About Equaleyes d.o.o.
Equaleyes d.o.o. has been in business since 2011, delivering technology projects for clients. The company's main offerings are Mobile App Development. With 50 - 249 people on staff, Equaleyes d.o.o. can take on projects of varying size. Typical hourly rates run around $50 - $99 / hr/hr, with an average project cost near $25,000. Equaleyes d.o.o. holds a 4.9-star rating across 21 client reviews. The team is based in Ljubljana - Črnuče, Slovenia. Overall, Equaleyes d.o.o. is one of the options worth shortlisting for a technology project.
Where We Specialize
Industry Expertise
Typical Project Size
Equaleyes d.o.o. Reviews
Write a ReviewOnline store that our fulfilment and finance teams are as happy with as our customers are
Maja Söderström / Head of Product Engineering - Scandia Digital ABJan 10, 2026
Project summary: Regulatory submission timelines required a document management platform that could handle version control, access permissions, and audit trails at a scale our existing tools were not designed for.
We had worked with three agencies before this engagement. The comparison is not flattering to the others. What distinguished this team was a systematic approach to understanding the problem before proposing a solution — something that sounds obvious and is practiced far less often than it should be. The delivery phase ran to schedule, the codebase is clean enough that our internal engineers made positive comments during handover review, and we have not logged a critical incident in five months of live operation. We intend to use them for our next phase of work.
Clear and consistent communication adapted appropriately for both technical and non-technical stakeholders, shared tooling that gave our team real-time visibility, reliable sprint delivery throughout
Pipeline availability for kickoff required a few weeks of lead time — in hindsight that selection pressure means you are working with a team that is in demand for the right reasons
Questions & Answers
Design work that measurably improved every conversion metric on our platform
Radosław Kowalczyk / Head of Development - Wisła Software Sp zooJan 10, 2026
Project summary: Our agents were spending more time managing data across disconnected systems than managing relationships. We needed a unified platform to give them that time back.
The technical quality of the final deliverable is the easiest thing to point to. The automated test coverage is thorough, the deployment pipeline is reliable, the documentation is genuinely useful rather than ceremonially produced. But the metric I keep returning to is the number of post-launch conversations we have not had to have. No incident calls at two in the morning. No emergency patches. No retrospective discussions about what went wrong. The absence of those events is the evidence I would show to someone considering this vendor.
Commercially transparent throughout — no hidden assumptions, no bill shock at the end, change requests that were fair and clearly explained rather than used as a margin-recovery mechanism
We underestimated the input required from our subject matter experts during the requirements phase. The team flagged this early but our resource planning did not fully reflect it — our responsibility, not theirs
Questions & Answers
Zero-trust implementation that satisfied our enterprise client security questionnaire first pass
Takashi Morimoto / Director of IT Strategy - Sakura Digital KKJan 05, 2026
Project summary: Cross-agency data sharing had been blocked by incompatible systems for four years. A secure integration platform was the prerequisite for every transformation initiative in our roadmap.
The technical quality of the final deliverable is the easiest thing to point to. The automated test coverage is thorough, the deployment pipeline is reliable, the documentation is genuinely useful rather than ceremonially produced. But the metric I keep returning to is the number of post-launch conversations we have not had to have. No incident calls at two in the morning. No emergency patches. No retrospective discussions about what went wrong. The absence of those events is the evidence I would show to someone considering this vendor.
Clear and consistent communication adapted appropriately for both technical and non-technical stakeholders, shared tooling that gave our team real-time visibility, reliable sprint delivery throughout
Their insistence on a detailed functional specification before development began felt like friction at the time. In retrospect, it was the reason the development phase ran without the ambiguity that has derailed similar projects for us previously