QATestLab vs QAwerk
QA Rating is published independently, and its publisher owns no company listed in this catalog.
Field by field
| Field | QATestLab | QAwerk |
|---|---|---|
| Headquarters | Strovolos, Cyprus | Kyiv, Ukraine |
| Delivery locations | Cyprus, France, Poland, Ukraine, the UK | Ukraine |
| Team size | 501-1000 people | 51-200 people |
| Founded | 2005 | 2015 |
| Ownership | Independent | Independent |
| Services | Manual testing, Test automation, QA consulting, Performance testing, Usability testing, Compatibility testing, Localization testing, API testing, Penetration testing, Security testing, Acceptance testing, Accessibility testing, Blockchain testing, IoT and device testing | Mobile app testing, Penetration testing, AR/VR testing, Accessibility testing, Manual testing, Blockchain testing, Localization testing, Compliance testing, AI system testing, Compatibility testing, Test automation, API testing, Usability testing, Security testing, Acceptance testing, Performance testing |
| Industries | Media, Games, Ecommerce, Education, Travel, Healthcare, Fintech | Games, Automotive, SaaS, Fintech, Ecommerce, Education, Healthcare |
| Frameworks | Salesforce, Selenium, Appium, Robot Framework, TestComplete, Apache JMeter, SoapUI, Postman | Selenium, Robot Framework, Appium, TestNG, JUnit |
| Engagement models | Managed testing service, Staff augmentation | Project work, Dedicated team |
| Client stagespublished by one of the two | Not published | Startups |
| 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 | $5,000clutch.co | $10,000clutch.co |
| Onboardingpublished by one of the two | 3 daysqatestlab.com | Not published |
| Crowd tester pool | Not published | Not published |
| Device labpublished by one of the two | 500 real devicesqatestlab.com | Not published |
Who each one fits
QATestLab's delivery footprint spans several countries, and its published services lean into that spread: localization testing and usability testing sit alongside industries such as travel and media, where a release can differ by market. QAwerk's footprint stays inside its home country, and its published services lean toward newer ground, AR/VR testing paired with industries such as automotive. A buyer arrives at this pair when a product is about to reach users somewhere a team's base already sits, or somewhere it does not.
The reach a buyer can actually count on stops where each in-house team already sits, and the page gives nothing to extend it with. A team sitting in a fixed set of countries verifies what that set of countries can reach: a language, a payment method, a carrier network, a device shape common there and rare elsewhere. Whether either company can put a person in front of the product where the end users actually live, on the operator and handset those users carry, is not answered here. Ask the vendor how it tests a market where its team has nobody sitting, then check the answer against the delivery locations already on the profile.
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.
Both meet the conditions for Security focus, Nearshore for the EU, so those conditions do not separate them.
Where the data runs out
Completeness against the 14 fields of the comparison checklist is 79% for QATestLab and 86% for QAwerk. 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: Certificates, Signs a BAA / GDPR DPA, 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 QATestLab profile and the QAwerk profile.
Questions
- Do the two companies' published profiles name the same engagement models?
- QATestLab's published profile lists managed testing and staff augmentation as engagement models, checked 2 September 2026. QAwerk's published profile lists project-based work and a dedicated team model as engagement models, checked 2 September 2026. Neither list names a model that appears on the other. Which of the four shapes a buyer needs decides who carries day-to-day direction of the testers, and that question is settled before scope is ever discussed.
- What device lab does each company's published profile report, if any?
- QATestLab's published profile reports a device lab of 500 real devices, sourced from its homepage, checked 2 September 2026. QAwerk's published profile reports no device lab figure. A published count records how many handsets a vendor holds and not which models sit in the rack, so a buyer whose users carry a specific handset generation still has to name it and ask.
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.