Guide

Rapid Prototyping Service Comparison: 9 Platforms Compared (2026)

Last updated: 2026-02-27

This process-intent guide compares rapid prototyping service options by process breadth, lead-time signal, MOQ behavior, and workflow fit.

Rapid Prototyping Comparison Table (9 Platforms)

PlatformProcess signalLead-time signalMOQ signalInstant quoteBest-fit scenario
XometryCNC, multi-tech 3DP, sheet, molding, castingCNC can be as fast as 1 business day1 unit / no MOQYesMulti-process prototyping with API-ready procurement
ProtolabsOwn-factory CNC/3DP/sheet/molding + network extensionCNC/3DP as fast as 1 day; sheet 3-5 days1 part (tooling economics for molding)YesFast-turn engineering prototypes with own-factory controls
HubsNetwork CNC/3DP/sheet/molding3DP can be as fast as 1 day; other windows are network dependent1 part in core flowsYesSupplier-network routing with production handoff continuity
FictivCNC/3DP/molding/sheet/casting through managed networkCNC as fast as 1 day; 3DP as fast as 24hNo MOQ statedYesManaged prototype-to-production programs
JigaRFQ-oriented CNC/3DP/sheet/moldingQuote cycle reduced, but production lead times are supplier dependent1 part (inferred)No (RFQ model)Complex prototypes needing direct supplier collaboration
SendCutSendFast sheet, cut, and limited CNC workflowsCore services commonly 1-3 business daysNo MOQYesSheet and plate prototyping with fast domestic turnaround
RapidDirectCNC, 3DP, molding, sheet, and castingCNC/3D prototypes often around 3-5 daysNo MOQ statedYesCost-tilted global prototype sourcing
MeviyCAD-driven CNC and sheet prototypingPublished 5/6/8/22-day options; 4-day Expedite+ eligible pathsNo MOQYesFast CAD-to-quote workflows in MISUMI ecosystem
eMachineShopCNC, sheet, injection, and 3DP with CAD-first flowQuote dependent; some jobs in daysNo min/max order limitsYesUS-focused design-to-order prototyping

Buyer Decision Guide

Choose by speed

Protolabs, Xometry, and Fictiv publish the strongest quick-turn prototype signals for eligible parts and processes.

Choose by workflow style

Most platforms are instant-quote-first for standard geometry. Jiga is RFQ-first and stronger for collaboration-heavy programs.

Choose by compliance needs

Xometry, Protolabs, and eMachineShop publish stronger explicit compliance posture for regulated prototype pathways.

Choose by cost strategy

RapidDirect is commonly shortlisted for cost-focused global sourcing, while domestic fast-turn options can reduce coordination risk.

What Independent Users Report

Sources: Reddit (alternatives thread); Reddit (Xometry experience); Trustpilot (Xometry); Trustpilot (Protolabs); Trustpilot (RapidDirect)

FAQ

What is the best rapid prototyping service?

The best service depends on prototype complexity, process mix, turnaround target, and whether your team prefers instant quote automation or RFQ collaboration.

Which rapid prototyping platform is fastest?

Protolabs and Xometry publish strong fastest-path prototype signals for eligible jobs, with Fictiv also publishing fast CNC and 3D printing options.

Which platform is best for low-quantity prototypes?

Most platforms in this set support low-quantity starts, though tooling-heavy processes still have setup economics that affect practical minimum runs.

Is instant quote always better for prototypes?

Not always. Instant quote is usually faster for standard parts, while RFQ workflows are often stronger for unusual geometry and collaboration-heavy requirements.

Which platform is strongest for compliance-heavy prototype programs?

Xometry, Protolabs, and eMachineShop publish stronger explicit compliance posture in this current dataset.

What should I compare first in a rapid prototyping quote?

Start with lead-time commitment, process/material fit, quality and compliance constraints, and total landed cost using the same CAD package across vendors.

Related Pages

Sources