Lane Technology Solutions vs pgEdge: Revenue, Funding & Team Size Compared
Lane Technology Solutions generates $4.2M in revenue; pgEdge generates $4.3M. pgEdge and Lane Technology Solutions are close to the same size by revenue. The table below compares Lane Technology Solutions and pgEdge on funding, valuation, customers, team size and headquarters — every figure GetLatka has verified for each company.
| Company | ||
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $4.2M | $4.3M |
| Team size | Not disclosed | 31 |
| Founded | 1992 | 2022 |
| HQ | Winter Park, United States | Alexandria, United States |
Want the full dataset? GetLatka tracks revenue, funding and team history for thousands of SaaS companies, with charts, growth rates and founder interviews.
Lane Technology Solutions at a glance
Lane Technology Solutions generates $4.2M in revenue, headquartered in Winter Park, United States.
- Revenue
- $4.2M
- Founded
- 1992
Managed service provider and Microsoft direct partner helping small businesses manage their IT services
pgEdge at a glance
pgEdge generates $4.3M in revenue with 31 employees, headquartered in Alexandria, United States.
- Revenue
- $4.3M
- Team size
- 31
- Founded
- 2022
pgEdge provides distributed PostgreSQL optimized for the network edge to reduce data latency and achieve ultra high availability. The company was founded by industry veterans with expertise in distributed systems and PostgreSQL.
Other Lane Technology Solutions alternatives
Lane Technology Solutions competes with more than the companies on this page. Browse the full alternative lists to compare revenue, funding and team size across the category.
Lane Technology Solutions vs pgEdge: frequently asked questions
Is Lane Technology Solutions or pgEdge bigger?
pgEdge is the bigger company by revenue, at $4.3M against $4.2M for Lane Technology Solutions.
How much revenue does Lane Technology Solutions make?
Lane Technology Solutions generates $4.2M in annual revenue.
How much revenue does pgEdge make?
pgEdge generates $4.3M in annual revenue with a team of 31.