How many New York Mobile Development agencies have documented mobile MVP development work?

11 of the 44 Mobile Development agencies Vendar tracks in New York have at least one mobile MVP development claim on file under the published rubric; 1 of the 11 ranked has an outside source naming it, and 1 has one that describes the work rather than listing the service. The other 33 New York agencies are listed unranked until evidence is added.

Which New York mobile MVP development agency fits my type of business?

By the clients named in their documented mobile MVP development work: Dental, medical and wellness: Moon Technolabs (#3); Shops, restaurants and retail: JumpGrowth (#9). This comes from client reviews and case studies on file, not from the agencies' own positioning; the number after each name is its place in the ranking.

What does mobile MVP development cost in New York?

Among the ranked agencies that disclose a monthly floor, retainers start at $20,000/month and the median floor is $20,000/month. 1 of 11 ranked agencies disclose some pricing signal.

How is this list different from the New York Mobile Development page?

The New York Mobile Development page ranks every Mobile Development agency serving the city. This page keeps only the agencies with mobile MVP development evidence on file, scores them on the mobile MVP development query with the published model, and cites the claims behind every position. The model, its weights and the rubric are on the How we rank page.

When was this list updated?

The newest profile verification among ranked agencies is September 14, 2026; the newest evidence claim was checked on November 3, 2026. Scores are recomputed from the profiles whenever a profile changes; the ranking model is version 2026.11.7.

DevelopmentMobile Development New YorkMobile MVP Development

New York / Mobile MVP Development

Best Mobile MVP Development Companies in New York (2026)

11 of 44 agencies are ranked on documented mobile MVP development work; 1 confirmed by an independent source; payment does not affect the order.

Data as of November 3, 2026 · Evidence-weighted ranking 2026.11.7 · How this ranking works ↓

The answer in three lines

Compare top 3

1NoGood 70 · From $20,000/month · clients 4.0/5 (14)7 mobile MVP development claims on file: 1 third-party, 1 first-party, 5 profile signals; outside claims from 2 distinct sites
2DOOR3 54 · price not disclosed · clients 4.5/5 (15)4 mobile MVP development claims on file: 0 third-party, 4 first-party, 0 profile signals; outside claims from 1 distinct site
3Moon Technolabs 50 · price not disclosed · clients 4.4/5 (175)4 mobile MVP development claims on file: 0 third-party, 4 first-party, 0 profile signals; outside claims from 1 distinct site

Budget in New York: disclosed monthly floors run from $20,000, median $20,000; 1 of 11 disclose a price.

11 ranked agencies

BudgetSort

For

NoGood

New York, NY, USA · team 10-49

HQ in New York · From $20,000/month · clients 4.0/5 (14) 1 documented

NoGood helped Steer, an electric car subscription startup, increase their activations by generating new active members. This involved encouraging users to… (Independent source, techcrunch.com)

70/100

High confidence

Verified · Sources checked Sep 2026

View profile

Compare

DOOR3

New York, NY, USA · team 250 · since 2002

HQ in New York · pricing not disclosed · clients 4.5/5 (15) Agency's own published cases

DOOR3 was engaged to design and build Dr. Treat's mobile and desktop product, from the project's beginnings to an MVP launch, for the boutique veterinary… (Agency's own words, door3.com)

No independent source names mobile MVP development work; the evidence is first-party or editorial.

54/100

Moderate confidence

Not verified

View profile

Compare

3MT

Moon Technolabs

Ahmedabad, India · team 400+ · since 2009

serves New York from Ahmedabad · pricing not disclosed · clients 4.4/5 (175) Agency's own published cases

Flavio S., a Founder & Managing Director from Germany, said Moon Technolabs successfully developed apps for him and that he is highly satisfied with the… (Agency's own words, moontechnolabs.com)

No independent source names mobile MVP development work; the evidence is first-party or editorial.

50/100

Moderate confidence

Not verified

View profile

Compare

iQlance Solutions

New York, NY, USA · team 51-200 · since 2010

HQ in New York · pricing not disclosed · clients 4.7/5 (10) Agency's own published cases

iQlance Solutions developed CineVerse, a feature-rich movie streaming app, taking it from idea to launch in 8 months. (Agency's own words, iqlance.com)

No independent source names mobile MVP development work; the evidence is first-party or editorial.

50/100

Moderate confidence

Not verified

View profile

Compare

Appicoders

New York, USA · team 100+ · since 2014

HQ in New York · pricing not disclosed · clients 4.9/5 (12) Agency's own published cases

Kevin Martin, a customer, states that the app development process went according to the agreed schedule and that the finished prototype met or exceeded… (Agency's own words, appicoders.com)

No independent source names mobile MVP development work; the evidence is first-party or editorial.

47/100

Moderate confidence

Not verified

View profile

Compare

Suffescom

New York, USA · team 250+ · since 2013

HQ in New York · pricing not disclosed Agency's own published cases

A client identified as Sarah Mitchell, Product Manager at a Healthcare Startup, states that Suffescom's developers delivered the company's mobile app… (Agency's own words, suffescom.com)

No independent source names mobile MVP development work; the evidence is first-party or editorial.

44/100

Moderate confidence

Not verified

View profile

Compare

Big Human

New York, NY, USA · team 35 · since 2010

HQ in New York · pricing not disclosed · clients 4.3/5 (8) Agency's own published cases

Big Human did startup branding work for Bloom, a mental health app, covering brand strategy, brand positioning and messaging, and design, resulting in a… (Agency's own words, bighuman.com)

No independent source names mobile MVP development work; the evidence is first-party or editorial.

