Frog vs Projects by IF: full comparison for 2026
Quick verdict
Projects by IF (4.0/5) edges ahead of Frog (3.7/5) overall. Projects by IF is the better choice for Tech/public-sector, trust- and policy-aware design. Frog is the stronger option for enterprises needing digital plus physical/hardware design. The right choice depends on your project size, budget, and required tech stack.
Frog vs Projects by IF: head-to-head summary
| Criterion | Frog | Projects by IF |
|---|---|---|
| Founded | 1969 | 2016 |
| HQ | San Francisco, CA, USA | London, UK |
| Team size | 2,000+ | Not published |
| Rating | 3.7 / 5 | 4.0 / 5 |
| Primary differentiator | Still designs physical hardware (IoT, automotive, medical devices) alongside software, inside Capgemini Invent's enterprise consulting scale | A design practice built specifically around trust, regulation, and policy work for technology-enabled organizations, with clients spanning Google to the UK Government |
| Pricing model | Project-based, enterprise consulting engagements | Project-based (not published) |
| Min. engagement | Not published | Not published |
| Primary tech stack | Figma, Adobe Creative Suite, Miro | Figma, Miro, Adobe Creative Suite |
| Industries served | Enterprise transformation, Consumer products, Healthcare | Enterprise transformation, Healthcare, Financial services / fintech |
Frog vs Projects by IF: overview
Frog
Three separate owners — Aricent, Altran, and now Capgemini — have held frog since its 1969 start as Esslinger Design in Germany; Capgemini folded it into Capgemini Invent in 2019 and later merged Fahrenheit 212, Idean, and June21 into the same brand, landing at roughly 2,000 people across 35 studios. What survives the consolidation is a genuine rarity on this list: frog still designs physical products — IoT, automotive interiors, medical devices — with the same team that handles the software layer.
Projects by IF
Sarah Gold founded Projects by IF in London in 2016, building a strategic design practice around a specific problem: helping technology-enabled organizations design for trust at scale. That focus — spanning product and experience design, digital strategy, regulation and policy work, and technology architecture — has produced client relationships with Google, the UK Government, and Blue Cross Blue Shield, an unusual combination of big tech and public-sector work for a studio this size.
Services and capabilities: Frog vs Projects by IF
| Capability | Frog | Projects by IF |
|---|---|---|
| Product design | ✓ | ✓ |
| UX research | ✓ | ✓ |
| Branding | ✗ | ✗ |
| Web development | ✗ | ✗ |
| Mobile development | ✗ | ✗ |
| Design systems | ✓ | ✗ |
Tech stack comparison: Frog vs Projects by IF
| Framework / platform | Frog | Projects by IF |
|---|---|---|
| Figma | ✓ | ✓ |
| Webflow | N/A | N/A |
| React | N/A | N/A |
| Framer | N/A | N/A |
| Adobe Creative Suite | ✓ | ✓ |
| Design systems/Storybook | ✓ | N/A |
| After Effects | N/A | N/A |
Pricing comparison: Frog vs Projects by IF
| Criterion | Frog | Projects by IF |
|---|---|---|
| Minimum engagement | Not published | Not published |
| Engagement models | Fixed project, Retainer | Fixed project, Retainer |
| Rate transparency | Minimum disclosed | Minimum disclosed |
| Price tier | Mid-market | Mid-market |
Target audience comparison: Frog vs Projects by IF
| Dimension | Frog | Projects by IF |
|---|---|---|
| Best company size | Startup to mid-market | Startup to mid-market |
| Best industries | Enterprise transformation, Consumer products, Healthcare | Enterprise transformation, Healthcare, Financial services / fintech |
| Best use cases | IoT and connected hardware product design, Automotive and smart-home interface design | Public-sector or government digital service design, Trust-and-safety product design for a technology platform |
| Typical project type | Fixed project | Fixed project |
Frog vs Projects by IF: pros and cons
| Frog | |
|---|---|
| + | Rare combined software-plus-physical-hardware design capability in this list |
| + | 35 global studios support multi-region enterprise programs |
| + | More than five decades of brand history and design case studies |
| + | Access to Capgemini Invent's broader technology-consulting bench |
| - | Operates as a Capgemini Invent brand today, not an independent firm — worth disclosing to prospective clients |
| - | Absorbed several legacy agencies (Fahrenheit 212, Idean, June21) under one brand, which can mean inconsistent staffing |
| - | Consulting-firm process overhead can slow fast-moving engagements relative to boutique firms |
| Projects by IF | |
|---|---|
| + | Purpose-built around trust and regulation-aware design, a genuine specialty few boutiques on this list offer |
| + | Client list combines big tech (Google) with public-sector work (UK Government), demonstrating range within its niche |
| + | Founder-led since 2016 under CEO Sarah Gold, giving a consistent point of view across engagements |
| + | Services span product design through policy and regulatory design, useful for regulated or public-facing products |
| - | Team size isn't published in available sources, making capacity planning harder for large programs |
| - | Trust-and-policy specialization is a narrower fit for clients wanting pure visual or brand design |
| - | Pricing and minimum engagement size aren't published |
Who should choose Frog?
