PICO vs Meta Quest Enterprise: Which is the better option?
Extended Reality is reshaping the enterprise, transforming training, collaboration, and even customer service experiences across industries.
For companies that want to take advantage, the first step is choosing the right partner. So, do you pick a global giant like Meta, or a lesser-known, but growing company like PICO XR? Both of these companies offer hardware and software custom-made for corporate settings.
But dive into the portfolios and roadmaps, and you’ll see that each company has its own distinct strengths and weaknesses.
PICO vs Meta Quest: Enterprise Hardware
Meta is usually the go-to choice for XR hardware. By the end of 2024, it was responsible for about 70% of all the AR/VR shipments worldwide. Meta’s headsets offer the perfect balance of power and affordability for consumers and businesses. They’ve also (historically) been a lot more accessible than PICO’s solutions – although PICO is partnering with distributers to tackle this problem.
Where PICO has an edge, however, is in its focus on enterprise-grade solutions. Meta is producing headsets that are suitable for “anyone,” but right now, it’s scaling back its focus on corporate tools.
PICO XR: A Broad Range of Enterprise Options
PICO has a comprehensive suite of headsets specifically created for enterprise users. There’s the Pico G3 – a cost-effective option similar to the Meta Quest 3S, that offers straightforward VR experiences for a fraction of the price of competing wearables. The PICO Neo3 collection upgrades virtual reality with headsets that feature 6DoF tracking and eye-tracking capabilities.
Then there’s the cutting-edge PICO 4 Ultra – PICO’s mixed reality headset with a 4K+ resolution, full-color passthrough cameras, and a wide field of view. All of these tools are custom-made for business use cases. They’re lightweight, ergonomic, designed with security in mind, and supported by custom-made operating systems and software.
PICO even offers some great accessories for enterprises, like its versatile motion trackers, perfect for training simulations and immersive collaboration.
Meta Quest: Affordable and Versatile
Meta’s product lineup is a little smaller. The company used to offer a dedicated option to companies (the Meta Quest Pro), but that was discontinued in 2025. Now, organizations only have the flagship headsets to choose from: the Quest 3, and Quest 3S.
The Quest 3 is a powerful mixed reality headset, with the same Snapdragon XR2 Gen 2 processor as the PICO 4 Ultra, and the same pancake lenses. It also offers full-color passthrough, and 4K+ resolution. The Quest 3S, delivers a pared down feature set for a lower price point, similar to PICO’s G3 option (but with basic mixed reality baked in).
What Meta doesn’t offer (alongside a specific enterprise headset) is an option with built-in eye tracking, or any real accessories for motion tracking. However, companies can still access software to help with managing and deploying XR devices at scale.
PICO vs Meta Quest Enterprise Software and Ecosystems
Both Meta and PICO are looking beyond the hardware landscape, designing ecosystems, software, and even operating systems for XR. Again, Meta’s ecosystem is a little larger (and more versatile), but PICO’s is very enterprise-focused and ideal for developers.
PICO vs Meta Quest Enterprise Operating Systems and Apps
Meta’s Horizon OS gives companies a flexible platform for developing and deploying all kinds of applications. The operating system supports thousands of VR, AR, and mixed reality applications. Plus, Meta offers companies plenty of developer tools they can use to create their own XR experiences. There are flexible SDKs, the Meta Quest Developer Hub, tutorials, and more.
But Horizon OS isn’t really designed specifically for enterprises. PICO, on the other hand, has created a custom OS for companies. The company upgraded this ecosystem in 2025, with new features for LBE mapping, application testing, hand and body tracking, and more.
While PICO’s business application store is smaller in scale than Meta’s Horizon store, it does support hundreds of enterprise-grade apps. Plus, like Meta, PICO offers plenty of developer tools, from SDKs, to API access, and development sandboxes.
PICO also supports “business streaming” services, so companies can easily connect applications to any headset by simply pairing them to a PC or laptop.
PICO vs Meta Quest Enterprise: Device Management Tools
For device management, Meta offers the Quest for Business suite, packed with mobile device management features, and tools for managing and configuring user accounts. The solution gives companies full control over their XR deployment strategy. You can implement authentication features, track and wipe devices remotely, and update apps automatically.
