Hourly sounds flexible. Fixed price sounds expensive. Neither is “better” until you say who pays when scope moves.
The question before you sign is not “what’s the day rate?”. It is: who carries the cut? If scope grows, does it land on next month’s invoice or reopen the number? If nobody says that on day one, you find out in month three. This page is not the tariff. It is the buying criterion. The offer lives on /en/software.
The short answer
Hourly: you pay time. The backlog can change. The month stretches if the work stretches. You carry scope risk. It fits when you already run the list — you prioritise, you merge, you know what “done” means every Monday.
Fixed price: there is one scope sentence, a number, and a date you can point at. If scope moves, the price reopens — it does not hide inside more hours. Whoever closes carries the cut. It fits when the slice fits on one page: one flow, one tool, one bridge.
If you cannot write “this is in / this is out” on day one, you do not have a fixed price. You have a hope with a figure on it. If you can write it and still ask for hours “just in case”, you are paying for flexibility you will not use — or opening a contract that accumulates without closing.
When hourly wins (you own the backlog)
Hourly is not the “cheap” model. It is the model where you are the product owner: the product already exists, the backlog does not stop, the bottleneck is capacity not clarity. You prioritise. You say what merges. The other side brings time and technical judgement. The work has sprints, not a single deliverable.
In a Barcelona-area SME: a founder or technical lead already running the board, who knows which ticket hurts this week, and needs hands — not a studio inventing the roadmap. The risk that “this month went somewhere else” is yours. That is fine if you know it on day one.
It does not fit when there is no list (people in a vacuum create meetings) or when you want a date and a “done” you can point at: hourly does not close. It accumulates. If the blocker is “we still don’t know what to build”, hours will not fix it — write the slice first, or a Diagnosis that writes it.
When fixed wins (one writable flow)
Fixed price is not “more expensive by magic”. It is scope + number + date, with cut risk on the side that signs the close. It fits when the slice fits on one page — one flow, one internal tool, one bridge, replacing a spreadsheet that already hurts — and you can say “this is in / this is out” before you start. You want a date when you can say done. You do not use the studio as the backlog queue: you close a slice, you do not hire a department.
In a lot of Spanish SMEs — founder still signing quotes, admin keeping the spreadsheet that “almost works”, tax or ERP partner — fixed wins when the pain is concrete: “this flow costs us hours every week and we want it to stop being a person”. Not “digitise the company”. One slice. One sentence. One number.
If the scope is “whatever comes up”, it is not a closed project. It is reinforcement with a project price stuck on it. Whoever “closes” that fixed number either loses money or reopens it quietly with hours. That is why writing the scope hurts. If it does not hurt, you did not write it.
How this shows up at an SME table (no invented clients)
You do not need a logo case study. The pattern is the table: someone compares an “indicative estimate” of €8,000 with a fixed €12,000 and a soft hourly cap “with no commitment” — three products, same meeting. The usual partner quotes “a few weeks” with no scope sentence; month two brings an invoice because “there were more meetings”. A studio offers fixed and says “then we’ll iterate”: then there is no fixed price, only hours with a fixed label.
The useful question is not “who is cheapest?”. It is: who carries the risk if scope moves, and is it written down? Wallion talks to that profile often: one concrete flow, fixed price, Diagnosis before build. No invented volumes.
Failure modes (ones you have seen, or will)
Hourly that never ends.
You open a meter “while we clarify”. Three months later you are still clarifying. Nobody said what “done” was. Without a backlog owner every Monday, hours are not flexibility — they are drift.
Fixed with fuzzy scope.
“An app that manages sales” is not a scope. It is a wish. Whoever signed the number either loses or reopens with endless change requests. Without “this is in / this is out”, the fixed price is a hope with a figure on it.
Mixing both in the same contract.
You ask for fixed and change the list every week → hours with a fixed label. You hire hourly and expect a finished product on day 40 with no owner of scope → nobody said what done was. One sentence, one model. If there are two, two prices.
Surprise invoices.
An “indicative estimate” that becomes real. Unannounced kickoff. Meetings that “didn’t count”. A fixed quote that “assumed” three integrations and five show up. If the model does not say what happens when scope moves, the surprise is the hidden model.
Comparing a fixed number with an estimate.
If it is not closed, it is not the same product. A PDF with a range and another with a number plus a scope sentence do not compete.
