In-House vs. Remote Dev Team: The Real Cost of Building a 6-Month MVP

Comparing an in-house hire's salary to a remote team's hourly rate is the wrong comparison — it leaves out most of what actually determines the cost of building a 6-month MVP. Here's a fuller picture, using illustrative figures for a typical 3-engineer MVP team.

The costs that hide in "in-house"

Beyond salary, a fully in-house team for a 6-month build typically carries:

• Recruiting: agency fees or weeks of internal recruiter time per hire, before anyone starts
• Ramp-up: 4-8 weeks of reduced productivity while a new hire learns your codebase and domain
• Overhead: payroll tax, benefits, equipment, and office costs on top of base salary — commonly adding 25-40% to headcount cost
• Downside risk: if the MVP direction changes or the project ends, severance and notice periods apply

What changes with a dedicated remote team

A dedicated remote team removes the recruiting cost and most of the ramp-up time — engineers arrive already vetted on the relevant stack, and typically reach full productivity within the first 1-2 weeks rather than 1-2 months.

Because engagements scale month-to-month, there's no severance cost if the MVP validates (and you want to scale the team) or doesn't (and you want to wind down). You're paying for the 6 months you actually need, not carrying headcount past the point it makes sense.

Where the real savings are — and aren't

The honest version of this comparison isn't just 'remote is cheaper per hour.' It's that the total cost of getting to a working MVP — recruiting, ramp-up, overhead, and the flexibility to scale down without penalty — is usually lower with a dedicated remote team than a from-scratch in-house build, particularly for a defined 6-month scope rather than a permanent hire you're making anyway for the long term.

If you want an estimate specific to your MVP scope rather than a general comparison, that's a conversation worth having before you commit to either path.