About Gear9
Businesses looking for a reliable technology partner often consider Gear9. Their core services include Custom Software Development and Web Development. With 50 - 249 people on staff, Gear9 can take on projects of varying size. Projects are generally billed around $25 - $49 / hr/hr. Gear9 operates out of Casablanca, Morocco. These details offer a useful starting point when evaluating Gear9.
Where We Specialize
Industry Expertise
Typical Project Size
Gear9 Reviews
Write a ReviewA team that understood the difference between AI that demos well and AI that runs in prod
Priya Chandrasekaran / VP of Data & AI - Wavefront Analytics IncJan 15, 2026
Project summary: Customer expectations had reset and our conversion funnel data showed precisely where we were losing them. We needed a commerce platform capable of delivering the experience our competitors already had.
The thing that retrospectively seems most significant is how little drama there was. Complex technology projects tend to accumulate incidents, escalations, and tense conversations. This one did not. Problems were surfaced before they became incidents. Scope changes were handled with process rather than conflict. Risks were managed rather than avoided. That level of maturity is rare in my experience and it made the delivery feel almost effortless from our side, which I know it was not from theirs.
Senior-level engineering presence throughout the entire project, not just during the pitch, honest and commercially fair handling of scope changes, codebase that our internal team praised on review
The quality of documentation they produce means our team needed to set aside dedicated review time to do it justice — a minor scheduling point rather than a genuine criticism
Questions & Answers
User research that uncovered friction we had stopped noticing because it was always there
Liselotte Bakker / Head of Platform Engineering - Harbour Digital BVJan 06, 2026
Project summary: First notice of loss processing was taking three days on average. Market benchmarks were under four hours. Automation of the intake and triage workflow was the agreed priority.
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.
Architectural decisions designed for longevity rather than just the current brief, thorough automated test coverage, post-launch stability that validated every technical choice made during discovery
The quality of documentation they produce means our team needed to set aside dedicated review time to do it justice — a minor scheduling point rather than a genuine criticism