We want security regression runs automated. Do the alternatives publish tooling for that?

No published tool list among the alternatives names a security scanner or a penetration testing tool. The tools that are named drive a browser, a mobile app, an API or a load test. Five alternatives publish a tool list of that kind. Three publish no tool list at all, and Qualysec publishes none either. Automated security work is the one kind of testing the tooling field says nothing about here.

Our clients are public sector bodies. Does any alternative work in that sector?

Public sector is named by none of the eight alternatives. Medical devices is named by one alternative. Energy and utilities is named by one alternative as well, and it is the same one in both cases. Healthcare sits at the opposite end, named by seven of the eight. Ecommerce is named by six of the eight. Three of the nine sectors Qualysec names come down to a single alternative or to none, and all three sit in regulated or state-facing work.

What does a published case study about security work actually report?

Published security cases count different things from each other. One reports 233 high-risk issues found in the first seven days of an engagement. One reports 15 security issues, two of them critical, all confirmed fixed on retest. One reports 700,000 US dollars of annual savings from detective controls testing. Qualysec's own published cases report a SOC 2 compliance outcome and a quarterly testing cadence. Three alternatives publish a security case at all, and no two of those accounts measure the same thing, so comparing them means weighing findings against spend against cadence.

Qualysec alternatives

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

Qualysec declares 5 services in this catalog, among them Penetration testing, API testing, Red teaming. Qualysec names 9 industries, among them Medical devices, Education, Energy and utilities. Across the review platforms this catalog reads, Qualysec has 31 verified reviews, and that count is what puts it among the companies people search alternatives for.

8 companies compared against Qualysec.

Where these companies differ from Qualysec

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 Qualysec.

Delivery geography: 8 of the 8 candidates deliver from at least one country Qualysec does not list.
Certifications: 3 of the 8 candidates hold a confirmed certification that Qualysec does not.
Published rates: 6 of the 8 candidates publish an hourly rate, and Qualysec 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 Qualysec does not, among them Nearshore for the EU, Automation first, Embedded team model.
Published case studies: 8 of the 8 candidates publish at least one case study with a named metric, and Qualysec publishes 2.

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.

ScienceSoft
Security focus
ScienceSoft meets the same applicability condition as Qualysec, Security focus, declares 3 of the services Qualysec declares, among them Security testing and Penetration testing, names SaaS and Healthcare among its industries, and carries 85 verified reviews against 31 for Qualysec.
Edgescan
Security focus
Edgescan meets the same applicability condition as Qualysec, Security focus, declares 2 of the services Qualysec declares, among them Penetration testing and Security testing, names Healthcare and Ecommerce among its industries, and carries 53 verified reviews against 31 for Qualysec.
DeviQA
Security focus
DeviQA meets the same applicability condition as Qualysec, Security focus, declares 3 of the services Qualysec declares, among them API testing and Security testing, names Healthcare and Fintech among its industries, and carries 44 verified reviews against 31 for Qualysec.
QA Madness
Security focus
QA Madness meets the same applicability condition as Qualysec, Security focus, declares 3 of the services Qualysec declares, among them Security testing and Penetration testing, names SaaS and Ecommerce among its industries, and carries 44 verified reviews against 31 for Qualysec.
QATestLab
Security focus
QATestLab meets the same applicability condition as Qualysec, Security focus, declares 3 of the services Qualysec declares, among them API testing and Penetration testing, names Ecommerce and Education among its industries, and carries 17 verified reviews against 31 for Qualysec.
QAwerk
Security focus
QAwerk meets the same applicability condition as Qualysec, Security focus, declares 3 of the services Qualysec declares, among them Penetration testing and API testing, names SaaS and Fintech among its industries, and carries 13 verified reviews against 31 for Qualysec.
NetSPI
Security focus
NetSPI meets the same applicability condition as Qualysec, Security focus, declares 4 of the services Qualysec declares, among them Penetration testing and Security testing, names Healthcare among its industries, and carries 11 verified reviews against 31 for Qualysec.
SHIFT ASIA
Security focus
SHIFT ASIA meets the same applicability condition as Qualysec, Security focus, declares 1 of the services Qualysec declares, among them Security testing, names Education among its industries, and carries 7 verified reviews against 31 for Qualysec.

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.

Qualysec 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
QualysecThe company this page compares against	India	Blended $25-49/hclutch.co	51-200 people	None confirmed	2	31
ScienceSoft	the USA, Mexico, Latvia, Finland, Poland, Saudi Arabia, the UAE	Blended $50-99/hclutch.co	501-1000 people	None confirmed	2	85
Edgescan	Ireland, the USA	Not published	51-200 people	ISO/IEC 27001register entryCRESTregister entry	1	53
DeviQA	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
QATestLab	Cyprus, France, Poland, Ukraine, the UK	Blended $25-49/hclutch.co	501-1000 people	None confirmed	2	17
QAwerk	Ukraine	Blended $25-49/hclutch.co	51-200 people	None confirmed	3	13
NetSPI	the USA, Canada, the UK, India	Not published	501-1000 people	CRESTregister entry	2	11
SHIFT ASIA	Vietnam	Blended up to $25/hclutch.co	501-1000 people	ISO/IEC 27001register entry	3	7

No company in this table has a value recorded for these fields: 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.

