Cambridge Consultants vs Planet Innovation: full comparison for 2026
Quick verdict
Cambridge Consultants (4.4/5) edges ahead of Planet Innovation (4.2/5) overall. Cambridge Consultants is the better choice for novel technology with high technical risk. Planet Innovation is the stronger option for diagnostics companies in Asia-Pacific and the US. The right choice depends on your project size, budget, and required tech stack.
Cambridge Consultants vs Planet Innovation: head-to-head summary
| Criterion | Cambridge Consultants | Planet Innovation |
|---|---|---|
| Founded | 1960 | 2009 |
| HQ | Cambridge, UK (part of Capgemini) | Box Hill, Victoria, Australia |
| Team size | 900+ | 300–400 |
| Rating | 4.4 / 5 | 4.2 / 5 |
| Primary differentiator | Physicists, chemists and engineers working in one building on problems no off-the-shelf design can solve | Diagnostics roots plus product and commercialization experience in Australia and the US |
| Pricing model | Time and materials, phased fixed project | Fixed project, time and materials |
| Min. engagement | Not disclosed | Not disclosed |
| Primary tech stack | Optics & photonics, RF, Embedded C/C++ | Embedded C/C++, Cloud (AWS/Azure), Microfluidics |
| Industries served | Diagnostics & lab devices, Surgical & robotics, Drug delivery, Digital health | Diagnostics & lab devices, Digital health, Wearables & remote monitoring |
Cambridge Consultants vs Planet Innovation: overview
Cambridge Consultants
Cambridge Consultants has done contract research and product development from Cambridge, UK, since 1960. It became part of Capgemini through the 2020 acquisition of Altran and now sits within Capgemini Invent, with a headcount of about 900 to 1,000. Medical and life sciences is one of its main sectors, and its public work includes the optics behind Ellume's FDA-authorized COVID-19 home test. Projects tend to involve new sensing, surgical robotics, drug delivery or diagnostics technology rather than incremental redesigns.
Planet Innovation
Planet Innovation was founded in Melbourne in 2009 by four diagnostics industry specialists: Eduardo Vom, Sam Lanyon, Stuart Elliott and Troy O'Callaghan. It is headquartered in Box Hill, Victoria, with a facility in Irvine, California, and employs roughly 300 to 390 people depending on the source. The company has focused on regulated medical devices since 2016 and works across diagnostics, medical devices, biotechnology and connected health, including some product ventures of its own.
Services and capabilities: Cambridge Consultants vs Planet Innovation
| Capability | Cambridge Consultants | Planet Innovation |
|---|---|---|
| Electronics & PCB design | ✓ | ✓ |
| Firmware & embedded software | ✓ | ✓ |
| SaMD & companion apps | ✗ | ✗ |
| Connected devices & IoT | ✗ | ✓ |
| Industrial design & human factors | ✓ | ✗ |
| Mechanical engineering | ✓ | ✓ |
| Device cybersecurity | ✗ | ✗ |
| Regulatory & QMS support | ✓ | ✗ |
| Manufacturing & scale-up | ✗ | ✓ |
Tech stack comparison: Cambridge Consultants vs Planet Innovation
| Framework / platform | Cambridge Consultants | Planet Innovation |
|---|---|---|
| Embedded C/C++ | ✓ | ✓ |
| Embedded Linux | N/A | N/A |
| RTOS | N/A | N/A |
| BLE | N/A | N/A |
| Cloud (AWS/Azure) | N/A | ✓ |
| IEC 62304 | N/A | N/A |
| ISO 14971 | N/A | N/A |
| ISO 13485 QMS | ✓ | ✓ |
| Qt | N/A | N/A |
Pricing comparison: Cambridge Consultants vs Planet Innovation
| Criterion | Cambridge Consultants | Planet Innovation |
|---|---|---|
| Minimum engagement | Not disclosed | Not disclosed |
| Engagement models | Consulting, Fixed project, Time & materials | Fixed project, Manufacturing contract, Time & materials |
| Rate transparency | Not public | Not public |
| Price tier | Mid-market | Mid-market |
Target audience comparison: Cambridge Consultants vs Planet Innovation
| Dimension | Cambridge Consultants | Planet Innovation |
|---|---|---|
| Best company size | Startup to mid-market | Startup to mid-market |
| Best industries | Diagnostics & lab devices, Surgical & robotics, Drug delivery | Diagnostics & lab devices, Digital health, Wearables & remote monitoring |
| Best use cases | Feasibility of a new sensing method for a point-of-care diagnostic, Early-stage surgical robotics architecture | Developing a connected point-of-care diagnostic, Commercialization planning for an Australian medtech startup |
| Typical project type | Consulting | Fixed project |
Cambridge Consultants vs Planet Innovation: pros and cons
| Cambridge Consultants | |
|---|---|
| + | Rare breadth of science and engineering disciplines for early, risky technology work |
| + | Public medtech credits such as the Ellume home-test optics |
| + | Backing of Capgemini gives access to digital and manufacturing partners for later phases |
| + | Strong at feasibility studies that tell you whether an idea can work before you fund a full program |
| - | Owned by Capgemini since 2020, so pricing and processes follow a large-group model |
| - | Among the most expensive options on this list; small startups often find the minimum budget too high |
| - | Best at invention and early development; routine sustaining engineering is not where it adds most value |
| Planet Innovation | |
|---|---|
| + | Founders came from the diagnostics industry, and diagnostics is still its strongest area |
| + | Has launched products of its own, so it understands commercialization as well as engineering |
| + | Australian base offers time-zone coverage for Asia-Pacific clients |
| + | Irvine facility serves US clients locally |
| - | Runs its own product ventures, so ask how client work is prioritized |
| - | Less known in Europe |
| - | Headcount and certifications should be confirmed directly |
Who should choose Cambridge Consultants?
