employer cover photo
employer logo
employer logo

Multiverse Computing

Engaged employer

Multiverse Computing Reviews

3.9

65% would recommend to a friend

(23 total reviews)
avatar

Enrique Lizaso Olmos

58% approve of CEO

57% positive business outlook

Multiverse Computing has an employee rating of 3.9 out of 5 stars, based on 23 company reviews on Glassdoor which indicates that most employees have a good working experience there. The Multiverse Computing employee rating is in line with the average (within 1 standard deviation) for employers within the Information Technology industry (3.9 stars).

Reviews by job title

23 reviews
1.0
26 Dec 2024

Avoid at all cost

Anonymous employee
Recommend
CEO approval
Business outlook

Pros

Young, diverse group of people. Sometimes interesting projects. Many good, competent people, spread out through HR, research and engineering.

Cons

Basically everything else. Normally, you would expect a startup to be founded and run by young, talented tech people with innovative ideas. Alas, that is not the case here. The CEO is a senior with outdated notions about the workplace, lacking both knowledge of the technology and the desire to learn. His sole intention seems to be capitalizing on the hype surrounding AI and quantum technologies to inflate the company's value, sell it, and call it good business. He ticks all the cliché boxes of a toxic corporate management style. The CSO does lend the company some scientific credibility; however, that quickly dissipates into smoke and mirrors. He has little professional integrity to speak of, creating nothing more than a paper mill and taking credit for anything in his vicinity. The company frequently issues cringeworthy PR releases celebrating him (or the other founders) internally, regardless of how little he contributed to the actual work. His only motivation seems to be building a monument to his ego. The CTO, the youngest of the trio, lacks discernible leadership, industry, or scientific experience. As a result, he has fostered an atmosphere where his team dreads meetings with him and are afraid to admit problems. His directives and strategies can at best yield half-baked proofs of concept or visually appealing slides—an illustration of a PhD who has learned to mimic actions to appear successful, without any depth. He is quick to get upset with his team but lacks the backbone to stand up to the other two when he disagrees. The rest of the executive management is at best “fine”, but nothing more than that. It’s evident that the founders have surrounded themselves with people who never challenge them; that is their main qualification. The company has no product worth paying for, but that doesn't seem to concern anyone — half the employees are barely aware of this. It is not surprising since the only noteworthy talent in the company lies in the tech team, and management would never listen to them. The sales team lacks common sense and is either lying to make a sell or is completely clueless about what they’re selling. It can sometimes be entertaining to watch them flounder in minor issues, turning small problems into catastrophes—a recurring theme throughout the company. Most of it is thanks to the chief of sales, who is a piece of work. But such leadership appears to be valued at the company. The organization of the tech teams is bizarre. There are very few senior engineers, no tech leads, but an abundance of mid-level managers who at times lack the knowledge to manage or engineer effectively, making them more of a hindrance than a help to the engineers. Meanwhile, capable juniors are forced to compete for mid-level roles. Last but not least, while the company portrays itself as a young, hip startup, the reality is a toxic mix of controlling, archaic, and outdated policies designed to exert control over employees, often just for the sake of power display, including (but not limited to) strict enforcement of office hours. In a software company…

1.0
23 Sept 2025
Recommend
CEO approval
Business outlook

Pros

There are some genuinely talented and well-meaning professionals scattered across the tech teams, exclusively below management level. If you're lucky enough to work with them, there are opportunities for learning and support on a peer-to-peer level

Cons

The company operates with a hire-and-fire mentality, and job security is virtually nonexistent. Speaking up about the lack of strategy or direction is met with hostility—anyone raising valid concerns is quickly labelled as “difficult.” They publicly position themselves as champions of diversity in STEM, but this is entirely performative. In reality, women are significantly underrepresented in the tech team, and mostly occupy roles in HR, finance, and sales. Female employees are treated like token faces—expected to be front and center during investor visits, with the CEO even insisting on their physical presence in the office during those times. It's a cynical and disingenuous approach that undermines any genuine progress in diversity and inclusion. Sales routinely overpromise to clients without consulting tech, and when delivery inevitably falls short, blame is pushed down rather than addressed collaboratively. There is no culture of learning, improvement, or even doing things the right way—just a constant scramble to appease management and save face. Leadership is the biggest red flag. The CEO is out of touch, surrounded by yes-men who do not challenge his views, and operates with a top-down authoritarian mindset. The CSO is more concerned with volume over value—producing research with little integrity. The CTO lacks both technical depth and leadership ability, and instead resorts to undermining subordinates to maintain the illusion of competence. There’s strict surveillance over working hours but zero accountability in management. When clients are unhappy, threats of termination come before any effort to understand root causes. HR is ineffective, often siding blindly with leadership regardless of legality or fairness. The CPO lacks experience in people management, and it shows in the way issues are handled—or more often, ignored. Internal communications often feel artificial, with obvious use of AI-generated content and minimal effort toward authenticity or employee engagement. There’s no retention strategy outside of hooking people with the visa.

1.0
12 Aug 2024

A company with headless chickens

Recommend
CEO approval
Business outlook

Pros

- Nobody understands what is going on in a project - Regular food freebies and drinks

Cons

- Engineers don't have tech depth - Managers are sarcastic and are well-protected by Directors and the HR - Managers/Directors talking bad about counterparts in a different team; Very unprofessional - Not a good place for tech career growth

Viewing 1 - 3 of 23 Reviews

Glassdoor has 54 Multiverse Computing reviews submitted anonymously by Multiverse Computing employees. Read employee reviews and ratings on Glassdoor to decide if Multiverse Computing is right for you.