Node.js and NestJS development
for APIs that ship

Hourly rates run €60 to €65 across all engineering roles. Project ranges depend on scope. Small Node.js services (single-purpose APIs, webhook handlers, internal microservices): €15.000 to €30.000. Standard NestJS applications (multi-resource APIs, authentication, integrations with three to five third parties): €30.000 to €60.000. Complex platforms (multi-tenant SaaS backends, real-time WebSocket APIs, event-driven microservice architectures): €60.000 to €150.000+. Staff augmentation rates run the same €60 to €65 per hour with monthly retainer arrangements available for sustained capacity. Our pricing page covers the broader rate structure.

Depends on scope. Small Node.js service (single-purpose API, webhook handler, internal tool): 3 to 6 weeks from kickoff to production. Standard NestJS application with multiple resources, authentication, and a few integrations: 8 to 16 weeks. Complex platform with real-time features, multi-tenancy, or extensive third-party integrations: 14 to 28 weeks. Discovery and architecture phase typically takes 1 to 3 weeks before coding begins. Production deployment plus a 2 to 4 week stabilisation window adds to the timeline. Our process page covers the project structure.

New projects: NestJS 10 (current stable release at time of writing) running on Node.js 20 LTS or 22 LTS. NestJS 11 expected in late 2026. Existing applications on older NestJS versions (7, 8, or 9) need upgrade planning. Standard upgrade path: minor version-by-version progression with regression test coverage at each step, dependency updates, and breaking-change adjustments. Typical NestJS 8 to 10 upgrade: 2 to 4 weeks for moderately complex applications, longer for applications with custom decorators, third-party packages no longer maintained, or significant changes to core decorators. Applications on NestJS 6 or earlier (end-of-life versions) need a more substantial review before deciding between upgrade and rewrite paths.

Depends on what you actually need. Project work fits when: the scope is well-defined, you want a fixed timeline and deliverable, you don’t want hiring overhead, the work has a clear end. Studio Ubique handles engineering plus project management. Staff augmentation fits when: you have an existing team that needs additional capacity, the work is ongoing rather than project-bound, you want developers integrated into your sprint cadence, or you need specific expertise (NestJS architects, GraphQL specialists, DevOps engineers) without permanent hiring. Studio Ubique developers work alongside your team, follow your sprint process, attend your standups. Hourly rates the same €60 to €65 across both models. For most one-off builds, project work is cleaner. For sustained product development, staff augmentation often makes more financial sense than permanent hiring, especially for non-EU teams who want EU-time-zone coverage.

Honest comparison. Node.js plus NestJS: strong choice for real-time applications (WebSockets, server-sent events), microservices, GraphQL APIs, and projects where frontend and backend can share TypeScript types. Higher operational complexity than monolithic frameworks. Laravel (PHP): better for traditional CRUD applications with admin panels and content management, comfortable for PHP-familiar teams, mature ecosystem. Django (Python): comparable to Laravel for traditional web apps, often chosen when Python expertise or machine learning integration matters. Go: best for high-performance microservices, infrastructure tools, and CPU-bound workloads, smaller ecosystem than Node.js. The framework choice matters less than the engineering quality. A well-built Node.js application outperforms a poorly-built Go application, and vice versa.

The question that gets debated more than it should. Start as a modular monolith for most projects. NestJS makes this easy with its module system that enforces boundaries within a single deployment. Move to microservices when there’s a concrete reason: independent scaling needs (one component handling 100x the traffic of others), team autonomy at scale (multiple teams blocked by deployment coordination), technology diversity needs (one component genuinely benefits from a different language or runtime), or compliance boundaries (one component handles regulated data that needs isolation). Premature microservices are the most common architectural mistake we see. Operational complexity increases significantly: service discovery, distributed tracing, transaction coordination, deployment orchestration, monitoring across services. For most startups and mid-market companies, a well-modularised NestJS monolith deployed to a container platform handles growth past 100.000 daily users before microservices become necessary.

Depends on application complexity. Simple Node.js services (single-purpose APIs, low traffic): managed serverless platforms like AWS Lambda, Vercel Functions, or Cloudflare Workers, often with free tiers for small applications. Standard Node.js applications: managed container platforms (Google Cloud Run, AWS Fargate, DigitalOcean App Platform, Fly.io) with managed databases (Aurora, Cloud SQL, Supabase, Neon). PM2 process management for traditional VPS deployments if cloud platforms aren’t a fit. Complex applications: full Kubernetes setups or AWS ECS with proper service mesh, observability stack (Datadog, New Relic, Grafana plus Prometheus), CI/CD pipelines with automated testing and deployment, separate environments per stage. Real-time applications with WebSockets need sticky sessions or session-replication setups that some serverless platforms don’t support well. Care, Growth, and Partnership packages cover ongoing maintenance and operations work after launch.