topappdevelopmentcompanies
Write a Review menu
Menu

Overall Review Rating

4.2 (5 Ratings)

Quality 4.1/5
Schedule 3.8/5
Cost 4.2/5
Communication 4.1/5

Services

  • Cross Platform Development
  • Mobile App Development
  • Data Analytics
  • Android App Development
  • iOS App Development
  • Enterprise App Development
  • Cloud Computing Software
  • Web Development
  • Mobile App Marketing
  • Ethereum Blockchain
  • AWS Services
  • Automotive R&D

Industries Served

Financial Services Insurance Mining & Metals Nonprofit & NGO

virtualforce.io Reviews

Have a look at these client reviews on previously delivered projects.

Lynne Robichaud

Director of Product - Atlantic Digital Corp
Posted on May 01, 2025
4.0 Overall Rating

ISO 27001 certification achieved on the first attempt. The preparation was that thorough.

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 compliance team had flagged gaps that needed fixing before our next regulatory review. The work was too specialist for our internal team to absorb without dropping the product roadmap entirely.

Quality 3.5/5
Schedule 4.0/5
Cost 4.5/5
Communication 4.0/5
project type
Project Type Cybersecurity
industry
Industry Financial Services
project cost
Project Cost $150,000 to $499,999
Read Full Review

Zanele Dlamini

Director of Engineering - Cape Digital Solutions
Posted on May 06, 2024
4.5 Overall Rating

Technically strong, commercially fair, and genuinely good to work with

Three months post-launch our key metrics are all moving in the right direction — user adoption ahead of target, support volume down, time-on-task reduced for our core workflows. The product team has started planning features that were never viable on the previous platform. That is the real proof of the investment: it opened up possibilities rather than just replacing what was there before.

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.

Quality 4.5/5
Schedule 4.0/5
Cost 4.5/5
Communication 4.0/5
project type
Project Type Low-Code / No-Code Development
industry
Industry Mining & Metals
project cost
Project Cost $50,000 to $149,999
Read Full Review

Eoghan Fitzgerald

VP of Engineering - Shannon Tech Solutions Ltd
Posted on Jan 14, 2024
4.5 Overall Rating

Pen test found things our previous vendor had missed for two consecutive years

The knowledge transfer at the end of the project was notably good. Too many vendors see handover as a tick-box exercise. This team ran structured sessions, produced documentation our internal team actually references, and spent real time making sure we understood the architecture decisions well enough to maintain and extend the system independently. Six months later we are doing exactly that without needing to go back to them for every question.

Project summary

The project had a board-level visibility date. We needed a partner who would treat the deadline as their own.

Quality 5.0/5
Schedule 4.0/5
Cost 4.0/5
Communication 4.5/5
project type
Project Type Cybersecurity
industry
Industry Nonprofit & NGO
project cost
Project Cost $10,000 to $49,999
Read Full Review

Ananya Sharma

Engineering Manager - BlueMind Analytics Pvt Ltd
Posted on Sep 24, 2022
4.0 Overall Rating

Automation that gave our analysts back 12 hours a week. Real ROI, not projected.

The part of this project I had been most worried about was the integration work. Our system landscape is complex, some of the upstream APIs were barely documented, and one of our third-party vendors was notoriously slow to respond. This team documented what the upstream vendors could not, built resilience into the architecture where third-party reliability was uncertain, and delivered integrations that have worked exactly as specified since day one. I genuinely could not have asked for more.

Project summary

First notice of loss was averaging three days. The market benchmark was under four hours. Automating intake and triage was the agreed priority for the year.

Quality 4.0/5
Schedule 3.5/5
Cost 4.5/5
Communication 4.0/5
project type
Project Type AI & Machine Learning
industry
Industry Insurance
project cost
Project Cost $150,000 to $499,999
Read Full Review

Flynn Buchanan

GM of Technology - Pacific Rim Commerce Group
Posted on Jun 14, 2022
4.0 Overall Rating

Our team stopped guessing and started deciding. That is what good ML looks like.

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

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.

Quality 3.5/5
Schedule 3.5/5
Cost 3.5/5
Communication 4.0/5
project type
Project Type AI & Machine Learning
industry
Industry Nonprofit & NGO
project cost
Project Cost $10,000 to $49,999
Read Full Review
back to top