43/100

Moderate confidence

Not verified

View profile

Compare

New York App Devs

New York, NY, USA

HQ in New York · pricing not disclosed · clients 5.0/5 (2) Agency's own published cases

Vaultly founder and CEO Dana Reyes says in a testimonial that New York App Devs shipped the company's MVP in nine weeks. (Agency's own words, newyorkappdevs.com)

No independent source names mobile MVP development work; the evidence is first-party or editorial.

42/100

Moderate confidence

Not verified

View profile

Compare

JumpGrowth

Dallas, TX, USA · team 51-200 · since 2018

serves New York from Dallas · pricing not disclosed · clients 4.4/5 (5) Agency's own published cases

JumpGrowth lists Fireflies as a case study: an app for finding bars and restaurants while earning loyalty points, taken from idea to a first release. (Agency's own words, jumpgrowth.com)

No independent source names mobile MVP development work; the evidence is first-party or editorial.

41/100

Moderate confidence

Not verified

View profile

Compare

10A

Apptunix

New York, NY, USA · team 700+

HQ in New York · pricing not disclosed · clients 4.2/5 (29) Agency's own published cases

Apptunix built a mobile-first fashion e-commerce platform with AI personalization for Namshi, with results including 54% increased revenue, 27% higher… (Agency's own words, apptunix.com)

No independent source names mobile MVP development work; the evidence is first-party or editorial.

39/100

Moderate confidence

Not verified

View profile

Compare

33 more agencies serve New York, but without externally confirmed mobile MVP development work

This is an absence of evidence, not a quality rating.

One sourced claim moves an agency into the ranking.

Only Vendar profile tags name mobile MVP development; no outside source on file yet. (16)

No mobile MVP development claim on file yet. (17)

Frequently asked questions (6)

How many New York Mobile Development agencies have documented mobile MVP development work?: 11 of the 44 Mobile Development agencies Vendar tracks in New York have at least one mobile MVP development claim on file under the published rubric; 1 of the 11 ranked has an outside source naming it, and 1 has one that describes the work rather than listing the service. The other 33 New York agencies are listed unranked until evidence is added.
Which New York mobile MVP development agency fits my type of business?: By the clients named in their documented mobile MVP development work: Dental, medical and wellness: Moon Technolabs (#3); Shops, restaurants and retail: JumpGrowth (#9). This comes from client reviews and case studies on file, not from the agencies' own positioning; the number after each name is its place in the ranking.
What does mobile MVP development cost in New York?: Among the ranked agencies that disclose a monthly floor, retainers start at $20,000/month and the median floor is $20,000/month. 1 of 11 ranked agencies disclose some pricing signal.
Which of them are verified?: 1 of 11 ranked agencies are verified. Verified means Vendar confirmed the company, its service and its market on official sources and stamped the profile with the date. A participation status or a partner relationship does not make a profile verified. The lowest disclosed floor among verified agencies is NoGood at $20,000/month.
How is this list different from the New York Mobile Development page?: The New York Mobile Development page ranks every Mobile Development agency serving the city. This page keeps only the agencies with mobile MVP development evidence on file, scores them on the mobile MVP development query with the published model, and cites the claims behind every position. The model, its weights and the rubric are on the How we rank page.
When was this list updated?: The newest profile verification among ranked agencies is September 14, 2026; the newest evidence claim was checked on November 3, 2026. Scores are recomputed from the profiles whenever a profile changes; the ranking model is version 2026.11.7.

Get my shortlist Machine-readable version All details ↓

All detailsThe full table, the rubric, the rules and the limits: the same data the machine feed serves for this ranking.Open ↓

D1Full ranking table11 ranked · click a column to sort

#	Agency	Score	Evid./30	Fit/25	Capab./15	Reliab./10	Transp./10	Reput./5	Cred./5	Pen.	Conf.	Claims	Verified
1	NoGood	70	25.7	25	1.6	3	10	2.4	2.5		0.86	7/1	Sep 14, 2026
2	DOOR3	54	14.8	19	9.3	7.2	2.5	2.7	0	-2	0.8	4/0	Not verified
3	Moon Technolabs	50	15	12.4	8.8	7.2	2.5	4.4	1.3	-2	0.8	4/0	Not verified
4	iQlance Solutions	50	12	19	8.5	7.2	2.5	2.4	0	-2	0.8	2/0	Not verified
5	Appicoders	47	9	19	8.4	7.2	2.5	2.7	0	-2	0.8	2/0	Not verified
6	Suffescom	44	9	19	8.5	7.2	2.5	0	0	-2	0.8	2/0	Not verified
7	Big Human	43	6	19	8	7.2	2.5	2.1	0	-2	0.8	1/0	Not verified
8	New York App Devs	42	12	19	8.5	3	0	1.2	0	-2	0.8	2/0	Not verified
9	JumpGrowth	41	12	12.4	8.3	6	2.5	1.7	0	-2	0.8	2/0	Not verified
10	Apptunix	39	9	15.5	7.9	3	2.5	3.1	0	-2	0.8	1/0	Not verified
11	AOX Apps	38	6	19	8.7	3	2.5	0.8	0	-2	0.8	1/0	Not verified

Pool 44 · ranked 11 · unranked 33 (16 with profile tags only) · verified 1 · pricing disclosed 1 · case studies on file 8 · an outside source names the work 1 · an outside document describes it 1 · lowest verified floor NoGood $20,000/month

Claims: claims for this need in the feed / of them from a third party. Confidence is the number behind the High, Moderate and Lower labels; it never changes the order.

