Frog vs Doberman: full comparison for 2026
Quick verdict
Doberman (3.8/5) edges ahead of Frog (3.7/5) overall. Doberman is the better choice for Nordic/European enterprises, service design backed by EY network. Frog is the stronger option for Enterprises, digital plus physical product design, one team. The right choice depends on your project size, budget, and required tech stack.
Frog vs Doberman: head-to-head summary
| Criterion | Frog | Doberman |
|---|---|---|
| Founded | 1969 | 1998 |
| HQ | San Francisco, CA, USA | Stockholm, Sweden (also Oslo and Copenhagen) |
| Team size | 2,000+ | 100+ (within EY's global network) |
| Rating | 3.7 / 5 | 3.8 / 5 |
| Primary differentiator | Still designs physical hardware (IoT, automotive, medical devices) alongside software — a combined scope most of its peers have abandoned | Nearly three decades of Nordic service-and-product-design work, now backed by EY's global consulting network after its majority-stake acquisition |
| Pricing model | Project-based, enterprise consulting engagements | Enterprise consulting engagement (project-based or retainer) |
| 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 | Financial services / fintech, Enterprise transformation |
Frog vs Doberman: overview
Frog
The frog name has carried through several owners since its 1969 start as Esslinger Design — Aricent, then Altran, then Capgemini, which folded the studio into Capgemini Invent in 2019. Since then, Capgemini has consolidated Fahrenheit 212, Idean, and June21 under the same brand, landing at roughly 2,000 people across 35 studios. The trait that still separates frog from most names on this list: it designs physical products — IoT devices, automotive interiors, medical hardware — with the same team that handles software, a combination getting rarer every year.
Doberman
Doberman started in Stockholm in 1998 and grew into a 100+ person design and innovation firm with studios in Stockholm, Oslo, and Copenhagen before EY acquired a majority stake, folding it into EY's much larger consulting network. Its client list spans Google, Swedish banks, and public-sector organizations, and Doberman positions itself around service and product innovation rather than pure visual design — helping organizations design new services and customer experiences, not just interfaces.
Services and capabilities: Frog vs Doberman
| Capability | Frog | Doberman |
|---|---|---|
| Product design | ✓ | ✓ |
| UX research | ✓ | ✓ |
| Branding | ✗ | ✓ |
| Web development | ✗ | ✗ |
| Mobile development | ✗ | ✗ |
| Design systems | ✓ | ✗ |
Tech stack comparison: Frog vs Doberman
| Framework / platform | Frog | Doberman |
|---|---|---|
| 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 Doberman
| Criterion | Frog | Doberman |
|---|---|---|
| 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 Doberman
| Dimension | Frog | Doberman |
|---|---|---|
| Best company size | Startup to mid-market | Startup to mid-market |
| Best industries | Enterprise transformation, Consumer products, Healthcare | Financial services / fintech, Enterprise transformation |
| Best use cases | IoT and connected hardware product design, Automotive and smart-home interface design | Service design for a Nordic bank or public-sector organization, Product innovation engagement backed by a large consulting network |
| Typical project type | Fixed project | Fixed project |
Frog vs Doberman: pros and cons
| Frog | |
|---|---|
| + | Combined software-and-hardware design capability spanning IoT, automotive, and medical devices |
| + | 35 studios worldwide support genuine multi-region enterprise delivery |
| + | Over five decades of design history and case studies to draw on |
| + | Capgemini Invent backing adds broader technology-consulting resources on top of design |
| - | Now a Capgemini Invent brand rather than an independent studio — a structural fact worth disclosing to clients |
| - | Multiple legacy agencies (Fahrenheit 212, Idean, June21) were folded into the frog name, risking inconsistent team continuity |
| - | Large consulting-firm overhead can slow faster-moving engagements relative to boutique studios |
| Doberman | |
|---|---|
| + | Nearly three decades of continuous operation since 1998, longer than most European boutiques on this list |
| + | Three-city Nordic studio footprint (Stockholm, Oslo, Copenhagen) |
| + | EY's majority-stake backing provides access to a much larger global consulting network |
| + | Client list includes Google alongside major Swedish banks and public-sector organizations |
| - | Majority acquired by EY, so clients are hiring into a large consulting network rather than an independent boutique |
| - | Nordic-centered office footprint may mean less overlap with US or APAC business hours |
| - | Team size figures blend Doberman's own ~100 staff with EY's much larger combined network, making direct capacity comparison harder |
Who should choose Frog?
A typical fit: IoT and connected hardware product design.
Still designs physical hardware (IoT, automotive, medical devices) alongside software — a combined scope most of its peers have abandoned. Minimum engagement starts at Not published. Works best with clients in Enterprise transformation, Consumer products, Healthcare.
Who should choose Doberman?
A typical fit: service design for a Nordic bank or public-sector organization.
Nearly three decades of Nordic service-and-product-design work, now backed by EY's global consulting network after its majority-stake acquisition. Minimum engagement starts at Not published. Works best with clients in Financial services / fintech, Enterprise transformation.
Decision matrix: Frog vs Doberman
| 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 Doberman (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 Doberman
| Use case | Frog fit | Doberman fit | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| IoT and connected hardware product design | Strong | Limited | Frog |
| Automotive and smart-home interface design | Strong | Limited | Frog |
| Service design for a Nordic bank or public-sector organization | Limited | Strong | Doberman |
| Product innovation engagement backed by a large consulting network | Strong | Strong | Both equally |
| Fixed-price product build | Limited | Limited | Both equally |
| Dedicated design team augmentation | Limited | Limited | Both equally |
Verdict: Frog vs Doberman
Doberman (3.8/5) is the stronger overall choice for most Product Design projects. Nearly three decades of Nordic service-and-product-design work, now backed by EY's global consulting network after its majority-stake acquisition.
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 Doberman FAQ
Is Frog better than Doberman?
Doberman (3.8/5) scores higher overall, but "better" depends on your use case. Frog's strongest advantage: combined software-and-hardware design capability spanning IoT, automotive, and medical devices. Doberman's strongest advantage: nearly three decades of continuous operation since 1998, longer than most European boutiques on this list.
How do Frog and Doberman differ in pricing?
Frog uses project-based, enterprise consulting engagements pricing with a minimum engagement of Not published. Doberman uses enterprise consulting engagement (project-based or retainer) 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 Doberman?
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 agency before shortlisting.
What are the main differences between Frog and Doberman?
Frog's primary differentiator is: still designs physical hardware (IoT, automotive, medical devices) alongside software — a combined scope most of its peers have abandoned. Doberman's primary differentiator is: nearly three decades of Nordic service-and-product-design work, now backed by EY's global consulting network after its majority-stake acquisition. They also differ in team size (2,000+ vs 100+ (within EY's global network)), minimum engagement (Not published vs Not published), and primary industries served (Enterprise transformation, Consumer products vs Financial services / fintech, Enterprise transformation).
Verify all details directly with each agency before making a decision.