Do any of the alternatives publish services that DeviQA does not list?

Yes, several alternatives publish services that are missing from DeviQA's own list, among them mobile app testing, QA consulting, compliance testing, AI system testing and IoT and device testing. Two alternatives go further still. One of them publishes ERP testing and data and ETL testing. Another publishes AR/VR testing. None of those three services appear on any other alternative's list. A service absent from a company's list is not proof the work cannot be done, only that no offer of it has been published. Match a requirement to a named service on the list, since the length of a list settles nothing about what is on it.

Half of what we buy runs in telecom and real estate. Do the alternatives cover those sectors?

Telecom is published by one alternative out of the eight. Real estate is published by one as well, and it is a different one. Advertising and marketing tech is the third sector on DeviQA's list that a single alternative names. Ecommerce sits at the other end, published by seven of the eight, and healthcare by six. A shortlist read for the sectors nearly everybody claims looks eight companies deep, and the same shortlist read for the three sectors at the thin end is one company deep in each of them.

Do the alternatives' published case studies name a measured result the same way DeviQA's case studies do?

Some publish a measured result and some publish none. DeviQA's own case studies each state a measured result, such as a regression run time cut to two days on one engagement and a testing-device count that grew from 5 to 20 or more on another. One alternative publishes several case studies tagged automotive, energy and media that describe the client and the work without stating any measured result. The same alternative also publishes other case studies with numbers, such as 52 automated API endpoints on a separate engagement. A case study without a number still names the client and the work; it leaves out how much changed.

DeviQA alternatives

QA Rating is published independently, and its publisher owns no company listed in this catalog.

DeviQA declares 11 services in this catalog, among them Test automation, Manual testing, API testing. DeviQA names 12 industries, among them Healthcare, Fintech, Banking. Across the review platforms this catalog reads, DeviQA has 44 verified reviews, and that count is what puts it among the companies people search alternatives for.

8 companies compared against DeviQA.

Where these companies differ from DeviQA

This catalog does not know why a reader is looking for a replacement, and it does not guess. The list below is the set of fields on which the companies on this page actually differ from DeviQA.

Delivery geography: 7 of the 8 candidates deliver from at least one country DeviQA does not list.
Certifications: 1 of the 8 candidates hold a confirmed certification that DeviQA does not.
Published rates: 6 of the 8 candidates publish an hourly rate, and DeviQA publishes one too, so the two can be read side by side.
Applicability conditions the subject does not meet: Candidates on this page meet conditions DeviQA does not, among them Nearshore for the USA, Fast onboarding, Performance engineering.
Published case studies: 8 of the 8 candidates publish at least one case study with a named metric, and DeviQA publishes 5.

The companies

A company is listed here when it meets at least one of the same applicability conditions as the company at the top of the page. Those conditions are computed from published fields, so the list changes when the fields change and never because somebody paid for a place in it.

