Work & Co vs Deeplocal: full comparison for 2026
Quick verdict
Deeplocal (3.9/5) edges ahead of Work & Co (3.7/5) overall. Deeplocal is the better choice for brands needing working hardware prototypes, not just software. Work & Co is the stronger option for premium brands, design paired with front-end engineering. The right choice depends on your project size, budget, and required tech stack.
Work & Co vs Deeplocal: head-to-head summary
| Criterion | Work & Co | Deeplocal |
|---|---|---|
| Founded | 2013 | 2006 |
| HQ | Dumbo, Brooklyn, NY, USA | Pittsburgh, PA, USA |
| Team size | 425+ | ~75 |
| Rating | 3.7 / 5 | 3.9 / 5 |
| Primary differentiator | A client roster (Apple, IKEA, Nike, Disney) out of proportion with its ~425-person headcount, delivered through an engineering-heavy design-and-build model | A Carnegie Mellon-spinoff studio that engineers and builds working hardware prototypes in-house, not just software mockups |
| Pricing model | Fixed project, dedicated team | Project-based (not published) |
| Min. engagement | Not published | Not published |
| Primary tech stack | Figma, React, Next.js | Figma, React, Arduino/embedded systems |
| Industries served | Consumer products, Enterprise transformation, Healthcare | Consumer products, Enterprise transformation, Automotive & mobility |
Work & Co vs Deeplocal: overview
Work & Co
Work & Co launched in Dumbo, Brooklyn in May 2013 under five co-founders — Gene Liebel, Felipe Memoria, Joe Stewart, Mohan Ramaswamy, and Marcelo Eduardo — and has since opened offices across the US, Latin America, and Europe. At roughly 425 people, its client roster (Apple, IKEA, Google, Mercedes-Benz, Pfizer, GoFundMe, Nike, Disney) is out of proportion with its size, a result of an engineering-heavy model that keeps design and front-end build inside the same team. Accenture Song acquired Work & Co in 2023.
Deeplocal
Deeplocal spun out of Carnegie Mellon University in Pittsburgh in 2006, building a studio around robotics, hardware development, electrical engineering, and industrial design alongside standard software and creative work. WPP Digital acquired the studio in 2017. At around 75 people, Deeplocal does most of its prototyping and production in-house, which shows up in a client list — Google, Netflix, Airbnb, Lyft, Nike, Toyota, Volkswagen, PNC Bank — that regularly asks for physical, working prototypes rather than mockups.
Services and capabilities: Work & Co vs Deeplocal
| Capability | Work & Co | Deeplocal |
|---|---|---|
| Product design | ✓ | ✓ |
| UX research | ✗ | ✗ |
| Branding | ✗ | ✗ |
| Web development | ✓ | ✓ |
| Mobile development | ✓ | ✗ |
| Design systems | ✗ | ✗ |
Tech stack comparison: Work & Co vs Deeplocal
| Framework / platform | Work & Co | Deeplocal |
|---|---|---|
| Figma | ✓ | ✓ |
| Webflow | N/A | N/A |
| React | ✓ | ✓ |
| Framer | N/A | N/A |
| Adobe Creative Suite | N/A | N/A |
| Design systems/Storybook | N/A | N/A |
| After Effects | N/A | N/A |
Pricing comparison: Work & Co vs Deeplocal
| Criterion | Work & Co | Deeplocal |
|---|---|---|
| Minimum engagement | Not published | Not published |
| Engagement models | Fixed project, Dedicated team | Fixed project, Dedicated team |
| Rate transparency | Minimum disclosed | Minimum disclosed |
| Price tier | Mid-market | Mid-market |
Target audience comparison: Work & Co vs Deeplocal
| Dimension | Work & Co | Deeplocal |
|---|---|---|
| Best company size | Startup to mid-market | Startup to mid-market |
| Best industries | Consumer products, Enterprise transformation, Healthcare | Consumer products, Enterprise transformation, Automotive & mobility |
| Best use cases | Flagship consumer app redesign for a global brand, E-commerce platform rebuild with heavy front-end engineering | Connected-hardware or physical prototype design for a brand campaign, Automotive or consumer-electronics product design requiring in-house engineering |
| Typical project type | Fixed project | Fixed project |
Work & Co vs Deeplocal: pros and cons
| Work & Co | |
|---|---|
| + | Client roster (Apple, IKEA, Google, Nike, Disney) is exceptional relative to headcount |
| + | Design and engineering under one roof cuts the hand-off risk of splitting vendors |
| + | 425+ people across the US, Europe, and Latin America give real multi-region capacity |
| + | Consistent record shipping flagship consumer digital products |
| - | Now part of Accenture Song, which shares a parent with the Accenture Song entry elsewhere in this pool |
| - | A premium client base implies premium pricing even without a published minimum |
| - | Less vertical specialization (fintech, healthcare-specific) than boutiques built around one niche |
| Deeplocal | |
|---|---|
| + | In-house robotics, electrical engineering, and industrial design capability alongside software and creative work |
| + | Client list (Google, Netflix, Airbnb, Lyft, Nike, Toyota, Volkswagen, PNC Bank) spans tech, consumer, and automotive |
| + | WPP Digital backing since 2017 provides access to a larger global network when needed |
| + | Two decades of continuous operation since its 2006 Carnegie Mellon spinout |
| - | A ~75-person team caps capacity for very large, multi-workstream programs |
| - | Hardware-and-prototype focus is a narrower fit for clients needing pure software UI/UX work |
| - | Pricing and minimum engagement size aren't published |
Who should choose Work & Co?
