Best Medical Device Development Companies

TTP vs Planet Innovation: full comparison for 2026

Quick verdict

TTP (4.4/5) edges ahead of Planet Innovation (4.2/5) overall. TTP is the better choice for pharma device programs, inhalers and injectors. Planet Innovation is the stronger option for diagnostics companies in Asia-Pacific and the US. The right choice depends on your project size, budget, and required tech stack.

TTP vs Planet Innovation: head-to-head summary

Criterion TTP Planet Innovation
Founded 1987 2009
HQ Melbourn, Cambridgeshire, UK Box Hill, Victoria, Australia
Team size Not published 300–400
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 Diagnostics roots plus product and commercialization experience in Australia and the US
Pricing model Time and materials, phased fixed project Fixed project, time and materials
Min. engagement Not disclosed Not disclosed
Primary tech stack Ultrasound, Microfluidics, Embedded C/C++ Embedded C/C++, Cloud (AWS/Azure), Microfluidics
Industries served Drug delivery, Surgical & robotics, Diagnostics & lab devices Diagnostics & lab devices, Digital health, Wearables & remote monitoring

TTP vs Planet Innovation: 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.

Planet Innovation

Planet Innovation was founded in Melbourne in 2009 by four diagnostics industry specialists: Eduardo Vom, Sam Lanyon, Stuart Elliott and Troy O'Callaghan. It is headquartered in Box Hill, Victoria, with a facility in Irvine, California, and employs roughly 300 to 390 people depending on the source. The company has focused on regulated medical devices since 2016 and works across diagnostics, medical devices, biotechnology and connected health, including some product ventures of its own.

Services and capabilities: TTP vs Planet Innovation

Capability TTP Planet Innovation
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 Planet Innovation

Framework / platform TTP Planet Innovation
Embedded C/C++ ✓ ✓
Embedded Linux N/A N/A
RTOS N/A N/A
BLE N/A N/A
Cloud (AWS/Azure) N/A ✓
IEC 62304 N/A N/A
ISO 14971 N/A N/A
ISO 13485 QMS ✓ ✓
Qt N/A N/A

Pricing comparison: TTP vs Planet Innovation

Criterion TTP Planet Innovation
Minimum engagement Not disclosed Not disclosed
Engagement models Consulting, Fixed project, Time & materials Fixed project, Manufacturing contract, Time & materials
Rate transparency Not public Not public
Price tier Mid-market Mid-market

Target audience comparison: TTP vs Planet Innovation

Dimension TTP Planet Innovation
Best company size Startup to mid-market Startup to mid-market
Best industries Drug delivery, Surgical & robotics, Diagnostics & lab devices Diagnostics & lab devices, Digital health, Wearables & remote monitoring
Best use cases Designing an autoinjector or inhaler for a pharma combination product, Developing a surgical energy device Developing a connected point-of-care diagnostic, Commercialization planning for an Australian medtech startup
Typical project type Consulting Fixed project

TTP vs Planet Innovation: 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
Planet Innovation
+ Founders came from the diagnostics industry, and diagnostics is still its strongest area
+ Has launched products of its own, so it understands commercialization as well as engineering
+ Australian base offers time-zone coverage for Asia-Pacific clients
+ Irvine facility serves US clients locally
- Runs its own product ventures, so ask how client work is prioritized
- Less known in Europe
- Headcount and certifications should be confirmed directly

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 Planet Innovation?

A typical fit: developing a connected point-of-care diagnostic.

Diagnostics roots plus product and commercialization experience in Australia and the US. Minimum engagement is not publicly disclosed. Works best with clients in Diagnostics & lab devices, Digital health, Wearables & remote monitoring.

Decision matrix: TTP vs Planet Innovation

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 Check each company's engagement model
Your budget is at the lower end Compare: TTP (Not disclosed) vs Planet Innovation (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 Planet Innovation

Use case TTP fit Planet Innovation fit Winner
Designing an autoinjector or inhaler for a pharma combination product Strong Limited TTP
Developing a surgical energy device Strong Strong Both equally
Developing a connected point-of-care diagnostic Strong Strong Both equally
Commercialization planning for an Australian medtech startup Limited Strong Planet Innovation

Verdict: TTP vs Planet Innovation

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.

Planet Innovation (4.2/5) is worth a look if you need commercialization planning for an Australian medtech startup. If your situation matches that, Planet Innovation is a competitive option.

Related comparisons

TTP vs Planet Innovation FAQ

Is TTP better than Planet Innovation?

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. Planet Innovation's strongest advantage: founders came from the diagnostics industry, and diagnostics is still its strongest area.

How do TTP and Planet Innovation differ in pricing?

TTP uses time and materials, phased fixed project pricing. Planet Innovation uses fixed project, time and materials pricing. Neither firm publishes a full rate card; a discovery call is required for project-specific quotes.

Which is better for enterprise: TTP or Planet Innovation?

Planet Innovation 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 Planet Innovation?

TTP's primary differentiator is: employee ownership plus long-running drug delivery and surgical device work for large pharma and medtech clients. Planet Innovation's primary differentiator is: diagnostics roots plus product and commercialization experience in Australia and the US. They also differ in team size (Not published vs 300–400), minimum engagement (Not disclosed vs Not disclosed), and primary industries served (Drug delivery, Surgical & robotics vs Diagnostics & lab devices, Digital health).

Verify all details directly with each company before making a decision.