DeviQA vs QA Wolf
QA Rating is published independently, and its publisher owns no company listed in this catalog.
Field by field
| Field | DeviQA | QA Wolf |
|---|---|---|
| Headquarters | Warsaw, Poland | Seattle, the USA |
| Delivery locations | Poland | the USA |
| Team size | 201-500 people | 51-200 people |
| Founded | 2010 | 2019 |
| Ownership | Independent | Independent |
| Services | Test automation, Manual testing, API testing, Compatibility testing, Performance testing, Security testing, Localization testing, Accessibility testing, Penetration testing, Usability testing, Acceptance testing | Test automation, Accessibility testing |
| Industries | Healthcare, Fintech, Banking, Ecommerce, Media, Travel, Advertising and marketing tech, Manufacturing, Real estate, Logistics, Education, Telecom | Ecommerce, Banking, Games, Healthcare, Insurance |
| Frameworks | Playwright, Cypress, Selenium, Appium, k6 | Playwright, Appium |
| Engagement models | Managed testing service, Staff augmentation, Dedicated team | Dedicated team |
| Client stages | Not published | Not published |
| Certificates | No certificate confirmed by a register entry | No certificate confirmed by a register entry |
| Signs a BAA / GDPR DPA | Not confirmed / Not confirmed | Not confirmed / Yes |
| Published ratespublished by one of the two |
| Not published |
| Minimum project | $5,000clutch.co | $5,000clutch.co |
| Onboarding | Not published | Not published |
| Crowd tester pool | Not published | Not published |
| Device labpublished by one of the two | 300 real devicesdeviqa.com | Not published |
Who each one fits
This pair suits a buyer who has already narrowed the field to a pair of automation-heavy vendors and is choosing between the shape of the work each sells. DeviQA runs a practice that spans manual and automated testing across many industries, with device-lab and security work sitting alongside its automation core, so a buyer who wants breadth beyond automation from the same vendor fits there. QA Wolf's practice stays inside continuous automated regression, treated as the outcome it delivers, and fits a buyer whose need starts and ends with test coverage running on its own pipeline.
A buyer trying to line up QA Wolf's cost ahead of a first call has nothing published to work from: no rate sits on its profile to plug into a budget line or hold against a competing quote. That puts pricing itself on the agenda for the call. Worth asking directly: how QA Wolf structures cost for an automated-regression engagement, whether it scales with suite size or team seats, and whether that figure holds for a contract term. Get the answer in writing, since no published entry exists to check it against later unless QA Wolf adds one.
A tag is attached when the company's published fields meet its condition, never by judgement. Both lists come from the same closed vocabulary, so a tag missing from one side means the condition was not met, not that nobody looked.
QA Wolf
QA Wolf meets no applicability condition in this catalog. That is a statement about what its published fields show, not about the company.
Both meet the conditions for Embedded team model, Automation first, so those conditions do not separate them.
Where the data runs out
Completeness against the 14 fields of the comparison checklist is 79% for DeviQA and 79% for QA Wolf. A field is counted as filled when a source confirms it, so a gap means nobody published it.
Neither company has a value recorded for these fields: Client stages, Certificates, Onboarding, Crowd tester pool. The table shows those rows empty rather than estimating them.
Field definitions and the completeness checklist are on the methodology page. The sources behind each field are listed on the DeviQA profile and the QA Wolf profile.
Questions
- Does DeviQA's or QA Wolf's published profile name the automation frameworks each company works with?
- DeviQA's published profile names five automation frameworks and tools, including Playwright, Cypress and Selenium, checked 2 September 2026. QA Wolf's published profile names two automation frameworks, Playwright and Appium, checked 2 September 2026. A team already running tests on Appium finds it listed on both profiles, while a team standardized on Selenium or Cypress finds that tool named only on DeviQA's page. Neither profile states how much of the automated suite runs on each listed tool.
- Does DeviQA's or QA Wolf's published profile state how many days onboarding takes before a tester starts work?
- DeviQA's published profile carries no Onboarding figure, checked 2 September 2026. QA Wolf's published profile carries no Onboarding figure either, checked 2 September 2026. That field ordinarily states the days between signing and a first working tester, a number a buyer can plan a launch date around. With the figure missing from each profile, a buyer working to a fixed date should ask both companies directly for a written ramp schedule during the first call and check the answer later against an Onboarding entry, if either company publishes one.
Published by QA RatingUpdated on September 6, 2026
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.