{"id":281,"date":"2026-10-22T18:13:39","date_gmt":"2026-10-22T18:13:39","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/wallion.com\/?p=281"},"modified":"2026-10-29T23:41:45","modified_gmt":"2026-10-29T23:41:45","slug":"cuanto-cuesta-software-a-medida-2026","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/wallion.com\/en\/blog\/cuanto-cuesta-software-a-medida-2026\/","title":{"rendered":"How much custom software costs in Spain (2026)"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

2026-09-10 \u00b7 Oscar<\/p>\n\n\n

\"Three<\/figure>\n\n\n

In Spain, in September 2026, Wallion publishes three figures: Diagnosis \u20ac1,900<\/strong> (it's discounted if you continue), Construction \u20ac6,900\u201314,900<\/strong> only for an internal flow \/ an internal tool<\/strong>, and License from \u20ac390\/month<\/strong>. That's not "just any custom software": apps, MVPs, and staffing are going to price fixed in writing<\/strong>, Outside of that range. If someone prices a product with external users at \u20ac6,900\u2013\u20ac14,900, they are comparing the wrong order.<\/p>\n\n\n

This page shows the pricing and comparison criteria \u2014 not a case study with fictitious clients. Offer: \/pricing<\/a>. Hub: \/software<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n

Market 2026 vs. Wallion (Option D)<\/h2>\n\n\n

The table usually contains "guideline" PDFs, retainers, and agency ranges which, for an average custom software order in Spain, are typically located between \u20ac15,000 and \u20ac80,000<\/strong> (sometimes more so) when the scope is vague, there are layers of project management, and the buyer bears the risk of budget cuts. We are not citing external studies here: only an anonymous summary of market 2026<\/strong> in contrast to what Wallion publishes.<\/p>\n\n\n

Concept<\/th>Market 2026 (anonymous ranges)<\/th>Wallion (Option D)<\/th><\/tr><\/thead>
Entry \/ Discovery<\/td>Kickoff or discovery often costs several thousand; sometimes "free" and then hours<\/td>Diagnosis \u20ac1,900<\/strong> Closed; if you continue, it will be deducted from the construction<\/td><\/tr>
A bounded internal flow<\/td>Project or retainer: frequently \u20ac15\u201340k<\/strong> (or more) if the PDF does not write \u201center \/ no\u201d<\/td>\u20ac6,900\u201314,900<\/strong> fixed \u2014 only<\/strong> an internal tool\/flow, 4\u20138 weeks; includes 3 months license<\/td><\/tr>
App, MVP, comprehensive program<\/td>Typical market ranges \u20ac30\u201380k<\/strong>+ when there are multiple hands, mark and open range<\/td>Written fixed price<\/strong> (another figure; same model range + number + date)<\/td><\/tr>
Month by month<\/td>Retainer, tickets or \u201cthen we iterate\u201d = hours<\/td>License from \u20ac390\/month<\/strong> if we maintain what has been built<\/td><\/tr>
Who bears the risk of the reach<\/td>Often the buyer, if the PDF is blurry<\/td>Scope written on day one; if it moves, it reopens the price<\/strong>, it doesn't hide during more hours<\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table><\/figure>\n\n\n

The useful question isn't "who's cheaper in month one." It's: who bears the risk if the scope shifts, and is that in writing? The fixed-price vs. hourly criteria is in fixed price or per hour<\/a>. This page is the Option D rate and comparison; that is the purchase framework.<\/p>\n\n\n

What goes into each Wallion figure (Option D)<\/h2>\n\n\n

Diagnosis \u2014 \u20ac1,900<\/h3>\n\n\n

Enter:<\/strong> a workflow (not "the whole company"); audit of how it lives today (sheet, email, three tools that don't communicate); navigable prototype; written fixed construction budget; about two calendar weeks depending on the offer.<\/p>\n\n\n

It doesn't fit:<\/strong> a six-month transformation deck; staffing disguised as diagnosis; build the complete product within \u20ac1,900; promises of ownership or escrow on the web.<\/p>\n\n\n

If you don't continue, you'll be left with scope and prototype\u2014not an empty PDF. If you continue, the Diagnostic is discounted<\/strong> of the construction. Detail: \/pricing<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n

Construction \u2014 \u20ac6,900\u2013\u20ac14,900 (one flow)<\/h3>\n\n\n

That band is an internal tool: a flow<\/strong>, after the Diagnosis. Table patterns (without invented clients): budgets, follow-up, planning or reports that the team uses every day; replace the sheet that is for the closing on the 28th.<\/p>\n\n\n

Enter:<\/strong> the flow outlined in the Diagnosis; construction deployed at the published pace (4\u20138 weeks for a limited flow); three months of license included as per the offer; integrations that the Diagnosis has limited as part of that flow.<\/p>\n\n\n

