TTP vs Orthogonal: full comparison for 2026
Quick verdict
TTP (4.4/5) edges ahead of Orthogonal (4.2/5) overall. TTP is the better choice for pharma device programs, inhalers and injectors. Orthogonal is the stronger option for SaMD and device companion apps. The right choice depends on your project size, budget, and required tech stack.
TTP vs Orthogonal: head-to-head summary
| Criterion | TTP | Orthogonal |
|---|---|---|
| Founded | 1987 | 1998 |
| HQ | Melbourn, Cambridgeshire, UK | Chicago, IL, USA |
| Team size | Not published | 11–60 |
| Rating | 4.4 / 5 | 4.2 / 5 |
| Primary differentiator | Employee ownership plus long-running drug delivery and surgical device work for large pharma and medtech clients | Agile delivery adapted to FDA-regulated software, focused on the app and cloud side of connected devices |
| Pricing model | Time and materials, phased fixed project | Time and materials, dedicated team |
| Min. engagement | Not disclosed | Not disclosed |
| Primary tech stack | Ultrasound, Microfluidics, Embedded C/C++ | iOS, Android, Cloud (AWS/Azure) |
| Industries served | Drug delivery, Surgical & robotics, Diagnostics & lab devices | Digital health, Wearables & remote monitoring, Diagnostics & lab devices |
TTP vs Orthogonal: overview
TTP
TTP (The Technology Partnership) has operated for around 40 years from its own science park in Melbourn, South Cambridgeshire. In December 2021 TTP Group moved to 100% employee ownership through an Employee Ownership Trust. Its Medical Devices team works on drug delivery, surgical systems and diagnostics, and the wider company does deep technology work in sectors such as life science instruments and industrial products. Headcount is not published in a form we could verify.
Orthogonal
Orthogonal is a Chicago software company founded in 1998 and led by founder and CEO Bernhard Kappe, with its office in the Merchandise Mart. It builds Software as a Medical Device (SaMD), digital therapeutics and the mobile and cloud software that connects to medical devices, working with venture-backed startups as well as established medtech and pharma companies. Directory listings describe ISO 13485 and HIPAA compliance and Class I–III experience. Team size estimates vary widely, from about 11 to 60 people.
Services and capabilities: TTP vs Orthogonal
| Capability | TTP | Orthogonal |
|---|---|---|
| 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: TTP vs Orthogonal
| Framework / platform | TTP | Orthogonal |
|---|---|---|
| Embedded C/C++ | ✓ | N/A |
| Embedded Linux | N/A | N/A |
| RTOS | N/A | N/A |
| BLE | N/A | ✓ |
| Cloud (AWS/Azure) | N/A | ✓ |
| IEC 62304 | N/A | ✓ |
| ISO 14971 | N/A | ✓ |
| ISO 13485 QMS | ✓ | N/A |
| Qt | N/A | N/A |
Pricing comparison: TTP vs Orthogonal
| Criterion | TTP | Orthogonal |
|---|---|---|
| Minimum engagement | Not disclosed | Not disclosed |
| Engagement models | Consulting, Fixed project, Time & materials | Dedicated team, Time & materials |
| Rate transparency | Not public | Not public |
| Price tier | Mid-market | Mid-market |
Target audience comparison: TTP vs Orthogonal
| Dimension | TTP | Orthogonal |
|---|---|---|
| Best company size | Startup to mid-market | Startup to mid-market |
| Best industries | Drug delivery, Surgical & robotics, Diagnostics & lab devices | Digital health, Wearables & remote monitoring, Diagnostics & lab devices |
| Best use cases | Designing an autoinjector or inhaler for a pharma combination product, Developing a surgical energy device | Building a mobile app that controls a Class II device, Developing a digital therapeutic for FDA clearance |
| Typical project type | Consulting | Dedicated team |
TTP vs Orthogonal: pros and cons
| TTP | |
|---|---|
| + | Employee ownership since 2021 removes pressure from outside investors |
| + | Well regarded for drug delivery devices, an area where mechanics and human factors decide success |
| + | Own science park with lab and workshop space for physical prototyping |
| + | Specialist depth in ultrasound and fluidics |
| - | Does not publish headcount or rates, which makes early budgeting harder |
| - | UK-centric delivery; US clients work across time zones |
| - | Pricing sits with the premium Cambridge consultancies |
| Orthogonal | |
|---|---|
| + | Focused on regulated medical software for more than a decade |
| + | Publishes practical guidance on agile methods under FDA rules, a sign of real process experience |
| + | Strong on mobile apps that talk to devices over BLE |
| + | Small enough for direct access to senior people |
| - | No hardware or firmware design |
| - | Small team limits how many parallel workstreams it can staff |
| - | Team size data is inconsistent across sources |
Who should choose TTP?
A typical fit: designing an autoinjector or inhaler for a pharma combination product.
Employee ownership plus long-running drug delivery and surgical device work for large pharma and medtech clients. Minimum engagement is not publicly disclosed. Works best with clients in Drug delivery, Surgical & robotics, Diagnostics & lab devices.
Who should choose Orthogonal?
A typical fit: building a mobile app that controls a Class II device.
Agile delivery adapted to FDA-regulated software, focused on the app and cloud side of connected devices. Minimum engagement is not publicly disclosed. Works best with clients in Digital health, Wearables & remote monitoring, Diagnostics & lab devices.
Decision matrix: TTP vs Orthogonal
| Your situation | Recommended choice |
|---|---|
| You need full-ownership delivery on a defined project scope | TTP |
| You need a large dedicated team for an ongoing programme | Orthogonal |
| Your budget is at the lower end | Compare: TTP (Not disclosed) vs Orthogonal (Not disclosed) |
| You need specialist depth in a specific vertical | TTP |
| 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: TTP vs Orthogonal
| Use case | TTP fit | Orthogonal fit | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Designing an autoinjector or inhaler for a pharma combination product | Strong | Limited | TTP |
| Developing a surgical energy device | Strong | Strong | Both equally |
| Building a mobile app that controls a Class II device | Limited | Strong | Orthogonal |
| Developing a digital therapeutic for FDA clearance | Strong | Strong | Both equally |
Verdict: TTP vs Orthogonal
TTP (4.4/5) is the stronger overall choice for most Medical Device Development projects. Employee ownership plus long-running drug delivery and surgical device work for large pharma and medtech clients.
Orthogonal (4.2/5) is worth a look if you need developing a digital therapeutic for FDA clearance. If your situation matches that, Orthogonal is a competitive option.
Related comparisons
TTP vs Orthogonal FAQ
Is TTP better than Orthogonal?
TTP (4.4/5) scores higher overall, but "better" depends on your use case. TTP's strongest advantage: employee ownership since 2021 removes pressure from outside investors. Orthogonal's strongest advantage: focused on regulated medical software for more than a decade.
How do TTP and Orthogonal differ in pricing?
TTP uses time and materials, phased fixed project pricing. Orthogonal uses 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: TTP or Orthogonal?
Orthogonal 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 TTP and Orthogonal?
TTP's primary differentiator is: employee ownership plus long-running drug delivery and surgical device work for large pharma and medtech clients. Orthogonal's primary differentiator is: agile delivery adapted to FDA-regulated software, focused on the app and cloud side of connected devices. They also differ in team size (Not published vs 11–60), minimum engagement (Not disclosed vs Not disclosed), and primary industries served (Drug delivery, Surgical & robotics vs Digital health, Wearables & remote monitoring).
Verify all details directly with each company before making a decision.