QA Madness
Embedded team model Automation first Security focus Nearshore for the EU
QA Madness meets 4 of the same applicability conditions as DeviQA, among them Embedded team model and Automation first, declares 10 of the services DeviQA declares, among them Manual testing and Test automation, names Ecommerce and Fintech among its industries, and carries 44 verified reviews against 44 for DeviQA.
QAwerk
Embedded team model Automation first Security focus Nearshore for the EU
QAwerk meets 4 of the same applicability conditions as DeviQA, among them Embedded team model and Automation first, declares 11 of the services DeviQA declares, among them Penetration testing and Accessibility testing, names Fintech and Ecommerce among its industries, and carries 13 verified reviews against 44 for DeviQA.
ScienceSoft
Automation first Security focus Nearshore for the EU
ScienceSoft meets 3 of the same applicability conditions as DeviQA, among them Automation first and Security focus, declares 10 of the services DeviQA declares, among them Manual testing and Compatibility testing, names Healthcare and Fintech among its industries, and carries 85 verified reviews against 44 for DeviQA.
a1qa
Embedded team model Automation first Nearshore for the EU
a1qa meets 3 of the same applicability conditions as DeviQA, among them Embedded team model and Automation first, declares 10 of the services DeviQA declares, among them Manual testing and Test automation, names Banking and Telecom among its industries, and carries 20 verified reviews against 44 for DeviQA.
QATestLab
Device lab coverage Security focus Nearshore for the EU
QATestLab meets 3 of the same applicability conditions as DeviQA, among them Device lab coverage and Security focus, declares 11 of the services DeviQA declares, among them Manual testing and Test automation, names Media and Ecommerce among its industries, and carries 17 verified reviews against 44 for DeviQA.
SnoopGame
Embedded team model Device lab coverage Nearshore for the EU
SnoopGame meets 3 of the same applicability conditions as DeviQA, among them Embedded team model and Device lab coverage, declares 4 of the services DeviQA declares, among them Manual testing and Compatibility testing, and carries 9 verified reviews against 44 for DeviQA.
appmatics GmbH
Embedded team model Automation first Nearshore for the EU
appmatics GmbH meets 3 of the same applicability conditions as DeviQA, among them Embedded team model and Automation first, declares 4 of the services DeviQA declares, among them Manual testing and Test automation, names Ecommerce and Banking among its industries, and carries no verified reviews on the platforms this catalog reads.
BetterQA
Automation first Security focus Nearshore for the EU
BetterQA meets 3 of the same applicability conditions as DeviQA, among them Automation first and Security focus, declares 6 of the services DeviQA declares, among them Manual testing and Security testing, names Healthcare and Fintech among its industries, and carries no verified reviews on the platforms this catalog reads.

Field by field

The order is by the number of applicability conditions a company shares with the company at the top of the page, then by the number of verified reviews it has on external review platforms, then alphabetically by name. No position here is paid for and none of it is an editorial score.

DeviQA and the 8 companies this catalog lists as alternatives, on the fields it publishes for every company.
Company	Delivery locations	Published rates	Team size	Certificates	Case studies	Reviews
DeviQAThe company this page compares against	Poland	Blended $25-49/hclutch.co	201-500 people	None confirmed	5	44
QA Madness	Poland	Blended $25-49/hclutch.co	51-200 people	None confirmed	2	44
QAwerk	Ukraine	Blended $25-49/hclutch.co	51-200 people	None confirmed	3	13
ScienceSoft	the USA, Mexico, Latvia, Finland, Poland, Saudi Arabia, the UAE	Blended $50-99/hclutch.co	501-1000 people	None confirmed	2	85
a1qa	the USA, the UK, Poland, Georgia, Bangladesh, Mexico	Blended $25-49/hclutch.co	1000 or more people	None confirmed	3	20
QATestLab	Cyprus, France, Poland, Ukraine, the UK	Blended $25-49/hclutch.co	501-1000 people	None confirmed	2	17
SnoopGame	Estonia, Poland, Romania, Ukraine, North Macedonia, Mexico, the Philippines	Blended up to $25/hclutch.co	51-200 people	None confirmed	3	9
appmatics GmbH	Germany	Not published	201-500 people	None confirmed	7	0
BetterQA	Romania	Not published	11-50 people	ISO/IEC 27001register entryISO 9001register entryISO 13485register entry	4	0

No company in this table has a value recorded for these fields: Signs a BAA / GDPR DPA, Crowd tester pool. Those cells are empty because no source recorded the value, and an empty cell is not a statement that the company lacks the property.

The engagement model DeviQA does not publish

DeviQA publishes three engagement models: managed testing, staff augmentation and dedicated team. A Project work model, a fixed-scope engagement with a defined deliverable, distinct from an open-ended staffed relationship, is not among them. Five of the eight companies compared against DeviQA on this page publish Project work as a model: QA Madness, QAwerk, a1qa, SnoopGame and appmatics GmbH. Two publish a narrower set than DeviQA does: QATestLab publishes managed testing and staff augmentation, and ScienceSoft publishes managed testing alone. BetterQA publishes no engagement model at all. A buyer whose requirement is a single project with a fixed scope has five named alternatives with a matching published model and no matching option published for DeviQA itself.

