eInfochips vs ArcTouch: full comparison for 2026
Quick verdict
eInfochips (4.3/5) edges ahead of ArcTouch (4.0/5) overall. eInfochips is the better choice for large OEM programmes needing scale and component supply. ArcTouch is the stronger option for consumer brands wanting design-led companion apps. The right choice depends on your project size, budget, and required tech stack.
eInfochips vs ArcTouch: head-to-head summary
| Criterion | eInfochips | ArcTouch |
|---|---|---|
| Founded | 1994 | 2008 |
| HQ | San Jose, California, USA (engineering HQ: Ahmedabad, India) | San Francisco, California, USA (studio in Florianópolis, Brazil) |
| Team size | 1,000–5,000 | 100–250 |
| Rating | 4.3 / 5 | 4.0 / 5 |
| Primary differentiator | Arrow ownership links engineering services to component sourcing and supply chain | Design-first mobile studio for consumer connected products |
| Pricing model | Time and materials, dedicated team, fixed price | Time and materials, fixed price |
| Min. engagement | Not published | Not published |
| Primary tech stack | AWS IoT, Azure IoT, Embedded Linux | Swift, Kotlin, React Native |
| Industries served | Industrial manufacturing, Healthcare, Automotive, Consumer electronics, Semiconductors | Consumer electronics, Healthcare, Retail, Media |
eInfochips vs ArcTouch: overview
eInfochips
eInfochips was founded in 1994 and became part of Arrow Electronics in January 2018. The company now lists San Jose as headquarters, while most of its engineers work in Ahmedabad and other Indian centres; estimates put the team between about 3,500 and 4,000. It covers silicon, hardware, firmware, cloud and mobile apps, and its tie to Arrow gives clients a direct line into component supply. Few other vendors here can staff a 50-engineer IoT programme on short notice.
ArcTouch
ArcTouch was founded in San Francisco in 2008 and acquired by Grey Group, part of WPP, in January 2016, when it had 97 employees and an office in Florianópolis, Brazil. Its reputation comes from polished consumer apps, including companion apps for wearables and connected products. Design and mobile engineering are its strengths. It does not do firmware or hardware, so it works best when paired with a device engineering partner.
Services and capabilities: eInfochips vs ArcTouch
| Capability | eInfochips | ArcTouch |
|---|---|---|
| Mobile companion apps | ✓ | ✓ |
| Web dashboards and portals | ✓ | ✓ |
| IoT cloud back end | ✓ | ✗ |
| Embedded firmware | ✓ | ✗ |
| Hardware design | ✓ | ✗ |
| Edge AI | ✗ | ✗ |
| Fixed-price projects | ✓ | ✓ |
| Dedicated team model | ✓ | ✗ |
Tech stack comparison: eInfochips vs ArcTouch
| Framework / platform | eInfochips | ArcTouch |
|---|---|---|
| AWS | ✓ | N/A |
| Azure | ✓ | N/A |
| Embedded Linux | ✓ | N/A |
| BLE | N/A | ✓ |
| MQTT | N/A | N/A |
| Swift | N/A | ✓ |
| Kotlin | N/A | ✓ |
| Flutter | N/A | ✓ |
| React Native | N/A | ✓ |
Pricing comparison: eInfochips vs ArcTouch
| Criterion | eInfochips | ArcTouch |
|---|---|---|
| Minimum engagement | Not published | Not published |
| Engagement models | Dedicated team, Time and materials, Fixed project | Fixed project, Time and materials |
| Rate transparency | Not public | Not public |
| Price tier | Mid-market | Mid-market |
Target audience comparison: eInfochips vs ArcTouch
| Dimension | eInfochips | ArcTouch |
|---|---|---|
| Best company size | Mid-market to enterprise | Startup to mid-market |
| Best industries | Industrial manufacturing, Healthcare, Automotive | Consumer electronics, Healthcare, Retail |
| Best use cases | Staffing a large OEM's multi-device IoT platform with app and cloud teams., Building industrial gateways and their management apps for global rollout. | Designing a premium companion app for a consumer wearable., Redesigning the onboarding and pairing flow of an existing device app. |
| Typical project type | Dedicated team | Fixed project |
eInfochips vs ArcTouch: pros and cons
| eInfochips | |
|---|---|
| + | Can staff very large programmes quickly |
| + | Arrow ownership helps with chip availability, reference designs and supply planning |
| + | Covers the full chain from chip-level work to cloud and app |
| + | Indian delivery keeps blended rates competitive for big teams |
| - | Owned by Arrow Electronics since 2018, which may steer component recommendations toward Arrow's line card |
| - | Large-company process can feel slow for a startup MVP |
| - | Founding year is given as 1994 or 1995 depending on the source |
| ArcTouch | |
|---|---|
| + | Consumer app design quality is its main selling point |
| + | Wearable and watch app experience |
| + | Brazilian studio helps balance US design-led pricing |
| - | Owned by WPP's Grey Group since 2016, so it is part of an advertising holding company |
| - | No firmware, hardware or deep IoT cloud practice |
| - | Rates reflect US agency pricing |
Who should choose eInfochips?
