Frog vs Work & Co: full comparison for 2026
Quick verdict
Work & Co (3.9/5) edges ahead of Frog (3.8/5) overall. Work & Co is the better choice for premium consumer and enterprise brands wanting design paired tightly with production-grade front-end engineering.. Frog is the stronger option for enterprises needing design that covers both digital products and physical/connected hardware in one engagement.. The right choice depends on your project size, budget, and required tech stack.
Frog vs Work & Co: head-to-head summary
| Criterion | Frog | Work & Co |
|---|---|---|
| Founded | 1969 | 2013 |
| HQ | San Francisco, CA, USA | Dumbo, Brooklyn, NY, USA |
| Team size | 2,000+ | 425+ |
| Rating | 3.8 / 5 | 3.9 / 5 |
| Best for | Enterprises needing design that covers both digital products and physical/connected hardware in one engagement. | Premium consumer and enterprise brands wanting design paired tightly with production-grade front-end engineering. |
| Pricing model | Project-based, enterprise consulting engagements | Fixed project, dedicated team |
| Min. engagement | Not published | Not published |
| Primary tech stack | Figma, Adobe Creative Suite, Miro | Figma, React, Next.js |
| Industries served | Enterprise transformation, Consumer products, Healthcare | Consumer products, Enterprise transformation, Healthcare |
Frog vs Work & Co: overview
Frog
Frog dates to 1969 as Esslinger Design in Germany, later rebranding to frog design and passing through Aricent and Altran before landing inside Capgemini Invent in 2019 — an ownership chain worth disclosing. Capgemini has since folded Fahrenheit 212, Idean, and June21 into the frog brand, taking headcount to roughly 2,000 across 35 studios. Its differentiator among the firms here is scope: IoT, smart-home, automotive, and medical devices, not just screens.
Work & Co
Gene Liebel, Felipe Memoria, Joe Stewart, Mohan Ramaswamy, and Marcelo Eduardo started Work & Co in Dumbo, Brooklyn in May 2013; the firm now runs offices across the US, Latin America, and Europe. Its client roster — Apple, IKEA, Google, Mercedes-Benz, Pfizer, GoFundMe, Nike, Disney — is exceptional for a 425-person firm, a reflection of its engineering-heavy model where design and front-end build happen inside the same team. Work & Co is now part of Accenture Song, an ownership detail worth disclosing.
Services and capabilities: Frog vs Work & Co
| Capability | Frog | Work & Co |
|---|---|---|
| Product design | ✓ | ✓ |
| UX research | ✓ | ✗ |
| Branding | ✗ | ✗ |
| Web development | ✗ | ✓ |
| Mobile development | ✗ | ✓ |
| Design systems | ✓ | ✗ |
Tech stack comparison: Frog vs Work & Co
| Framework / platform | Frog | Work & Co |
|---|---|---|
| Figma | ✓ | ✓ |
| Webflow | N/A | N/A |
| React | N/A | ✓ |
| Framer | N/A | N/A |
| Adobe Creative Suite | ✓ | N/A |
| Design systems/Storybook | ✓ | N/A |
| After Effects | N/A | N/A |
Pricing comparison: Frog vs Work & Co
| Criterion | Frog | Work & Co |
|---|---|---|
| Minimum engagement | Not published | Not published |
| Engagement models | Fixed project, Retainer | Fixed project, Dedicated team |
| Rate transparency | Minimum disclosed | Minimum disclosed |
| Price tier | Mid-market | Mid-market |
Target audience comparison: Frog vs Work & Co
| Dimension | Frog | Work & Co |
|---|---|---|
| Best company size | Startup to mid-market | Startup to mid-market |
| Best industries | Enterprise transformation, Consumer products, Healthcare | Consumer products, Enterprise transformation, Healthcare |
| Best use cases | IoT and connected hardware product design, Automotive and smart-home interface design | Flagship consumer app redesign for a global brand, E-commerce platform rebuild with heavy front-end engineering |
| Typical project type | Fixed project | Fixed project |
Frog vs Work & Co: pros and cons
| Frog | |
|---|---|
| + | One of the few firms in this list spanning both software and physical/IoT hardware design |
| + | 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 |
| 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 list |
| - | A premium client base implies premium pricing even without a published minimum |
| - | Less vertical specialization (fintech, healthcare-specific) than boutiques built around one niche |
Who should choose Frog?
Frog is the right choice for enterprises needing design that covers both digital products and physical/connected hardware in one engagement..
Combined software-and-hardware design capability (IoT, automotive, medical devices) at Capgemini Invent scale. Minimum engagement starts at Not published. Works best with clients in Enterprise transformation, Consumer products, Healthcare.
Who should choose Work & Co?
Work & Co is the right choice for premium consumer and enterprise brands wanting design paired tightly with production-grade front-end engineering..
An engineering-led delivery model behind a client roster (Apple, IKEA, Nike, Disney) unusually strong for its headcount. Minimum engagement starts at Not published. Works best with clients in Consumer products, Enterprise transformation, Healthcare.
Decision matrix: Frog vs Work & Co
| 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 | Work & Co |
| Your budget is at the lower end | Compare: Frog (Not published) vs Work & Co (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 Work & Co
| Use case | Frog fit | Work & Co fit | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| IoT and connected hardware product design | Strong | Limited | Frog |
| Automotive and smart-home interface design | Strong | Limited | Frog |
| Flagship consumer app redesign for a global brand | Limited | Strong | Work & Co |
| E-commerce platform rebuild with heavy front-end engineering | Limited | Strong | Work & Co |
| Fixed-price product build | Limited | Limited | Both equally |
| Dedicated design team augmentation | Limited | Limited | Both equally |
Verdict: Frog vs Work & Co
Work & Co (3.9/5) is the stronger overall choice for most Product Design projects. An engineering-led delivery model behind a client roster (Apple, IKEA, Nike, Disney) unusually strong for its headcount. It is best for premium consumer and enterprise brands wanting design paired tightly with production-grade front-end engineering..
Frog (3.8/5) is the better choice when enterprises needing design that covers both digital products and physical/connected hardware in one engagement.. If your situation matches those criteria, Frog is a competitive option.
Related comparisons
Frog vs Work & Co FAQ
Is Frog better than Work & Co?
Work & Co (3.9/5) scores higher overall, but "better" depends on your use case. Frog is better for enterprises needing design that covers both digital products and physical/connected hardware in one engagement.. Work & Co is better for premium consumer and enterprise brands wanting design paired tightly with production-grade front-end engineering..
How do Frog and Work & Co differ in pricing?
Frog uses project-based, enterprise consulting engagements pricing with a minimum engagement of Not published. Work & Co uses fixed project, dedicated team 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 Work & Co?
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 Work & Co?
Frog's primary differentiator is: combined software-and-hardware design capability (iot, automotive, medical devices) at capgemini invent scale. Work & Co's primary differentiator is: an engineering-led delivery model behind a client roster (apple, ikea, nike, disney) unusually strong for its headcount. They also differ in team size (2,000+ vs 425+), minimum engagement (Not published vs Not published), and primary industries served (Enterprise transformation, Consumer products vs Consumer products, Enterprise transformation).
Verify all details directly with each firm before making a decision.