Comparison
Genwright vs custom development
You get exactly what you asked for, eighteen months later, and then you own it forever.
Side by side
Where the two approaches actually differ
| Factor | Custom development | Genwright |
|---|---|---|
| Time to first production use | Twelve to eighteen months, typically | Weeks |
| What you are paying to build | Application and the foundation under it | Application only |
| Who maintains the foundation | You, or an integrator on retainer | Knomatic |
| Cost of a change | Change order | Describe the change; re-run pre-flight |
| Production quality gate | Depends on the contract | Pre-flight, every promotion |
| Key-person risk | High — whoever built it | Platform is maintained independently of any build |
Choosing
When each is the better answer
Choose custom development when
- The system is your product, not your back office.
- You need to host it independently, on your own infrastructure.
- The requirements are genuinely unlike any operational pattern.
- You have, and will keep, engineers to maintain it.
Choose Genwright when
- You want custom fit without funding a platform underneath it.
- Nobody on staff wants to own permissions, backups and mobile sync in year three.
- The workflow will change, and change orders are the expensive part.
- Eighteen months is longer than the problem can wait.
The honest part
Custom development is not the wrong answer; it is the expensive answer to a problem that is mostly foundation. If you genuinely need to hold and host the source, that is a real requirement and Genwright is the wrong tool — see the ownership page.
Next step
Describe the workflow and we will tell you which way to go.
Including, sometimes, away from us. A scoping call that ends in a recommendation to buy something else is a good use of forty-five minutes.