A typical fit: feasibility of a new sensing method for a point-of-care diagnostic.
Physicists, chemists and engineers working in one building on problems no off-the-shelf design can solve. Minimum engagement is not publicly disclosed. Works best with clients in Diagnostics & lab devices, Surgical & robotics, Drug delivery, Digital health.
Who should choose Planet Innovation?
A typical fit: developing a connected point-of-care diagnostic.
Diagnostics roots plus product and commercialization experience in Australia and the US. Minimum engagement is not publicly disclosed. Works best with clients in Diagnostics & lab devices, Digital health, Wearables & remote monitoring.
Decision matrix: Cambridge Consultants vs Planet Innovation
| Your situation | Recommended choice |
|---|---|
| You need full-ownership delivery on a defined project scope | Cambridge Consultants |
| You need a large dedicated team for an ongoing programme | Check each company's engagement model |
| Your budget is at the lower end | Compare: Cambridge Consultants (Not disclosed) vs Planet Innovation (Not disclosed) |
| You need specialist depth in a specific vertical | Cambridge Consultants |
| 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: Cambridge Consultants vs Planet Innovation
| Use case | Cambridge Consultants fit | Planet Innovation fit | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Feasibility of a new sensing method for a point-of-care diagnostic | Strong | Limited | Cambridge Consultants |
| Early-stage surgical robotics architecture | Strong | Limited | Cambridge Consultants |
| Developing a connected point-of-care diagnostic | Limited | Strong | Planet Innovation |
| Commercialization planning for an Australian medtech startup | Limited | Strong | Planet Innovation |
Verdict: Cambridge Consultants vs Planet Innovation
Cambridge Consultants (4.4/5) is the stronger overall choice for most Medical Device Development projects. Physicists, chemists and engineers working in one building on problems no off-the-shelf design can solve.
Planet Innovation (4.2/5) is worth a look if you need commercialization planning for an Australian medtech startup. If your situation matches that, Planet Innovation is a competitive option.
Related comparisons
Cambridge Consultants vs Planet Innovation FAQ
Is Cambridge Consultants better than Planet Innovation?
Cambridge Consultants (4.4/5) scores higher overall, but "better" depends on your use case. Cambridge Consultants's strongest advantage: rare breadth of science and engineering disciplines for early, risky technology work. Planet Innovation's strongest advantage: founders came from the diagnostics industry, and diagnostics is still its strongest area.
How do Cambridge Consultants and Planet Innovation differ in pricing?
Cambridge Consultants uses time and materials, phased fixed project pricing. Planet Innovation uses fixed project, time and materials pricing. Neither firm publishes a full rate card; a discovery call is required for project-specific quotes.
Which is better for enterprise: Cambridge Consultants or Planet Innovation?
Planet Innovation 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 Cambridge Consultants and Planet Innovation?
Cambridge Consultants's primary differentiator is: Physicists, chemists and engineers working in one building on problems no off-the-shelf design can solve. Planet Innovation's primary differentiator is: diagnostics roots plus product and commercialization experience in Australia and the US. They also differ in team size (900+ vs 300–400), minimum engagement (Not disclosed vs Not disclosed), and primary industries served (Diagnostics & lab devices, Surgical & robotics vs Diagnostics & lab devices, Digital health).
Verify all details directly with each company before making a decision.