A typical fit: flagship consumer app redesign for a global brand.
A client roster (Apple, IKEA, Nike, Disney) out of proportion with its ~425-person headcount, delivered through an engineering-heavy design-and-build model. Minimum engagement starts at Not published. Works best with clients in Consumer products, Enterprise transformation, Healthcare.
Who should choose Deeplocal?
A typical fit: connected-hardware or physical prototype design for a brand campaign.
A Carnegie Mellon-spinoff studio that engineers and builds working hardware prototypes in-house, not just software mockups. Minimum engagement starts at Not published. Works best with clients in Consumer products, Enterprise transformation, Automotive & mobility.
Decision matrix: Work & Co vs Deeplocal
| Your situation | Recommended choice |
|---|---|
| You need full-ownership delivery on a defined project scope | Work & Co |
| You need a large dedicated team for an ongoing programme | Work & Co |
| Your budget is at the lower end | Compare: Work & Co (Not published) vs Deeplocal (Not published) |
| You need specialist depth in a specific vertical | Work & Co |
| 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: Work & Co vs Deeplocal
| Use case | Work & Co fit | Deeplocal fit | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Flagship consumer app redesign for a global brand | Strong | Limited | Work & Co |
| E-commerce platform rebuild with heavy front-end engineering | Strong | Limited | Work & Co |
| Connected-hardware or physical prototype design for a brand campaign | Limited | Strong | Deeplocal |
| Automotive or consumer-electronics product design requiring in-house engineering | Limited | Strong | Deeplocal |
| Fixed-price product build | Limited | Limited | Both equally |
| Dedicated design team augmentation | Limited | Limited | Both equally |
Verdict: Work & Co vs Deeplocal
Deeplocal (3.9/5) is the stronger overall choice for most Product Design projects. A Carnegie Mellon-spinoff studio that engineers and builds working hardware prototypes in-house, not just software mockups.
Work & Co (3.7/5) is worth a look if you need e-commerce platform rebuild with heavy front-end engineering. If your situation matches that, Work & Co is a competitive option.
Related comparisons
Work & Co vs Deeplocal FAQ
Is Work & Co better than Deeplocal?
Deeplocal (3.9/5) scores higher overall, but "better" depends on your use case. Work & Co's strongest advantage: client roster (Apple, IKEA, Google, Nike, Disney) is exceptional relative to headcount. Deeplocal's strongest advantage: in-house robotics, electrical engineering, and industrial design capability alongside software and creative work.
How do Work & Co and Deeplocal differ in pricing?
Work & Co uses fixed project, dedicated team pricing with a minimum engagement of Not published. Deeplocal uses project-based (not published) pricing with a minimum engagement of Not published. Neither firm publishes a full rate card; a discovery call is required for project-specific quotes.
Which is better for enterprise: Work & Co or Deeplocal?
Work & Co 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 Work & Co and Deeplocal?
Work & Co's primary differentiator is: a client roster (Apple, IKEA, Nike, Disney) out of proportion with its ~425-person headcount, delivered through an engineering-heavy design-and-build model. Deeplocal's primary differentiator is: a Carnegie Mellon-spinoff studio that engineers and builds working hardware prototypes in-house, not just software mockups. They also differ in team size (425+ vs ~75), minimum engagement (Not published vs Not published), and primary industries served (Consumer products, Enterprise transformation vs Consumer products, Enterprise transformation).
Verify all details directly with each company before making a decision.