ILoveMyQA vs SnoopGame
QA Rating is published independently, and its publisher owns no company listed in this catalog.
Field by field
| Field | ILoveMyQA | SnoopGame |
|---|---|---|
| Headquarters | Vancouver, Canada | Tallinn, Estonia |
| Delivery locations | Canada, the USA | Estonia, Poland, Romania, Ukraine, North Macedonia, Mexico, the Philippines |
| Team size | 11-50 people | 51-200 people |
| Founded | 2018 | 2015 |
| Ownership | Independent | Independent |
| Services | Usability testing, Manual testing, Test automation, Performance testing, Compatibility testing, API testing, Mobile app testing | Manual testing, Compliance testing, Compatibility testing, Performance testing, QA consulting, API testing |
| Industries | Ecommerce, Education, Banking | Games |
| Frameworkspublished by one of the two | Cypress, Selenium, WebdriverIO, Cucumber, Playwright, Postman, Appium | Not published |
| Engagement modelspublished by one of the two | Not published | Dedicated team, Project work, Time and materials |
| 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 / Not confirmed |
| Published rates |
|
|
| Minimum project | $1,000clutch.co | $1,000clutch.co |
| Onboarding | Not published | Not published |
| Crowd tester pool | Not published | Not published |
| Device labpublished by one of the two | Not published | 700 real devicessnoopgame.com |
Who each one fits
ILoveMyQA fits a buyer running a general software product who wants a QA practice broad enough to cover several kinds of testing under a shared contract. SnoopGame fits a buyer shipping a game, where the practice is built specifically around game titles and platform certification, and its case material names game studios instead of clients from other industries.
The choice usually settles on release timing rather than on anything published. A title heading for platform certification has a submission date fixed by the platform holder, and testing has to fit the window in front of it. A general product team ships on its own schedule and can absorb a slower start. So the question that decides this pair is what happens between signature and the first test report, and it goes unrecorded on each profile: ask each side to describe that interval and to name who is assigned during it.
Check whatever comes back against the delivery locations each publishes. An intake described as immediate still stretches when the people running it work a shift that barely overlaps the buyer's working day, and a certification window is the wrong place to discover that.
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.
ILoveMyQA
ILoveMyQA 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 Nearshore for the USA, so those conditions do not separate them.
Where the data runs out
Completeness against the 14 fields of the comparison checklist is 64% for ILoveMyQA and 71% for SnoopGame. 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, Signs a BAA / GDPR DPA, 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 ILoveMyQA profile and the SnoopGame profile.
Questions
- Which of ILoveMyQA and SnoopGame publishes a device lab for compatibility testing, and how large is it?
- SnoopGame's homepage states a device lab of 700 real devices, checked 3 September 2026. ILoveMyQA's profile carries no device lab entry at all, so the catalog has no comparable figure for it. A buyer planning compatibility checks across many handset models gets a published starting count only from SnoopGame. Confirming which device generations and operating system builds that bench currently covers is still a question for the first call.
- How does SnoopGame's published hourly ceiling compare with ILoveMyQA's published hourly floor for a buyer setting a budget before either sales call?
- SnoopGame's Clutch profile lists a blended hourly rate with a $25 ceiling, checked 3 September 2026. That same profile publishes no floor figure for the blended grade. ILoveMyQA's Clutch profile lists a blended hourly rate of $25 to $49, checked the same date. A budget of $25 an hour lands at the very top of SnoopGame's published band. That identical figure lands at the very bottom of ILoveMyQA's band. A buyer comparing the two on rate alone is weighing a ceiling on one side against an entry point on the other.
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.