D1Breakdown per agencyPoints, facts, claims with weights and reviews behind every position

#1 NoGood70/100 · High confidence 0.86

Confirmed by an independent source · headquarters in the city · From $20,000/month · projects from $8,000 · 171 claims on file

Evidence for this query	25.7/30	0.856	7 mobile MVP development claims on file: 1 third-party, 1 first-party, 5 profile signals; outside claims from 2 distinct sites; NoGood helped Steer, an electric car subscription startup, increase their activations by generating new active members. This involved… (techcrunch.com, verified); NoGood helped Invisibly, a Founders Fund-backed startup, increase app installs by 103% month-over-month. (nogood.io, claimed)
Fit to this query	25/25	1	Headquartered in New York (New York, NY, USA); Retainers from $20,000/month, inside the mobile MVP development band; Profile names startup clients
Capability depth	1.6/15	0.108	7 of 62 listed services are Mobile Development services; 7 of 171 claims on file concern mobile MVP development
Reliability	3/10	0.3	Founding year not disclosed; Retention not documented
Transparency	10/10	1	Pricing disclosed (From $20,000/month); Team size 10-49; Workflow or reporting cadence documented
Reputation	2.4/5	0.47	14 third-party reviews at 4.0
Market credibility	2.5/5	0.5	2 recognitions with a source on file: a press mention per techcrunch.com, a press mention per builtin.com; Sources: techcrunch.com, checked Nov 2026; builtin.com, checked Nov 2026

NoGood helped Steer, an electric car subscription startup, increase their activations by generating new active members. This involved encouraging users to download the app, upload a license, and get approved, as well as delivering a car to a member’s door, having them drive that car and leaving a review. They were able to demonstrate signup traction for Steer and help them launch in under three months.
Independent source · techcrunch.com · verified: Checked against the source page by Vendar. · weight 1 · describes work · checked Nov 2, 2026
NoGood helped Invisibly, a Founders Fund-backed startup, increase app installs by 103% month-over-month.
Agency's own words · nogood.io · claimed: Recorded as the source states it; not independently confirmed. · weight 0.8 · describes work · checked Nov 2, 2026
Profile service tag: mobile_mvp_development.
Vendar profile field · Vendar profile · internal_signal: status on file · weight 0.4 · checked Sep 14, 2026
Profile service tag: mobile-mvp-development.
Vendar profile field · Vendar profile · internal_signal: status on file · weight 0.4 · checked Sep 14, 2026
Editorial use case: New York buyers comparing mobile app development teams across iOS app development, Android app development, cross-platform app development, mobile MVP development, mobile backend and API integration, app launch, modernization, and support..
Vendar profile field · Vendar profile · internal_signal: status on file · weight 0.4 · checked Sep 14, 2026
Editorial use case: New York shortlist fit for Mobile Development: Cross-platform App Development, Mobile MVP Development, Mobile App Modernization, Mobile App Maintenance and Support, Mobile Backend and API Integration..
Vendar profile field · Vendar profile · internal_signal: status on file · weight 0.4 · checked Sep 14, 2026
Listed service on Vendar: Mobile MVP Development.
Vendar profile field · Vendar profile · internal_signal: status on file · weight 0.3 · checked Sep 14, 2026

Reviews: Google 4.6 from 10 reviews; Trustpilot 2.6 from 4 reviews. Ratings never count as evidence for this question.

Best for (profile): Startups, Founders, B2B / SaaS, Revenue-focused SEO

#2 DOOR354/100 · Moderate confidence 0.8

Published by the agency on its own site · headquarters in the city · price not disclosed · 42 claims on file

Evidence for this query	14.8/30	0.492	4 mobile MVP development claims on file: 0 third-party, 4 first-party, 0 profile signals; outside claims from 1 distinct site; DOOR3 was engaged to design and build Dr. Treat's mobile and desktop product, from the project's beginnings to an MVP launch, for the… (door3.com, claimed); In less than 6 months after being approached, DOOR3's team transformed Dr. Treat's concept into a complete MVP that packaged 24/7 in-app… (door3.com, claimed)
Fit to this query	19/25	0.76	Headquartered in New York (New York, NY, USA); Pricing not disclosed; Profile names startup clients
Capability depth	9.3/15	0.619	1 of 1 listed services are Mobile Development services; 4 of 42 claims on file concern mobile MVP development
Reliability	7.2/10	0.72	In business since 2002; Retention not documented
Transparency	2.5/10	0.25	Pricing not disclosed; Team size 250; Process not documented
Reputation	2.7/5	0.542	15 third-party reviews at 4.5
Market credibility	0/5	0	No awards, certifications or media mentions with a source on file

Penalties: Profile below decision-ready status -2 (Profile status is ready_for_render_audit.)

Limits: No independent source names mobile MVP development work; the evidence is first-party or editorial.; Pricing not disclosed; budget fit cannot be checked before outreach.; Never verified against official sources.; Profile below decision-ready status: Profile status is ready_for_render_audit.

