and materials pricing. Phillips-Medisize uses development contract plus manufacturing supply agreement pricing. Neither firm publishes a full rate card; a discovery call is required for project-specific quotes.
Which is better for enterprise: StarFish Medical or Phillips-Medisize?
StarFish Medical is the larger team and typically the better enterprise-scale choice. For very large programmes, verify team size and compliance coverage directly with each company before shortlisting.
What are the main differences between StarFish Medical and Phillips-Medisize?
StarFish Medical's primary differentiator is: medtech-only practice that can build clinical and early commercial units in its own certified clean room. Phillips-Medisize's primary differentiator is: Design, molding and assembly of drug delivery devices under one global quality system. They also differ in team size (201–250 vs ~7,000), minimum engagement (Not disclosed vs Not disclosed), and primary industries served (Diagnostics & lab devices, Surgical & therapeutic devices vs Drug delivery, Diagnostics & lab devices).
Verify all details directly with each company before making a decision.