Service overlap against Qualysec's five declared services

Qualysec declares five services: penetration testing, API testing, red teaming, secure code review and security testing. None of the eight candidates on this page declare red teaming, so that service drops out of any switch away from Qualysec. NetSPI is the only candidate that declares secure code review, pairing it with penetration testing and security testing for an overlap of three of Qualysec's five declared services. Five more candidates reach the same overlap count through a different combination: ScienceSoft, DeviQA, QA Madness, QATestLab and QAwerk each declare penetration testing, API testing and security testing, without secure code review or red teaming. Edgescan declares two of the five, penetration testing and security testing. SHIFT ASIA declares one, security testing alone. No candidate on this page reaches four or five of Qualysec's five declared services, and the widest overlap found here, three of five, belongs to six of the eight candidates.

Engagement models beyond Qualysec's own two

Qualysec publishes two engagement models: Managed testing service and On-demand testing. Across the eight candidates, six distinct engagement model labels appear: Managed testing service, On-demand testing, Continuous testing program, Staff augmentation, Dedicated team and Project work. Four of those labels, Continuous testing program, Staff augmentation, Dedicated team and Project work, do not appear anywhere in Qualysec's own list. Five of the eight candidates publish at least one label that matches Qualysec's list: ScienceSoft, DeviQA, QATestLab and NetSPI each publish Managed testing service, and Edgescan publishes On-demand testing. The remaining three, QA Madness, QAwerk and SHIFT ASIA, publish only labels absent from Qualysec's own two, mixing Project work, Dedicated team and Staff augmentation, with neither Managed testing service nor On-demand testing among them.

Where minimum project size sets a different floor

Qualysec publishes a minimum project size of 1,000 US dollars. Six of the eight candidates publish a minimum project size of their own; two, Edgescan and NetSPI, publish none. Of the six, QA Madness publishes the same 1,000-dollar floor as Qualysec. ScienceSoft, DeviQA, QATestLab and SHIFT ASIA each publish a 5,000-dollar floor, five times Qualysec's own. QAwerk publishes a 10,000-dollar floor, ten times Qualysec's own and the highest published floor on this page. A buyer whose engagement sits near Qualysec's 1,000-dollar floor finds one published match among the eight, QA Madness, and would need to confirm directly with the other five before assuming a project of that size fits their intake.

Client stages and industry counts beside a security profile

Qualysec publishes two client stages, Startups and Enterprises. Three of the eight candidates publish a client stage of their own: ScienceSoft and QA Madness each publish the same pair as Qualysec, Startups and Enterprises, while QAwerk publishes Startups alone. The other five candidates, Edgescan, DeviQA, QATestLab, NetSPI and SHIFT ASIA, publish no client stage at all. Named industry counts vary widely alongside that gap: ScienceSoft and DeviQA each name 12 industries, QA Madness, QATestLab and QAwerk name 7 each, Edgescan names 4, NetSPI names 3, and SHIFT ASIA names 1. A buyer with a security-focused mandate who wants a named client stage before shortlisting finds one at three of the eight, two of which describe the same startup-to-enterprise range as Qualysec.

Side by side with Qualysec

Questions

We want security regression runs automated. Do the alternatives publish tooling for that?: No published tool list among the alternatives names a security scanner or a penetration testing tool. The tools that are named drive a browser, a mobile app, an API or a load test. Five alternatives publish a tool list of that kind. Three publish no tool list at all, and Qualysec publishes none either. Automated security work is the one kind of testing the tooling field says nothing about here.
Our clients are public sector bodies. Does any alternative work in that sector?: Public sector is named by none of the eight alternatives. Medical devices is named by one alternative. Energy and utilities is named by one alternative as well, and it is the same one in both cases. Healthcare sits at the opposite end, named by seven of the eight. Ecommerce is named by six of the eight. Three of the nine sectors Qualysec names come down to a single alternative or to none, and all three sit in regulated or state-facing work.
What does a published case study about security work actually report?: Published security cases count different things from each other. One reports 233 high-risk issues found in the first seven days of an engagement. One reports 15 security issues, two of them critical, all confirmed fixed on retest. One reports 700,000 US dollars of annual savings from detective controls testing. Qualysec's own published cases report a SOC 2 compliance outcome and a quarterly testing cadence. Three alternatives publish a security case at all, and no two of those accounts measure the same thing, so comparing them means weighing findings against spend against cadence.

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