DOOR3 was engaged to design and build Dr. Treat's mobile and desktop product, from the project's beginnings to an MVP launch, for the boutique veterinary care startup.
Agency's own words · door3.com · claimed: Recorded as the source states it; not independently confirmed. · weight 0.8 · describes work · checked Nov 1, 2026
In less than 6 months after being approached, DOOR3's team transformed Dr. Treat's concept into a complete MVP that packaged 24/7 in-app urgent care contact, appointment scheduling, medical records, document storage, billing and subscription management, and user and pet profiles into one app.
Agency's own words · door3.com · claimed: Recorded as the source states it; not independently confirmed. · weight 0.8 · describes work · checked Nov 1, 2026
For Dr. Treat, DOOR3 designed and built refined desktop and mobile experiences, working from initial discovery through MVP launch.
Agency's own words · door3.com · claimed: Recorded as the source states it; not independently confirmed. · weight 0.8 · describes work · checked Nov 1, 2026
Dr. Treat gave DOOR3's designers full creative direction to expand the startup's graphics into a complete design system applied across their website and app as well as in a branding and marketing strategy; the outcome spans design, branding, and marketing and is not attributable to one service.
Agency's own words · door3.com · claimed: Recorded as the source states it; not independently confirmed. · weight 0.6 · describes work · checked Nov 1, 2026

Reviews: Google 4.5 from 15 reviews. Ratings never count as evidence for this question.

#3 Moon Technolabs50/100 · Moderate confidence 0.8

Published by the agency on its own site · serves the city from Ahmedabad, India · price not disclosed · 58 claims on file

Evidence for this query	15/30	0.5	4 mobile MVP development claims on file: 0 third-party, 4 first-party, 0 profile signals; outside claims from 1 distinct site; Flavio S., a Founder & Managing Director from Germany, said Moon Technolabs successfully developed apps for him and that he is highly… (moontechnolabs.com, claimed); Yousef A., Founder of Challenger BH in Jordan, said Moon Technolabs fulfilled his requirements for a sports mobile application. (moontechnolabs.com, claimed)
Fit to this query	12.4/25	0.495	Lists New York as a service region; headquartered in Ahmedabad, India; Pricing not disclosed
Capability depth	8.8/15	0.586	1 of 1 listed services are Mobile Development services; 4 of 58 claims on file concern mobile MVP development
Reliability	7.2/10	0.72	In business since 2009; Retention not documented
Transparency	2.5/10	0.25	Pricing not disclosed; Team size 400+; Process not documented
Reputation	4.4/5	0.88	175 third-party reviews at 4.4
Market credibility	1.3/5	0.25	1 recognition with a source on file: an award per cutshort.io; Sources: cutshort.io, checked Nov 2026

Penalties: Profile below decision-ready status -2 (Profile status is ready_for_render_audit.)

Flavio S., a Founder & Managing Director from Germany, said Moon Technolabs successfully developed apps for him and that he is highly satisfied with the outcomes.
Agency's own words · moontechnolabs.com · claimed: Recorded as the source states it; not independently confirmed. · weight 0.8 · describes work · checked Nov 2, 2026
Yousef A., Founder of Challenger BH in Jordan, said Moon Technolabs fulfilled his requirements for a sports mobile application.
Agency's own words · moontechnolabs.com · claimed: Recorded as the source states it; not independently confirmed. · weight 0.8 · describes work · checked Nov 2, 2026
Moon Technolabs lists Moon Invoice, a comprehensive accounting software app for time and expense tracking, as a delivered MVP solution built on Laravel, PHP, and CodeIgniter and available on iOS, macOS, Android, Web, and Windows.
Agency's own words · moontechnolabs.com · claimed: Recorded as the source states it; not independently confirmed. · weight 0.8 · describes work · checked Nov 2, 2026
Moon Technolabs lists MedGo, an online healthcare platform where patients order prescriptions and medical supplies for doorstep delivery, as a delivered MVP solution built on Android and iOS.
Agency's own words · moontechnolabs.com · claimed: Recorded as the source states it; not independently confirmed. · weight 0.8 · describes work · checked Nov 2, 2026

Reviews: Google 4.4 from 175 reviews. Ratings never count as evidence for this question.

#4 iQlance Solutions50/100 · Moderate confidence 0.8

Published by the agency on its own site · headquarters in the city · price not disclosed · 36 claims on file

Evidence for this query	12/30	0.4	2 mobile MVP development claims on file: 0 third-party, 2 first-party, 0 profile signals; outside claims from 1 distinct site; iQlance Solutions developed CineVerse, a feature-rich movie streaming app, taking it from idea to launch in 8 months. (iqlance.com, claimed); iQlance Solutions developed CineVerse, a feature-rich movie streaming app; the page lists this project in Dallas, USA with an 8 months… (iqlance.com, claimed)
Fit to this query	19/25	0.76	Headquartered in New York (New York, NY, USA); Pricing not disclosed; Profile names startup clients
Capability depth	8.5/15	0.569	1 of 1 listed services are Mobile Development services; 2 of 36 claims on file concern mobile MVP development
Reliability	7.2/10	0.72	In business since 2010; Retention not documented
Transparency	2.5/10	0.25	Pricing not disclosed; Team size 51-200; Process not documented
Reputation	2.4/5	0.489	10 third-party reviews at 4.7
Market credibility	0/5	0	No awards, certifications or media mentions with a source on file

Penalties: Profile below decision-ready status -2 (Profile status is ready_for_render_audit.)

iQlance Solutions developed CineVerse, a feature-rich movie streaming app, taking it from idea to launch in 8 months.
Agency's own words · iqlance.com · claimed: Recorded as the source states it; not independently confirmed. · weight 0.8 · describes work · checked Nov 2, 2026
iQlance Solutions developed CineVerse, a feature-rich movie streaming app; the page lists this project in Dallas, USA with an 8 months idea-to-launch timeline, built with React Native, AWS, Node.JS, and Mongo DB.
Agency's own words · iqlance.com · claimed: Recorded as the source states it; not independently confirmed. · weight 0.8 · describes work · checked Nov 2, 2026

Reviews: Google 5 from 7 reviews; Trustpilot 4 from 3 reviews. Ratings never count as evidence for this question.