It doesn't fit:<\/strong> app with external users \/ product MVP; \u201cdigitizing the company\u201d or three flows in the same issue; staffing or backlog reinforcement; brand redesign or a second product \u201cwhile we\u2019re at it\u201d; mid-range scope changes (price is reopened).<\/p>\n\n\n

If the pain is an external product: \/software\/mvp<\/a>. If it is the internal flow: \/software\/herramientas-internas<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n

License \u2014 from \u20ac390\/month<\/h3>\n\n\n

Hosting, security, regulatory and API updates, small change cap, and business-hour support are included, as per the published offer. Construction is the piece; operation is the month. Code ownership and any escrow deposits are stipulated in the project contract, not on this website. More context: property of the code<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n

Apps, MVPs, staffing<\/h3>\n\n\n

Same model (scope + number + date), another figure<\/strong>. Not the \u20ac6,900\u2013\u20ac14,900 range. Request a fixed price quote in writing after the diagnosis.<\/p>\n\n\n

Why is the market talking about \u20ac15\u201380k<\/h2>\n\n\n

A high rank is not "theft" by default. It usually reflects:<\/p>\n\n\n

    \n
  1. Open scope<\/strong> \u2014 \u201ca commercial app\u201d without an in\/out clause. The signatory either absorbs or secretly reopens.<\/li>\n\n
  2. Agency layers<\/strong> \u2014 account, PM, design, various profiles billing kickoff and \u201calignment\u201d.<\/li>\n\n
  3. Hours labeled as fixed<\/strong> \u2014 \u201cthen we iterate\u201d = counter. The risk of the clipping is yours.<\/li>\n\n
  4. Multiple flows or external product<\/strong> \u2014 users, onboarding, devices: it is not an internal flow.<\/li>\n\n
  5. Eternal discovery<\/strong> \u2014 months of workshops before a number that is still indicative.<\/li>\n\n
  6. Compare different products<\/strong> \u2014 a 40k indicative PDF versus a fixed one of a flow do not compete.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n

    Wallion does not create third-party fees. It publishes Option D and leaves the risk to the written scope. Model criteria: fixed price or per hour<\/a>. Ownership and escrow: contract only \u2014 see property of the code<\/a>. Ownership of the code and any escrow deposits are set out in the project contract, not on this website.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n

    Example TCO at 12 and 36 months (illustrative, Option D)<\/h2>\n\n\n

    This No<\/strong> It is neither a case study nor a real client. It is arithmetic with the published figures, to compare models on the table. Assumption: an internal flow at the midpoint of the build band (10.900 \u20ac<\/strong>), Diagnosis 1.900 \u20ac<\/strong> discounted upon completion (net of construction entry = \u20ac10,900 after credit), and license \u20ac390\/month<\/strong> after the 3 months included in the construction.<\/p>\n\n\n

    Horizon<\/th>What sums (example)<\/th>Order of magnitude<\/th><\/tr><\/thead>
    Year 1<\/td>Construction \u20ac10,900 (Accredited Diagnosis) + 9 months license \u00d7 \u20ac390<\/td>\u2248 14.410 \u20ac<\/strong><\/td><\/tr>
    Years 1\u20133<\/td>Year 1 + 24 additional months of license \u00d7 \u20ac390<\/td>\u2248 23.770 \u20ac<\/strong><\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table><\/figure>\n\n\n

    If the Diagnostic isn't approved (you don't proceed), you've paid \u20ac1,900 for scope and prototype\u2014and you haven't burned through the build band on the wrong problem. If someone puts an agency retainer on the table at \u20ac2,500\u2013\u20ac4,000\/month without a "done" clause, year three will usually far exceed this example even if month one "seems cheap." Always label the TCO as example with Option D<\/strong>, not as a promise of a specific project: the final number comes from the Diagnosis.<\/p>\n\n\n

    What drives up the price (six factors)<\/h2>\n\n\n
      \n
    1. Blurred scope<\/strong> \u2014 without \u201cthis is in \/ this is out\u201d there is no reliable fixed amount; there is hope with a number.<\/li>\n\n
    2. Multiple streams in a single number<\/strong> \u2014 three processes \u2260 one internal tool.<\/li>\n\n
    3. External users \/ MVP<\/strong> \u2014 another band; ask for a fixed price in writing, do not anchor \u20ac6,900\u2013\u20ac14,900.<\/li>\n\n
    4. Unbounded integrations<\/strong> \u2014 \u201call APIs\u201d does not fit in one flow; the Diagnostics lists them.<\/li>\n\n
    5. Range change mid-range<\/strong> \u2014 the price is reopened; it doesn't hide for hours.<\/li>\n\n
    6. Staffing mixed with project<\/strong> \u2014 Hands-on work in a live backlog is another job; don't put it in the flow band.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n

      Custom vs SaaS vs low-code (decision rule)<\/h2>\n\n\n