Framework-agnostic frontend work for product teams that take Core Web Vitals, WCAG 2.2 AA and design-system maturity seriously — not as a phase at the end.
Frontend problems rarely show up as "the design looks wrong." They show up as slow pages, failed audits, fragmented systems and architecture decisions made too late. These are the situations where bringing in senior frontend engineers makes the most impact.
The dev environment looked fine. Production tells a different story — slow time-to-interactive on mid-range Android, regressed Core Web Vitals, and a search ranking starting to wobble.
Government, education and enterprise buyers are asking for evidence, not assurances. The frontend was not built with the DDA in mind, and the audit window is short.
Three teams, three flavours of the button component, and tokens that drifted six months ago. The system that was meant to align everyone is now adding overhead instead of removing it.
The shell paints quickly, then the page sits unresponsive while a megabyte of JavaScript boots. The fix is rarely "more React" — it is choosing what to render where.
CSR vs SSR vs SSG, SPA vs MPA, Inertia vs Next vs Astro vs server-rendered. The wrong call locks the team into rebuilds. We help make the call before the build starts.
Performance, accessibility, design systems and frontend infrastructure are the work — everything else follows. We pick the framework to fit the system, then hold the line on the things that actually decide whether the product holds up.
Performance budgets, Core Web Vitals targets and Lighthouse thresholds are agreed before the first PR — and enforced in CI. Optimisation passes after launch are the exception, not the plan.
Accessibility is part of how components are built — semantic HTML, keyboard support, focus management, screen-reader-tested. We work to the standard your DDA exposure and procurement gates require.
Typed primitives, Storybook-driven workflows and tokens that real teams reach for by default. The system holds up when the third product line starts using it, not just when the first one does.
Build tooling, SSR, edge runtimes and bundle strategy are first-class deliverables. Vite, Turbopack, Cloudflare or Vercel — chosen for the workload, not the hype cycle.
Mid-range Android on a regional 4G connection is the target, not a flagship laptop on fibre. We measure on the devices and networks your users actually have.
React, Vue, Svelte, Inertia, Astro, server-rendered Blade — we will tell you which fits the system and which is a rebuild waiting to happen. The framework follows the problem, not the other way around.
A four-step path that measures before it builds, makes the architecture decisions explicit, and leaves the team that owns it next in a stronger position than where they started.
Performance, accessibility, bundle composition, render boundaries and component architecture — measured against real devices and the constraints the product has to meet.
Render strategy, framework choice, state boundaries and design-system shape decided before code. The trade-offs documented so the team that owns it next understands them.
Production-grade frontend in short, reviewable cycles. Primitives in Storybook, screens composed from them, accessibility and performance enforced in CI from the first PR.
Performance budgets verified on real traffic, accessibility audited end-to-end, infrastructure tightened. Documentation and a clean handover so your team owns it without surprises.
Most frontends are fast in the first month and slow by the sixth. The difference is whether performance was a constraint the team built against, or a phase tacked on once users started complaining. Here is how the two approaches compare.
| Performance as Constraint | Performance as Afterthought | |
|---|---|---|
| Targets | Budgets agreed up front, enforced in CI | Discovered when Core Web Vitals turn red |
| Render strategy | Chosen per route — SSR, SSG, CSR, edge | Whatever the framework defaulted to |
| Bundle | Composition reviewed at PR time | A megabyte before anyone notices |
| Measurement | Real devices on representative networks | A laptop on the office Wi-Fi |
| Cost of regression | A failing build, fixed in hours | A retro, a project, a quarter |
A deliberately framework-agnostic stack. We pick tools because they fit the workload — not because they round out a list.
Frontend Engineering is the broad, framework-agnostic service. A few situations are better served elsewhere — here is how to tell which.
When the conversation is already about React, Inertia, hooks and component patterns, our React Development service goes deeper on the React-specific decisions.
See React DevelopmentWhen the work spans schema design, contracts and the services behind the UI, API Design & Development is where to start. Frontend Engineering assumes the API exists.
See API Design & DevelopmentWhen you have the direction and the codebase but need senior frontend engineers contributing under your lead, Team Augmentation is the right shape.
See Team AugmentationNo. This service is deliberately framework-agnostic. We work in React, Vue, Svelte, Inertia, Astro and server-rendered stacks, and we will tell you which one fits the problem. If the answer is React specifically, our React Development service goes deeper on that side.
Yes — that is often where engagements start. We measure performance on real devices and networks, run accessibility audits against WCAG 2.2 AA, review bundle composition, render boundaries and component architecture, and write up the findings with prioritised recommendations.
Lighthouse and Core Web Vitals are the baseline, measured on the devices and networks your users actually have — typically mid-range Android on Australian 4G, not a flagship laptop on fibre. We set performance budgets up front and enforce them in CI so regressions are caught at PR time.
In Australia and New Zealand, WCAG 2.2 AA is the practical bar for DDA exposure, government procurement and most enterprise buyers. We build to that standard from the first component — semantic HTML, keyboard support, focus management, screen-reader testing — and produce evidence you can hand to a procurement team.
Yes. Most engagements involve an internal design team or design partner. We translate Figma into a typed, accessible component system, surface the gaps between design and engineering early, and keep tokens, primitives and screens aligned as both sides evolve.
Frontend Engineering is the broader, framework-agnostic service — performance, accessibility, design systems and architecture across whatever stack fits. React Development is the specialist funnel for teams already committed to React, Inertia and adjacent tooling. If you are not sure which fits, start here.
Tell us where you're headed and we'll figure out the best way to get you there.