#5 Appicoders47/100 · Moderate confidence 0.8

Published by the agency on its own site · headquarters in the city · price not disclosed · 44 claims on file

Evidence for this query	9/30	0.3	2 mobile MVP development claims on file: 0 third-party, 2 first-party, 0 profile signals; outside claims from 1 distinct site; Kevin Martin, a customer, states that the app development process went according to the agreed schedule and that the finished prototype… (appicoders.com, claimed); Kevin Martin recommended Appicoders' service, noting that the finished prototype was met and in many cases exceeded expectations. (appicoders.com, claimed)
Fit to this query	19/25	0.76	Headquartered in New York (New York, USA); Pricing not disclosed; Profile names startup clients
Capability depth	8.4/15	0.557	1 of 1 listed services are Mobile Development services; 2 of 44 claims on file concern mobile MVP development
Reliability	7.2/10	0.72	In business since 2014; Retention not documented
Transparency	2.5/10	0.25	Pricing not disclosed; Team size 100+; Process not documented
Reputation	2.7/5	0.546	12 third-party reviews at 4.9
Market credibility	0/5	0	No awards, certifications or media mentions with a source on file

Penalties: Profile below decision-ready status -2 (Profile status is ready_for_render_audit.)

Kevin Martin, a customer, states that the app development process went according to the agreed schedule and that the finished prototype met or exceeded his expectations.
Agency's own words · appicoders.com · claimed: Recorded as the source states it; not independently confirmed. · weight 0.6 · describes work · checked Nov 1, 2026
Kevin Martin recommended Appicoders' service, noting that the finished prototype was met and in many cases exceeded expectations.
Agency's own words · appicoders.com · claimed: Recorded as the source states it; not independently confirmed. · weight 0.6 · describes work · checked Nov 2, 2026

Reviews: Google 5 from 11 reviews; Trustpilot 3.7 from 1 reviews. Ratings never count as evidence for this question.

#6 Suffescom44/100 · Moderate confidence 0.8

Published by the agency on its own site · headquarters in the city · price not disclosed · 37 claims on file

Evidence for this query	9/30	0.3	2 mobile MVP development claims on file: 0 third-party, 2 first-party, 0 profile signals; outside claims from 1 distinct site; A client identified as Sarah Mitchell, Product Manager at a Healthcare Startup, states that Suffescom's developers delivered the company's… (suffescom.com, claimed); A client identified as Sarah Mitchell, Product Manager of a Healthcare Startup, states that Suffescom's developers delivered a mobile app… (suffescom.com, claimed)
Fit to this query	19/25	0.76	Headquartered in New York (New York, USA); Pricing not disclosed; Profile names healthcare provider clients
Capability depth	8.5/15	0.568	1 of 1 listed services are Mobile Development services; 2 of 37 claims on file concern mobile MVP development
Reliability	7.2/10	0.72	In business since 2013; Retention not documented
Transparency	2.5/10	0.25	Pricing not disclosed; Team size 250+; Process not documented
Reputation	0/5	0	No third-party reviews on file
Market credibility	0/5	0	No awards, certifications or media mentions with a source on file

Penalties: Profile below decision-ready status -2 (Profile status is ready_for_render_audit.)

A client identified as Sarah Mitchell, Product Manager at a Healthcare Startup, states that Suffescom's developers delivered the company's mobile app solution with all required functionalities on time.
Agency's own words · suffescom.com · claimed: Recorded as the source states it; not independently confirmed. · weight 0.6 · describes work · checked Nov 1, 2026
A client identified as Sarah Mitchell, Product Manager of a Healthcare Startup, states that Suffescom's developers delivered a mobile app solution with all required functionalities on time.
Agency's own words · suffescom.com · claimed: Recorded as the source states it; not independently confirmed. · weight 0.6 · describes work · checked Nov 1, 2026

#7 Big Human43/100 · Moderate confidence 0.8

Published by the agency on its own site · headquarters in the city · price not disclosed · 38 claims on file

Evidence for this query	6/30	0.2	1 mobile MVP development claim on file: 0 third-party, 1 first-party, 0 profile signals; outside claims from 1 distinct site; Big Human did startup branding work for Bloom, a mental health app, covering brand strategy, brand positioning and messaging, and design… (bighuman.com, claimed)
Fit to this query	19/25	0.76	Headquartered in New York (New York, NY, USA); Pricing not disclosed; Profile names startup clients
Capability depth	8/15	0.5329999999999999	1 of 1 listed services are Mobile Development services; 1 of 38 claims on file concern mobile MVP development
Reliability	7.2/10	0.72	In business since 2010; Retention not documented
Transparency	2.5/10	0.25	Pricing not disclosed; Team size 35; Process not documented
Reputation	2.1/5	0.41	8 third-party reviews at 4.3
Market credibility	0/5	0	No awards, certifications or media mentions with a source on file

Penalties: Profile below decision-ready status -2 (Profile status is ready_for_render_audit.)