A typical fit: staffing a large OEM's multi-device IoT platform with app and cloud teams.
Arrow ownership links engineering services to component sourcing and supply chain. Minimum engagement is not publicly disclosed. Works best with clients in Industrial manufacturing, Healthcare, Automotive, Consumer electronics, Semiconductors.
Who should choose ArcTouch?
A typical fit: designing a premium companion app for a consumer wearable.
Design-first mobile studio for consumer connected products. Minimum engagement is not publicly disclosed. Works best with clients in Consumer electronics, Healthcare, Retail, Media.
Decision matrix: eInfochips vs ArcTouch
| Your situation | Recommended choice |
|---|---|
| You need full-ownership delivery on a defined project scope | eInfochips |
| You need a large dedicated team for an ongoing programme | eInfochips |
| Your budget is at the lower end | Compare: eInfochips (Not published) vs ArcTouch (Not published) |
| You need specialist depth in a specific vertical | eInfochips |
| You need staff augmentation or team extension | Neither; consider alternatives that offer staff aug |
| You need consulting before committing to a build | eInfochips |
Use case fit: eInfochips vs ArcTouch
| Use case | eInfochips fit | ArcTouch fit | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Staffing a large OEM's multi-device IoT platform with app and cloud teams. | Strong | Limited | eInfochips |
| Building industrial gateways and their management apps for global rollout. | Strong | Strong | Both equally |
| Designing a premium companion app for a consumer wearable. | Limited | Strong | ArcTouch |
| Redesigning the onboarding and pairing flow of an existing device app. | Limited | Strong | ArcTouch |
| Fixed-price MVP app | Limited | Limited | Both equally |
| Long-term dedicated team | Limited | Limited | Both equally |
Verdict: eInfochips vs ArcTouch
eInfochips (4.3/5) is the stronger overall choice for most IoT App Development projects. Arrow ownership links engineering services to component sourcing and supply chain.
ArcTouch (4.0/5) is worth a look if you need redesigning the onboarding and pairing flow of an existing device app. If your situation matches that, ArcTouch is a competitive option.
Related comparisons
eInfochips vs ArcTouch FAQ
Is eInfochips better than ArcTouch?
eInfochips (4.3/5) scores higher overall, but "better" depends on your use case. eInfochips's strongest advantage: can staff very large programmes quickly. ArcTouch's strongest advantage: consumer app design quality is its main selling point.
How do eInfochips and ArcTouch differ in pricing?
eInfochips uses time and materials, dedicated team, fixed price pricing. ArcTouch uses time and materials, fixed price pricing. Neither firm publishes a full rate card; a discovery call is required for project-specific quotes.
Which is better for enterprise: eInfochips or ArcTouch?
eInfochips 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 eInfochips and ArcTouch?
eInfochips's primary differentiator is: arrow ownership links engineering services to component sourcing and supply chain. ArcTouch's primary differentiator is: design-first mobile studio for consumer connected products. They also differ in team size (1,000–5,000 vs 100–250), minimum engagement (Not published vs Not published), and primary industries served (Industrial manufacturing, Healthcare vs Consumer electronics, Healthcare).
Verify all details directly with each company before making a decision.