WAVECT vs DEV AGENCIES

Wavect or a generalist dev agency. The work overlaps. The pricing model and the scope ownership do not.

We do dev-agency work too: MVPs, full project builds, weekly retainers. The actual differences are who shows up, how we get paid, and who decides what ships. If product judgment is already a solved problem on your side, a 20-person generalist agency is usually faster and cheaper. If it is not, our pricing and our pushback are where the value lives.

Book a thirty-minute call
// 01

Decision snapshot

VerdictChoose the generalist agency when you already have the product call covered and need more hands. Choose Wavect when the spec itself is still risky, because the work you need is judgement plus build, not only execution.

Wavect is best when

  • The brief is still changing because customer, revenue, or technical risk is unresolved.
  • You want the people writing code in the same conversation as the people challenging scope.
  • A wrong feature would hurt runway more than a slower feature would hurt delivery.

The alternative is best when

  • You have a CTO or product owner who can write and defend the spec.
  • The bottleneck is parallel capacity across several known workstreams.
  • Procurement, reporting, or enterprise stakeholder management requires a larger vendor structure.

Questions to ask before you choose

  1. Who has permission to say a signed feature should not ship?
  2. Will the senior person who sells the project also be present during delivery?
  3. What happens commercially if the spec is correct but the product still fails?

Commercial risk to watch

  • The visible price is not the whole cost. The risk sits in the pricing unit, the staffing mix, and the moment the scope changes.
  • Ask what the vendor is paid to increase: hours, seats, retained advice, or shipped outcomes. Ask us the same question.

Evidence notes

  • This comparison is structural, not a claim that all agencies staff juniors or avoid scope pushback.
  • Use the agency’s proposal to verify staffing mix, change-request rules, termination terms, and who attends delivery calls.
// 02

Project fit: not limited to small builds

Project size and provider headcount are separate decisions. Wavect’s delivery unit is a named senior core, but that does not limit the work to MVPs or short startup projects. Larger projects are split into phases with separate budgets and acceptance criteria. We also build internal systems and process automations inside a client’s existing repositories, tooling and workflows. A vetted bench supports continuity and scope-specific capacity. A larger provider may still be the better choice when the main requirement is several parallel teams, an incumbent framework agreement or certifications Wavect does not currently hold.
// 03

How they actually differ

Six dimensions where the work actually diverges.

WAVECT DIMENSION ALTERNATIVE

Weekly outcome fee. One number per week.

PRICING UNIT

Hourly billing or a monthly retainer, with tracked hours as the common unit.

Senior only. No juniors on your retainer.

SENIORITY ON THE WORK

Mixed bench. The common shape is a senior scoping the work and others executing it, with a project manager in between.

A founder plus the senior engineer doing the work.

WHO YOU ACTUALLY TALK TO

Project manager plus a rotating bench.

We push back on scope. If a feature should not ship, we say so.

SCOPE OWNERSHIP

You own the scope. They execute what you signed for.

Cancel any week. Werkvertrag on fixed-price work.

EXIT TERMS

Notice period or contract minimum. Termination clauses vary.

Refund the last week if it did not blow you away.

WHAT IF IT FAILS

Depends on the contract. Under time and materials the hours worked are invoiced whatever the outcome. Ask what changes commercially if the spec turns out wrong.

// 04

The real difference, in practice

The overlap is real, so be honest about where you sit. A generalist agency and Wavect both ship MVPs, full builds, and retainers. The divergence is structural, not cosmetic.

The common agency shape is leverage: a senior scopes the work, others execute it, and a project manager sits between you and the people writing code. That model is efficient when the spec is already correct and you need throughput across parallel workstreams. If you have a CTO or a clear product owner who has already decided what to build, a twenty-person bench will beat us on raw capacity and price. None of that is a claim that agencies put juniors on your work or decline to challenge a spec: ask any vendor, us included, who will actually be on the delivery calls.

Where it breaks is when the spec itself is the risk. We bill a weekly outcome instead of tracked hours, put a founder and the senior engineer doing the work on every call, and we tell you when a feature should not ship. That pushback has no line item, but it is the point. The most expensive thing anyone builds for you is the feature you should have killed.

If your product judgment is solved, take the agency. If “should we even build this?” is still open, that is our work. See how we run build engagements .

// 05

When each is the better call

// 01

When Wavect is the better call

  • You are pre product-market fit and the product question is still open.
  • You want founder-grade pushback in the room, not a project manager taking notes.
  • You want one bill, one team, one accountability line. Not three vendors stitched together.
  • Your runway is the constraint. You cannot afford a six-month retainer to discover the product is wrong.
// 02

When a generalist agency is the better call

  • You have a CTO in house and the scope is genuinely fixed.
  • You need parallel workstreams across many engineers at once. Capacity is the bottleneck, not direction.
  • You are past product-market fit and your roadmap is set. You need execution, not strategy.
  • Your budget supports a six to twelve month retainer and the cost of a wrong technical bet is recoverable.

If the bullets on the right describe your situation, hire the agency. If the bullets on the left describe it, talk to us.

// 06

Relevant Wavect work

// 07

FAQs

Mechanically the work overlaps. We ship MVPs, full project builds, and weekly retainers, same shape as a dev agency. Three things actually differ. We staff senior only (no juniors on your retainer ). We bill weekly outcomes (no hourly timesheets). We push back on scope (the unit of work is a shipped outcome, not a closed ticket). Lower throughput than a 20-person agency, higher accountability per shipped feature.
Yes. We run fixed-scope engagements starting at €3,500 (Discovery Phase ), weekly retainers from €400 per week for the Fractional Co-Founder and €750 per week for QA, and full-stack delivery at €10,000 to €30,000 per month.[[nosrc:wavect-own-claim]] The difference is what we deliver in those slots. We will not deliver tickets you ask for if we believe the tickets are wrong.
We do not bill per hour. We bill weekly outcomes. A time-and-materials contract prices hours, not whether the feature was the right one, so compare the total cost of reaching a shipped, working product rather than rate against rate.[[nosrc:generic-category]] In our experience that total is usually lower through us, though an hourly rate and a weekly outcome fee are different units and not directly comparable.[[nosrc:wavect-own-claim]] Ask any vendor, us included, what happens commercially when the spec turns out wrong. For how the numbers actually break down, see what software development costs in Austria .
Four to twelve weeks per sprint , then re-evaluated. Some clients renew quarterly for years. Some leave after one sprint because the answer was clear. Both are fine.
No. Equity is a bet on the long tail. Our job is to derisk the next ninety days. Different time horizons. We have walked away from equity-only deals.
Last reviewed: byKevin Riedl wiki ↗

Still weighing the options?

Tell us what you are building. We will tell you straight which route fits, no pitch.

Book a thirty-minute call