Big Human did startup branding work for Bloom, a mental health app, covering brand strategy, brand positioning and messaging, and design, resulting in a refreshed, personalized, self-guided interactive video therapy experience.
Agency's own words · bighuman.com · claimed: Recorded as the source states it; not independently confirmed. · weight 0.6 · describes work · checked Nov 3, 2026

Reviews: Google 4.3 from 8 reviews. Ratings never count as evidence for this question.

#8 New York App Devs42/100 · Moderate confidence 0.8

Published by the agency on its own site · headquarters in the city · price not disclosed · 38 claims on file

Evidence for this query	12/30	0.4	2 mobile MVP development claims on file: 0 third-party, 2 first-party, 0 profile signals; outside claims from 1 distinct site; Vaultly founder and CEO Dana Reyes says in a testimonial that New York App Devs shipped the company's MVP in nine weeks. (newyorkappdevs.com, claimed); Vaultly's founder and CEO said New York App Devs shipped its MVP in nine weeks; the product looked like a Series-B product, and investors… (newyorkappdevs.com, claimed)
Fit to this query	19/25	0.76	Headquartered in New York (New York, NY, USA); Pricing not disclosed; Profile names healthcare clients
Capability depth	8.5/15	0.5660000000000001	1 of 1 listed services are Mobile Development services; 2 of 38 claims on file concern mobile MVP development
Reliability	3/10	0.3	Founding year not disclosed; Retention not documented
Transparency	0/10	0	Pricing not disclosed; Team size not disclosed; Process not documented
Reputation	1.2/5	0.239	2 third-party reviews at 5.0
Market credibility	0/5	0	No awards, certifications or media mentions with a source on file

Penalties: Profile below decision-ready status -2 (Profile status is ready_for_render_audit.)

Vaultly founder and CEO Dana Reyes says in a testimonial that New York App Devs shipped the company's MVP in nine weeks.
Agency's own words · newyorkappdevs.com · claimed: Recorded as the source states it; not independently confirmed. · weight 0.8 · describes work · checked Nov 1, 2026
Vaultly's founder and CEO said New York App Devs shipped its MVP in nine weeks; the product looked like a Series-B product, and investors noticed.
Agency's own words · newyorkappdevs.com · claimed: Recorded as the source states it; not independently confirmed. · weight 0.8 · describes work · checked Nov 2, 2026

Reviews: Google 5 from 2 reviews. Ratings never count as evidence for this question.

#9 JumpGrowth41/100 · Moderate confidence 0.8

Published by the agency on its own site · serves the city from Dallas, TX, USA · price not disclosed · 49 claims on file

Evidence for this query	12/30	0.4	2 mobile MVP development claims on file: 0 third-party, 2 first-party, 0 profile signals; outside claims from 1 distinct site; JumpGrowth lists Fireflies as a case study: an app for finding bars and restaurants while earning loyalty points, taken from idea to a… (jumpgrowth.com, claimed); JumpGrowth lists VowTimer as a case study: an app for wedding guests, taken from idea to a first release. (jumpgrowth.com, claimed)
Fit to this query	12.4/25	0.495	Lists New York as a service region; headquartered in Dallas, TX, USA; Pricing not disclosed
Capability depth	8.3/15	0.551	1 of 1 listed services are Mobile Development services; 2 of 49 claims on file concern mobile MVP development
Reliability	6/10	0.6	In business since 2018; Retention not documented
Transparency	2.5/10	0.25	Pricing not disclosed; Team size 51-200; Process not documented
Reputation	1.7/5	0.342	5 third-party reviews at 4.4
Market credibility	0/5	0	No awards, certifications or media mentions with a source on file

Penalties: Profile below decision-ready status -2 (Profile status is ready_for_render_audit.)

JumpGrowth lists Fireflies as a case study: an app for finding bars and restaurants while earning loyalty points, taken from idea to a first release.
Agency's own words · jumpgrowth.com · claimed: Recorded as the source states it; not independently confirmed. · weight 0.8 · describes work · checked Nov 1, 2026
JumpGrowth lists VowTimer as a case study: an app for wedding guests, taken from idea to a first release.
Agency's own words · jumpgrowth.com · claimed: Recorded as the source states it; not independently confirmed. · weight 0.8 · describes work · checked Nov 1, 2026

Reviews: Google 5 from 2 reviews; Trustpilot 4 from 3 reviews. Ratings never count as evidence for this question.

#10 Apptunix39/100 · Moderate confidence 0.8

Published by the agency on its own site · headquarters in the city · price not disclosed · 52 claims on file

Evidence for this query	9/30	0.3	1 mobile MVP development claim on file: 0 third-party, 1 first-party, 0 profile signals; outside claims from 1 distinct site; Apptunix built a mobile-first fashion e-commerce platform with AI personalization for Namshi, with results including 54% increased… (apptunix.com, claimed)
Fit to this query	15.5/25	0.62	Headquartered in New York (New York, NY, USA); Pricing not disclosed
Capability depth	7.9/15	0.524	1 of 1 listed services are Mobile Development services; 1 of 52 claims on file concern mobile MVP development
Reliability	3/10	0.3	Founding year not disclosed; Retention not documented
Transparency	2.5/10	0.25	Pricing not disclosed; Team size 700+; Process not documented
Reputation	3.1/5	0.62	29 third-party reviews at 4.2
Market credibility	0/5	0	No awards, certifications or media mentions with a source on file

Penalties: Profile below decision-ready status -2 (Profile status is ready_for_render_audit.)

