StarFish Medical vs ScienceSoft: full comparison for 2026
Quick verdict
StarFish Medical (4.6/5) edges ahead of ScienceSoft (3.9/5) overall. StarFish Medical is the better choice for startups needing design plus pilot manufacturing. ScienceSoft is the stronger option for SaMD and device software on a budget. The right choice depends on your project size, budget, and required tech stack.
StarFish Medical vs ScienceSoft: head-to-head summary
| Criterion | StarFish Medical | ScienceSoft |
|---|---|---|
| Founded | 1999 | 1989 |
| HQ | Victoria, BC, Canada | McKinney, TX, USA |
| Team size | 201–250 | 700–800 |
| 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 | Large, ISO 13485 certified software team with healthcare analytics and testing services |
| Pricing model | Phased fixed project, time and materials | Fixed project, time and materials, dedicated team |
| Min. engagement | Not disclosed | Not disclosed |
| Primary tech stack | ISO 13485 QMS, IEC 62304, ISO 14971 | .NET, Java, iOS |
| Industries served | Diagnostics & lab devices, Surgical & therapeutic devices, Wearables & remote monitoring, Drug delivery | Digital health, Diagnostics & lab devices, Wearables & remote monitoring, Financial services |
StarFish Medical vs ScienceSoft: 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.
ScienceSoft
Healthcare IT has been a ScienceSoft practice since 2005, inside a McKinney, Texas, software company that dates to 1989. The company holds ISO 13485:2016 certification for medical device software and SaMD, and it states experience preparing software for FDA clearance and CE marking (per company website; independently unverifiable). Its team is about 750. Its medical work is mostly software: SaMD, device companion apps, data analytics and medical device software testing.
Services and capabilities: StarFish Medical vs ScienceSoft
| Capability | StarFish Medical | ScienceSoft |
|---|---|---|
| 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 ScienceSoft
| Framework / platform | StarFish Medical | ScienceSoft |
|---|---|---|
| Embedded C/C++ | ✓ | N/A |
| Embedded Linux | N/A | N/A |
| RTOS | N/A | N/A |
| BLE | N/A | N/A |
| Cloud (AWS/Azure) | N/A | ✓ |
| IEC 62304 | ✓ | ✓ |
| ISO 14971 | ✓ | N/A |
| ISO 13485 QMS | ✓ | N/A |
| Qt | N/A | N/A |
Pricing comparison: StarFish Medical vs ScienceSoft
| Criterion | StarFish Medical | ScienceSoft |
|---|---|---|
| Minimum engagement | Not disclosed | Not disclosed |
| Engagement models | Fixed project, Manufacturing contract, Time & materials | Dedicated team, Fixed project, Time & materials |
| Rate transparency | Not public | Not public |
| Price tier | Mid-market | Mid-market |
Target audience comparison: StarFish Medical vs ScienceSoft
| Dimension | StarFish Medical | ScienceSoft |
|---|---|---|
| Best company size | Startup to mid-market | Startup to mid-market |
| Best industries | Diagnostics & lab devices, Surgical & therapeutic devices, Wearables & remote monitoring | Digital health, Diagnostics & lab devices, Wearables & remote monitoring |
| Best use cases | Taking a venture-backed device from proof of concept to clinical-trial units, Designing an optical diagnostic instrument with its consumable | SaMD for clinical decision support, Mobile companion app for an existing device |
| Typical project type | Fixed project | Dedicated team |
StarFish Medical vs ScienceSoft: 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 |
| ScienceSoft | |
|---|---|
| + | ISO 13485 certification covers medical device software and SaMD |
| + | Large team can staff software projects quickly |
| + | Offers medical device software testing as a separate service |
| + | Competitive rates compared with US onshore software firms |
| - | Generalist IT company where healthcare is one of many practices |
| - | No hardware, electronics or mechanical design |
| - | FDA and CE experience claims are self-reported |
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 ScienceSoft?
A typical fit: SaMD for clinical decision support.
Large, ISO 13485 certified software team with healthcare analytics and testing services. Minimum engagement is not publicly disclosed. Works best with clients in Digital health, Diagnostics & lab devices, Wearables & remote monitoring, Financial services.
Decision matrix: StarFish Medical vs ScienceSoft
| 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 | ScienceSoft |
| Your budget is at the lower end | Compare: StarFish Medical (Not disclosed) vs ScienceSoft (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 ScienceSoft
| Use case | StarFish Medical fit | ScienceSoft 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 |
| SaMD for clinical decision support | Limited | Strong | ScienceSoft |
| Mobile companion app for an existing device | Limited | Strong | ScienceSoft |
Verdict: StarFish Medical vs ScienceSoft
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.
ScienceSoft (3.9/5) is worth a look if you need mobile companion app for an existing device. If your situation matches that, ScienceSoft is a competitive option.
Related comparisons
StarFish Medical vs ScienceSoft FAQ
Is StarFish Medical better than ScienceSoft?
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. ScienceSoft's strongest advantage: ISO 13485 certification covers medical device software and SaMD.
How do StarFish Medical and ScienceSoft differ in pricing?
StarFish Medical uses phased fixed project, time and materials pricing. ScienceSoft uses fixed project, time and materials, dedicated team 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 ScienceSoft?
ScienceSoft 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 ScienceSoft?
StarFish Medical's primary differentiator is: medtech-only practice that can build clinical and early commercial units in its own certified clean room. ScienceSoft's primary differentiator is: Large, ISO 13485 certified software team with healthcare analytics and testing services. They also differ in team size (201–250 vs 700–800), minimum engagement (Not disclosed vs Not disclosed), and primary industries served (Diagnostics & lab devices, Surgical & therapeutic devices vs Digital health, Diagnostics & lab devices).
Verify all details directly with each company before making a decision.