Best Postman QA companies in 2026

The companies

How this ranking was put together

Membership is computed from the profile, not chosen: companies appear here when they list Postman among the frameworks and tools they work with, as their own profile states. Position in a ranking cannot be bought. Paid options are limited to the extended profile, labelled sponsor slots and lead forms, and none of them affect tags or order.

The table compares the fields that decide this axis: case studies, published rates, team size, plus the number of verified reviews on external platforms. Rates, minimum project size and onboarding time carry the source they came from next to the value.

• Automation first: Test automation is offered as a service, and at least one published case study reports a coverage or regression time metric.
• Nearshore for the EU: At least one delivery location in the EU or the EEA, or in Ukraine, Georgia, Serbia or Moldova.
• Nearshore for the USA: At least one delivery location in Canada, Mexico, Central America or South America.
• Embedded team model: The dedicated team engagement model is offered, and at least one published case study.
• Security focus: Security testing is offered, together with either penetration testing or a verified ISO/IEC 27001 certificate, and at least one published case study.
• Device lab coverage: A published device lab of 100 real devices or more, with a source.
• Performance engineering: Performance testing is offered as a service, and at least one published case study reports a throughput or latency metric.
• Fast onboarding: A published onboarding time of 14 days or less, with a source.
• Regulated industries: At least two verified certificates from ISO 13485, HITRUST CSF, PCI QSA and ISO/IEC 27001.

The criteria for this axis are on the methodology page, together with field definitions and the rule for editorial order. Changes of order are recorded in the changelog.

Questions

If a testing company lists Postman among its tools, does that mean it runs automated API checks in a build pipeline?

Not necessarily. Postman began as an interactive client built for sending and inspecting individual HTTP requests one at a time, and a tester can rely on it that way for an entire engagement without a collection ever running unattended. The framework field on this page records that a company names Postman among its tools, without recording whether that use is manual or wired into automated pipeline runs. The listing itself carries no signal for either case.

Does carrying a tag such as Automation first alongside a Postman listing confirm that Postman itself is the tool behind that company's automated checks?

No. Postman does not separate manual use from automated use in its own listing, so a company can carry an Automation first tag while running that automation through a different tool, keeping Postman for manual work. The tag is granted for the service offered and what a case study reports, not which tool performed the work. That makes a Postman listing weaker evidence of automated API checks than the same pairing for a tool used only inside pipelines. Ask the vendor which tool ran the checks behind a case study.

If a project needs both API testing and browser based UI automation, does a company appearing here for Postman also cover UI test automation for the same engagement?

Appearing here confirms only that a company names Postman among its tools. Postman is built for sending and validating HTTP requests; browser interaction and load generation sit outside what the tool does or what this axis tracks. Whether the same company also runs UI automation, and with which framework, is a separate fact that would need to come from that company's own profile among its other listed frameworks, if any appear there. That detail sits outside what this particular tag records, whichever tool ends up covering it.

How many companies in this composition have at least one named client on record?

Fifteen of the 17 companies here name at least one client with a source, and the field is empty for two companies. A named client on record shows that a company disclosed an engagement openly; it says nothing about the size of that client base or how recent the relationship is. The companies without a named client may still have served clients under a nondisclosure arrangement, since the field only tracks what has been made public. That gap is unrelated to the Postman listing shared by every company here.

Other axes these companies appear on

• Type of testing: Test automation 16 of these 17 companies also stand there
• Industry: Ecommerce 15 of these 17 companies also stand there
• Type of testing: Manual testing 14 of these 17 companies also stand there
• Industry: Banking 13 of these 17 companies also stand there

How to choose a vendor on this axis

Published by QA RatingPublished on September 3, 2026Updated on September 5, 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.