Apptunix built a mobile-first fashion e-commerce platform with AI personalization for Namshi, with results including 54% increased revenue, 27% higher conversion rate, 99.9% platform uptime, and 3X faster app performance.
Agency's own words · apptunix.com · claimed: Recorded as the source states it; not independently confirmed. · weight 0.9 · describes work · checked Nov 1, 2026

Reviews: Google 5 from 4 reviews; Trustpilot 4.1 from 25 reviews. Ratings never count as evidence for this question.

Positions 11 to 11: the same breakdown is on each agency's profile, linked from the table above, and in the machine-readable version below.

D2What counts as evidence for this questionRubric 2026.11

A claim counts as MVP evidence when a source on file names a minimum viable product, prototype, proof of concept or first release of an app the company built for a startup or a new product, ideally with the launch, the funding round or the first users that followed. Marketing work for a startup (SEO, ads) does not count.

Terms that count:: mvp, minimum viable product, prototype, proof of concept, first version, app launch, launched the app, pre-seed, seed round, startup
Minimum to be ranked:: 1 claim on file under this rubric, of which 1 from a source outside Vendar.
Budget band:: no budget band for this question

In plain words: a case counts when it names mobile MVP development work and where it was published can be checked.

D3Eligibility and orderWho is admitted, how ties break, what payment does

Ranked vendors have at least 1 claim on file that supports mobile MVP development under the published rubric, of which at least 1 comes from a source outside Vendar; the rest are listed unranked.

The vendor lists the page's service on its profile.
The vendor serves the page's market: headquarters or a listed service region in the city. When a need page has fewer than ten ranked vendors from the city, agencies from other cities join it only if they are headquartered in the same state or have published work (a case study, a project, a client review) that names the city or its state. A line saying a company serves the whole country is not enough. They are ranked by the same score, geography counts 0.3 for them, and each position says where the agency works from. Mobile development is bought remotely, so its city pages take agencies from anywhere in the United States under the same condition: documented work for the need. The same holds for SEO needs bought remotely: international, enterprise, consulting, recovery, marketplaces, startups, B2B SaaS, ecommerce, AI search visibility, audits, technical and content-led SEO. Local SEO, small business, lead generation and high-ticket services stay with agencies from the city and its state.
A need page that still has fewer than ten ranked agencies after that is filled from the city's own agencies whose sources say they offer the need but document no project for it yet. They always stand below every agency with documented work, are labelled "Offers this service; no documented project on file yet", carry lower confidence, and do not count toward the threshold that opens a page to search engines.
For an intent page, at least one claim on file supports the intent under the page's rubric, and at least one of those claims comes from a source outside Vendar. Our own service listings and profile tags describe the intent but document nothing, so they add weight to a vendor that already has outside evidence and never earn a rank on their own. Vendors without outside evidence appear below the ranking, unranked, never padded into it.
For an intent page, at least one of those claims documents work the vendor has done: a case study, a project or portfolio entry, or a client review. Service pages, price lists, positioning statements and directory listings say what a vendor offers, not what it did; they add weight to a vendor that already has documented work and never earn a documented position. They can only fill a page that is short of ten, below every documented position and labelled as such (see below).
A position may rest on case studies the agency published on its own site. It is admitted and labelled "Published by the agency on its own site" until an independent source documents the same kind of work.
Filtered views (an entry price, a pricing model, a team size) are not rankings of their own: they show agencies ranked for at least one need in the city, each with the score of its best need, and keep only those that meet the condition. An agency that does not publish the fact is listed below with the reason.
Draft and needs-data profiles are never listed.
Rank order is the score, highest first. Ties break on evidence points, then on the number of third-party claims, then alphabetically.
There is no hidden ordering: no hand-curated slug lists and no paid boost in the sort on any listing.
If an editor overrides a position, the position is labelled as an editorial placement with a written reason and ordering_basis set to editorial. No such placements exist on evidence-ranked pages today.
Every ranked position explains itself from its score components and cites the claims behind them, with their sources.
Sort: score_out_of_100, highest first; ties break on evidence points, then third-party claim count, then name.
Payment: Paid visibility never changes the order of a listing.
Top-list threshold: An intent page is offered to search engines when its ranked list has at least five evidence-backed vendors (three when the city has fewer than twenty vendors for the service). Only agencies from the city itself (headquarters or a listed service region) with documented work count toward it: agencies filled in from other cities and agencies that only offer the need do not. A page whose list rests mostly on agencies from other cities is titled “agencies serving” the city instead of “best agencies in” it, says how many are local, stays on the city page and in its feed, and is kept out of search engines until enough local agencies document the work; otherwise the same national list would stand behind six city pages. Below the threshold even with outside agencies the page stays published with noindex, keeps its URL, links and feed, and is left out of the city page's list of rankings. A page whose top ten repeats 70% or more of another need's top ten in the same city, or has the same top three, also stays noindex while the stronger of the two is offered; it opens when the lists differ. The same holds across cities: of the pages for one need whose top tens share 70% or more, only the one with the most local agencies is offered to search engines.

Weights: Evidence for this query 30 · Fit to this query 25 · Capability depth 15 · Reliability 10 · Transparency 10 · Reputation 5 · Market credibility 5. Penalties: Profile flagged for review -5 · Evidence not re-checked in 18 months -5 · No independent source on file -3 · Profile below decision-ready status -2.