These failures separate a commission that ends from one that becomes the month that never finishes.
What Wallion does (and when not to buy it)
Wallion builds custom software at a fixed price. It starts with a Diagnosis. One internal tool / one flow after Diagnosis sits in the published build band. Licence, if we keep what we built, is monthly.
The model in one line: written scope, closed number, a date you can point at as done. If scope moves, the price reopens — it does not hide inside more hours. It fits when you can write one flow on one page and want Diagnosis → fixed build → licence, not a meter “just in case”.
Do not buy Wallion’s model as fixed when you already run a live backlog and need hands (that is reinforcement / staffing: say so); when the scope is “whatever comes up” and nobody can write the cut; or when you want fixed and, in the same sentence, “total freedom to change every week”. That is not a model. It is a wish.
If on the call you say “we need reinforcement on our backlog”, say it in the first conversation. Do not hide it in the FAQ.
Public prices (Option D — no invented figures)
Only the numbers that live on the site:
- Diagnosis — €1,900. One workflow audit, prototype, fixed build quote. If you proceed, the Diagnosis is credited against the build.
- Build — €6,900–14,900. One internal tool: one flow, after Diagnosis. Not the price of a large app, an MVP or staffing — those are a written fixed price, not that band.
- Licence — from €390/month. Hosting, security updates, regulatory and API changes, a ceiling of small-change hours, business-hours support — as published on the offer.
Apps, MVPs and staffing: same model of scope + closed number, different figure, in writing. This page does not invent tariffs.
Decision checklist (before you sign)
Tick each point. If any stays blank, do not sign “fixed price” and do not open hours “with no commitment”.
- Who carries the risk if scope moves: us (hourly) or whoever closes (fixed)?
- Can we write “this is in / this is out” on one page today — or not?
- Who says “done”: us every Monday, or a sentence written on day one?
- Are we buying a time meter or a slice with a date?
- If we ask for fixed, does it fit one flow / tool / bridge, or is it “the whole company”?
- If we ask for hourly, is there a backlog and an owner of priority every week?
- Is the PDF a closed number or an “indicative estimate”?
- What happens in writing when scope grows: reopen price, change request, or “we’ll see”?
- Are we mixing fixed and hourly in the same contract?
- Are we comparing the internal-tool band (€6,900–14,900) or another written fixed (app/MVP/staffing)?
Without those answers, “flexible” and “closed” are adjectives, not a model.
Questions buyers actually ask
Isn’t fixed price more expensive?
Sometimes the build number is higher than one month of hours. Sometimes it is not. The useful comparison is not month one: it is who pays when scope moves and how long “almost done” lasts. A fixed price with a scope sentence ends. Hours without a list owner do not.
When should I choose hourly?
When you already run the backlog, prioritise, and know what to merge. Capacity, not clarity. If there is no list, do not open a meter to “discover the product”: write the slice first, or a Diagnosis that writes it.
Does the €6,900–14,900 band cover an app or an MVP?
No. That band is one internal tool / one flow after Diagnosis. Apps, MVPs and staffing: written fixed price, not that table.
Is the €1,900 Diagnosis lost if we don’t proceed?
If you proceed, it is credited against the build. If you don’t, you paid for a diagnosis with prototype and written fixed quote — not an empty deck.
Can we start hourly and then “close” a fixed price?
Yes, but not in one ambiguous sentence. One first, then the other, with written scope when you move to fixed. Mixing them with no owner of the close is the classic failure.
What does the licence from €390/month include?
What the offer publishes: hosting, security, regulatory and API changes, a ceiling of small changes, business-hours support. Bigger changes: a fixed quote in days.
Does Wallion do reinforcement / staffing or only fixed?
Both shapes fit. If you run the list: reinforcement. If you run a scope sentence: fixed. The buying path is still /en/software.
Do Wallion Mobility, Glowapp or Nummo belong here?
No. They are not Wallion products of this service. This page is about pricing model in the studio’s custom software — not those brands.
What this page is not
Not the offer (/en/software). It does not invent tariffs — Option D only. It does not treat Mobility, Glowapp or Nummo as Wallion products. It is not a ranking of studios.
Thirty minutes
If the pricing model is the blocker — hourly or fixed, who carries the risk, which scope sentence fits — settle it in the first conversation. Book a 30-minute call.