Koder
A US marketplace that assembles vetted engineering teams on demand. The homepage has one job: convince a CTO that a matched team of freelancers is safer than an agency and faster than hiring.

The homepage, top to bottom: the promise, the coder rail, the product, how it works, the comparison table and the two audience CTAs.
Handed over as components with the illustration set as one library, so a new page never needed a new drawing commissioned.
Two audiences on one page, and a claim nobody believes.
Koder sells to companies and recruits from freelancers, and both land on the same homepage. On top of that, the core promise — a world-class team in days, not months — is exactly what every staffing site claims, so a buyer discounts it on sight. The page had to prove the mechanism instead of asserting the outcome, and it had to do that before a visitor decided which of the two audiences they belonged to.
What I did
One sentence and two buttons at the top — schedule a demo for companies, become a coder for supply — so the split happens in the first screen instead of a menu.
Real coders next, faces and stacks in a rail, because the objection is never the process, it is whether the people are any good.
How it works runs as four numbered steps, each with its own screen: start a project, get matched, weekly updates, outcomes delivered. The product screenshots carry the explanation.
A single comparison table against agencies and in-house hiring — time to hire, recruiting cost, quality guarantee, termination cost — with the demo button sitting inside the Koder column.
One character set, one line weight, one palette, used only where a screenshot could not do the work.
What shipped
4 shots


What it changed
Selling a service people have heard promised before? I build the page around the mechanism and let the proof do the arguing.
Website · $1,190 to $2,790 · 2–4 weeks