However, accessing this platform means paying for a monthly subscription. PICO’s Business Device Management platform, which covers all of the same features offered by Meta’s solution is free to access with any enterprise-grade device.
It supports configurable profiles, remote factor resets, advanced security features, and even single sign-on support. Additionally, unlike Meta’s MDM tools, PICO’s software supports bulk app management and enrollment features, making it ideal for scaling teams.
Privacy, Security and Data Governance
The good news for enterprises comparing Meta and PICO, is that both companies take privacy and security seriously. As mentioned above, the device management software provided by each company supports granular access controls and permission settings.
Companies can remotely wipe data from devices with both platforms and place limitations on the types of apps and tools teams can access. However, some companies have raised concerns in the past that Meta might capture more data from devices than they might like.
PICO, on the other hand is very clear on its commitment to collecting as little device data as possible. PICO is also compliant with global security standards like GDPR and LGPD.
PICO vs Meta Quest Enterprise: Pricing
One of the reasons Meta is such a popular partner for enterprise companies is its focus on affordability. The Quest 3 starts at just $499.99, while the Quest 3S is only $299.99.
PICO’s cheapest business-grade headset, the G3, is around $400, making it only slightly cheaper than the more advanced Quest 3. Premium options, like the PICO 4 Ultra Enterprise, start at around $699.
If you want to upgrade with accessories like the PICO Motion tracker, those start at around $60 – making them among the cheapest options on the market for full-body tracking.
So, PICO’s hardware is a little more expensive, but as mentioned above, the enterprise options do come with the PICO Business Device Management platform included. With Meta, you’ll need to pay another $14.99 per month, per device on average.
From a total cost of ownership perspective, PICO’s solutions might end up being a little more affordable – particularly if you’re deploying headsets at scale.
PICO vs Meta Quest Enterprise: Use Case Recommendations
Both PICO and Meta offer versatile hardware and software options, ideal for various businesses. The right choice for you really depends on your company’s size, budget, and use cases. For instance:
- For Small Businesses: For smaller businesses, the Meta Quest 3S is probably the most affordable solution. Even the Quest 3 offers more functionality (from a mixed reality perspective) than PICO’s G3, for only a slightly higher price.
- For Larger Companies: Larger companies will appreciate the lower device costs of the Quest 3, compared to the PICO 4 Ultra for enterprises. However, when you add in the cost of device management software, PICO’s options could be better value for money overall.
- For Specific Use Cases: For training and education, as well as design and engineering, the PICO 4 Ultra, and PICO Neo3 Pro Eye offer more advanced tracking capabilities. For collaboration, Meta’s headsets are more versatile, lightweight, and easy to use.
Basically, if you’re looking for hardware affordability, global accessibility, and versatility, Meta might be your go-to choice. But if you’re searching for advanced tracking capabilities, more diverse hardware options, and built-in device management, PICO is the better option.
PICO vs Meta: Pros, Cons, and Final Verdict
PICO XR and Meta both have a lot to offer enterprises, whether you’re looking for flexibility, affordable, or extensive security and control.
| Comparison | Meta Quest Enterprise | PICO |
| Pros | · Affordable and versatile headset options.
· Seamless integration with popular enterprise tools · User-friendly interface and ergonomic design. · Huge app market. · Extensive global reach. |
· Enterprise-specific devices for MR and VR.
· Advanced tracking capabilities. · Straightforward pricing, with MDM software built-in. · Robust and growing OS and developer ecosystem. · Exceptional security, privacy, and control features. |
| Cons | · Additional costs for MDM software.
· No specific enterprise-grade headsets. · Some concerns with data privacy. |
· Smaller app ecosystem than Meta
· Reduced global reach · Slightly more expensive hardware |
The ultimate verdict? Both XR vendors are great. Meta excels with its global reach, affordable headsets, and strong app market. But PICO is clearly more enterprise-focused, more committed to building a business-grade ecosystem, and more affordable if you’re looking for software and hardware combined.