D4How claims are counted

Paid agency directories that sell placement are not a source. Their reviews are not cited, never support a position and do not count toward reputation; a profile may show how many reviews such directories hold as one unnamed figure, for context only. Ratings come from open review platforms: Google, Trustpilot and BBB.
Provenance is recorded per claim: third_party, first_party, internal (a Vendar profile field) or unknown.
Verification status is recorded per claim: verified, claimed, internal_signal or unverified.
Every record on file has a role: a claim states a fact; a source reference is a link without a statement (an official site, a directory profile); a research note is Vendar's own remark. Only claims count as evidence. A source reference never earns weight, however its title reads, and a research note never reaches a page or a feed.
Every claim with a source URL is checked against that page by an AI reader and the result is recorded: confirmed, partly confirmed, not supported, or page unreachable. A claim the page does not support stops counting toward any position until a later check confirms it; a claim whose page cannot be read still counts and says so.
Third-party claims outweigh first-party claims; profile fields are the weakest signal and are labelled as such.
A position may rest on case studies the agency published on its own site; such a position is admitted and labelled "Published by the agency on its own site" on the listing, the profile and the feed (evidence_basis: own_published) until an independent source documents the same kind of work. Its confidence is at most moderate.
In the ranking, who is speaking is decided by the source address: the vendor's own site and platforms where the vendor publishes about itself (platform partner directories and portals, case-study hosting sites, paid release wires) are the vendor's own word, not an independent source, whatever domain they sit on. Client reviews on a partner directory stay third-party.
On the profile and in its feed the rule is stricter: who is speaking is decided by who wrote the text. Every claim falls into one of four classes: independent (a client, the press, a rating written by a third party); linked to the agency (a person who worked at or through it, writing in the first person); a listing the agency writes (the platforms above, or another page retelling what the agency says); and the agency itself. Only the first class counts as independent there (section 18).
A claim counts for an intent only when the rubric's terms appear in the claim or its source. The rubric is published on the page.
Claims that only describe the company's location or history are not intent evidence.
Each claim is marked by whether it documents work (describes_work in the machine feed): case studies, projects, portfolio entries and client reviews do; service pages, pricing, positioning statements, review-platform profiles and employer reviews do not.
Claims from the same source count with diminishing weight: each further claim adds half as much as the one before it. Everything an agency says about itself, on any page, is one source; outside documents are told apart by the site that published them. The number of reviews on one platform, or of pages on an agency's own site, cannot carry a position.
Evidence documented on two or more different independent sites earns a small bonus over the same amount of evidence from one site.
Review platforms that compete with Vendar stay in the machine feed with their source URL, because a claim must be checkable, but pages do not name or link them; where other sources exist, they are listed first.

Verified means Vendar confirmed the company, its service and its market on official sources and stamped the profile with the date. A participation status or a partner relationship does not make a profile verified.

D5Dates and versions

Data as of: Nov 3, 2026
Newest evidence check: Nov 3, 2026
Feed generated: Nov 4, 2026
Ranking model: Evidence-weighted ranking 2026.11.7
Rubric: Mobile MVP Development 2026.11
Update cadence: Fast signals, monthly: licence status, site alive, review rating and count, pricing pages, team page. Evidence, each base cycle: case studies, portfolio, services, client types, press and awards. Full re-verification, yearly: registry, address, ownership, every claim a rank rests on. Event-driven, within days: a vendor update, a buyer report, a dead link, a regulator record, a dispute.
Next evidence pass due by: Feb 1, 2027

Every date shown is a data date. A listing's updated date is the newest verification date among its ranked vendors and the evidence claims their ranks rest on; the same value appears in the page text, the structured data and the machine feed.

D6Known limits of the method

A position reflects documented work for the page's question, not the quality of an agency as such. Without a public case or a visible campaign the result of an agency's work cannot be known from outside. An agency with no public evidence is not worse: there is nothing to confirm it with, so it is listed below the ranking instead of being ranked low.

About 20 of 100 points rest on what the vendor says about itself without an outside check: years in business, team size, retention, prices.
The weights favour older, larger and local vendors: full marks at ten years and around 100 reviews, awards count toward market credibility, a vendor that works remotely gets 0.3 on geography, an undisclosed price gets 0.2.
The weights 30/25/15/10/10/5/5 are set by judgment and are not yet calibrated on client outcomes.
Reviews on directories are often collected by the agency itself.
The ranking decides who is speaking by the source address only: a person who worked at or through the agency writing on their own site, or a third-party page retelling what the agency says, still counts as third-party in a position. The profile and its feed already count them as the agency's word, so a position can show more third-party claims than the profile shows independent ones.
Market credibility counts recognition with a source on file, including recognition the vendor reports about itself.
Claims are checked by AI models, not by people. Code confirms that the quoted words are on the page; it cannot confirm that the page itself tells the truth. A case study on an agency's own site stays the agency's word even when the check confirms it.
Confidence is shown next to the score and does not change the order.

D7Machine-readable version

This section carries the same data that AI assistants receive.

/ai/listings/development/mobile-development/new-york/mobile-mvp-development

Schema vendar.ai.decision.v1 · Evidence-weighted ranking 2026.11.7 · generated Nov 4, 2026 · methodology /scoring

Other New York Mobile Development scenarios

All Mobile Development iOS App Development Android App Development React Native Development Flutter Development Mobile App Modernization Mobile Backend and API Integration

Mobile MVP Development in other cities

Los Angeles Chicago Miami Houston