A typical fit: IoT and connected hardware product design.
Still designs physical hardware (IoT, automotive, medical devices) alongside software, inside Capgemini Invent's enterprise consulting scale. Minimum engagement starts at Not published. Works best with clients in Enterprise transformation, Consumer products, Healthcare.
Who should choose Projects by IF?
A typical fit: public-sector or government digital service design.
A design practice built specifically around trust, regulation, and policy work for technology-enabled organizations, with clients spanning Google to the UK Government. Minimum engagement starts at Not published. Works best with clients in Enterprise transformation, Healthcare, Financial services / fintech.
Decision matrix: Frog vs Projects by IF
| Your situation | Recommended choice |
|---|---|
| You need full-ownership delivery on a defined project scope | Frog |
| You need a large dedicated team for an ongoing programme | Check each company's engagement model |
| Your budget is at the lower end | Compare: Frog (Not published) vs Projects by IF (Not published) |
| You need specialist depth in a specific vertical | Frog |
| 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: Frog vs Projects by IF
| Use case | Frog fit | Projects by IF fit | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| IoT and connected hardware product design | Strong | Limited | Frog |
| Automotive and smart-home interface design | Strong | Limited | Frog |
| Public-sector or government digital service design | Limited | Strong | Projects by IF |
| Trust-and-safety product design for a technology platform | Limited | Strong | Projects by IF |
| Fixed-price product build | Limited | Limited | Both equally |
| Dedicated design team augmentation | Limited | Limited | Both equally |
Verdict: Frog vs Projects by IF
Projects by IF (4.0/5) is the stronger overall choice for most Product Design projects. A design practice built specifically around trust, regulation, and policy work for technology-enabled organizations, with clients spanning Google to the UK Government.
Frog (3.7/5) is worth a look if you need automotive and smart-home interface design. If your situation matches that, Frog is a competitive option.
Related comparisons
Frog vs Projects by IF FAQ
Is Frog better than Projects by IF?
Projects by IF (4.0/5) scores higher overall, but "better" depends on your use case. Frog's strongest advantage: rare combined software-plus-physical-hardware design capability in this list. Projects by IF's strongest advantage: purpose-built around trust and regulation-aware design, a genuine specialty few boutiques on this list offer.
How do Frog and Projects by IF differ in pricing?
Frog uses project-based, enterprise consulting engagements pricing with a minimum engagement of Not published. Projects by IF 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: Frog or Projects by IF?
Frog is the larger team and typically the better enterprise-scale choice. For very large programmes, verify team size and compliance coverage directly with each firm before shortlisting.
What are the main differences between Frog and Projects by IF?
Frog's primary differentiator is: still designs physical hardware (IoT, automotive, medical devices) alongside software, inside Capgemini Invent's enterprise consulting scale. Projects by IF's primary differentiator is: a design practice built specifically around trust, regulation, and policy work for technology-enabled organizations, with clients spanning Google to the UK Government. They also differ in team size (2,000+ vs Not published), minimum engagement (Not published vs Not published), and primary industries served (Enterprise transformation, Consumer products vs Enterprise transformation, Healthcare).
Verify all details directly with each firm before making a decision.