Evermade
Overall Review Rating
4.7 (7 Ratings)
Overview
Their team is made up of designers and developers working closely together to make sure that great concepts become even better final products. They take the time to know their client's demands in order to produce solutions changed to their requirements. They carry out all design & development in-house, something unusual nowadays, and use a full team of professionals.
Services
- iOS App Development
- Ethereum Blockchain
- Web Development
- Magento
- Hybrid App Development
- Cryptocurrency Wallet Development
- Mobile App Development
- Cloud Security Services
- Android App Development
- Market Research
- Enterprise App Development
- Cross Platform Development
Industries Served
Evermade Reviews
Have a look at these client reviews on previously delivered projects.
Yuki Hashimoto
Head of Product Development - East Asia Commerce KKPost-release incident rate halved in the first quarter after they joined
The technical quality is the obvious thing to highlight. The automated test suite is comprehensive, the deployment pipeline is solid, and the documentation is actually useful rather than written to satisfy a checklist. But the metric I keep coming back to is what has NOT happened since go-live. No 2am incident calls. No emergency patches. No post-launch retrospectives about what went wrong. For a system of this complexity, that outcome is exactly what we paid for.
Project summary
Clients were asking for real-time campaign performance data. We were delivering reports two days after the fact. The gap was becoming a retention issue.
Sarah Kimball
Product Manager - Clearpath Health SolutionsOur remote team now collaborates in VR daily. It changed how we work.
What I appreciated most was that they were honest when things were not going to plan. There was one point mid-project where a dependency was going to affect our timeline and they told us three weeks before it would have become critical. That gave us time to adjust. Vendors who manage upward proactively are rare. This one did it consistently throughout the engagement.
Project summary
Years of incremental development had left us with a platform that was functional but limiting. A structured rebuild was the agreed path forward.
Jordan Fischer
Director of Engineering - Mesa Technologies IncDelivered what the proposal described. More rare than it should be.
We have worked with a few agencies over the years and the comparison is honestly not close. What stood out from the start was that they spent serious time understanding the problem before they proposed anything. Once development started, every sprint review was clean — no hidden surprises, no slipped milestones. The production system has been running for four months without a single critical issue. Our internal developers reviewed the codebase at handover and were genuinely complimentary about the quality. That does not happen often.
Project summary
A failed engagement the previous year had made us more rigorous about vendor selection. We took the time to find a partner we actually trusted before we committed.
Amit Goldstein
VP of Product - Tel Aviv Ventures LtdTechnically strong, commercially fair, and genuinely good to work with
Our stakeholder group was unusually broad — board sponsors, operational users, compliance leads, and an IT team with strong opinions. I have watched vendors handle that kind of environment badly. This team adjusted how they communicated depending on who they were talking to, managed expectations honestly when things shifted, and delivered something that each group considers a success. Getting everyone to agree on that outcome was not straightforward and they deserve credit for making it happen.
Project summary
A new product line required underwriting logic that our legacy system could not support without a rewrite of the rules engine. The workarounds had accumulated to the point of being unmanageable.
Jia Hui Tan
VP of Engineering - RedDot Technologies Pte LtdObservability stack that caught three production issues before any user reported them
We went with a smaller team than we had originally planned for. I had concerns about whether the capacity would be sufficient given our timeline. Those concerns were unfounded. The team was focused, communication was constant, and the quality at each milestone review was consistent throughout. Smaller does not mean slower when the people are the right ones and this engagement proved that.
Project summary
Our product thinking was strong. Our execution capacity in this specific domain was limited. We needed deep expertise, not a generalist willing to learn on our time.