What the project size floor rules out before a first call

DeviQA publishes a minimum project size of 5,000 US dollars, a field the table above leaves out. Six of the eight candidates publish a floor of their own, and two publish none. Among those six, two publish the same 5,000-dollar figure, two publish 1,000 dollars, and two publish 10,000 dollars, so the spread across the six runs from a fifth of DeviQA's floor to twice it. A floor rules an engagement in or out before scope is discussed, and the two candidates without one leave that question open until a first call.

The client stage field answers a nearby question and fills in for a different set of companies. DeviQA records no client stage at all. Across the eight candidates, four publish a floor and record at least one client stage, two publish a floor and record no stage, one records stages and publishes no floor, and one leaves both fields empty. Of the five candidates that record a stage, two record startup and enterprise work together, one records enterprise alone, one records startup alone, and one records all three stages: startup, scale-up and enterprise. The candidate recording all three is the same one with no published floor, so its profile names the kinds of company it works with while leaving the size of engagement unstated.

Why the coverage percentages inside DeviQA's own case studies do not add to one figure

DeviQA's published case studies carry a coverage-labeled figure in each one, though the label changes from one engagement to the next: performance automated scenario coverage of 100% for Tipalti, test coverage from 50% to 90% for Abbott Laboratories, application test coverage from 50% to 85% and a separate E2E automation coverage from 40% to 80% for Compass, test coverage of 95% for Arklign, and test coverage of 90% for Xola. None of these entries states what the percentage is a share of, so the figures cannot be summed or averaged into one coverage number for the company. Reusing the same term, test coverage, for the Abbott, Arklign and Xola engagements does not make those three percentages comparable to each other either, since the three products differ and no shared denominator is published for any of them. Among the eight candidates, none of QA Madness, QAwerk, ScienceSoft, a1qa, QATestLab, SnoopGame, BetterQA or appmatics GmbH publishes a coverage percentage in its own case studies; their evidence runs on bug counts, test-case counts and durations instead. A buyer weighing DeviQA's percentages against a candidate's case studies has no percentage on the other side to weigh them against.

Side by side with DeviQA

Questions

Do any of the alternatives publish services that DeviQA does not list?: Yes, several alternatives publish services that are missing from DeviQA's own list, among them mobile app testing, QA consulting, compliance testing, AI system testing and IoT and device testing. Two alternatives go further still. One of them publishes ERP testing and data and ETL testing. Another publishes AR/VR testing. None of those three services appear on any other alternative's list. A service absent from a company's list is not proof the work cannot be done, only that no offer of it has been published. Match a requirement to a named service on the list, since the length of a list settles nothing about what is on it.
Half of what we buy runs in telecom and real estate. Do the alternatives cover those sectors?: Telecom is published by one alternative out of the eight. Real estate is published by one as well, and it is a different one. Advertising and marketing tech is the third sector on DeviQA's list that a single alternative names. Ecommerce sits at the other end, published by seven of the eight, and healthcare by six. A shortlist read for the sectors nearly everybody claims looks eight companies deep, and the same shortlist read for the three sectors at the thin end is one company deep in each of them.
Do the alternatives' published case studies name a measured result the same way DeviQA's case studies do?: Some publish a measured result and some publish none. DeviQA's own case studies each state a measured result, such as a regression run time cut to two days on one engagement and a testing-device count that grew from 5 to 20 or more on another. One alternative publishes several case studies tagged automotive, energy and media that describe the client and the work without stating any measured result. The same alternative also publishes other case studies with numbers, such as 52 automated API endpoints on a separate engagement. A case study without a number still names the client and the work; it leaves out how much changed.

Published by QA RatingPublished on September 3, 2026Updated on September 4, 2026

The rule behind this list and the basis of its order are on the methodology page. Every fact about a company comes from a listed source. A field without a source stays empty. A certificate counts as confirmed only when a registry, certificate or auditor report backs it; a certificate the company only claims about itself is published separately, under that label. Vendors can request a correction at hello@qa-rating.com. A correction is applied when it comes with a public source.