Does a company's SoapUI listing show whether it tests SOAP services, REST APIs, or both?

No. A company's SoapUI listing shows only that it works with the tool, since SoapUI runs functional tests against SOAP services and REST APIs from the same installation, and the listing does not break usage out by protocol. Case studies are on file for 5 of the 8 companies in this composition, and reading one is the direct way to see which protocol the described work actually covers. The remaining 3 companies carry no case study to check against.

If our WSDL or REST schema isn't finished yet, can we tell which vendors would produce one before testing starts?

No. A SoapUI listing records that a company works with the tool; it does not say whether an engagement began with a finished WSDL or schema, or whether the company produced one as a first step. Engagement models, the field that would normally describe how such preparatory work is scoped and billed, are unpublished for 2 of the 8 companies in this composition, and a published engagement model does not itself spell out what counts as in-scope discovery work. That distinction sits in a written scope, not in this record.

Which of the usual vendor tags actually measure SOAP or REST testing depth, as opposed to delivery location or process factors?

None. The tags used across this composition mark delivery footprint, service model, security posture, device coverage, onboarding time and performance throughput; none of them describe which protocol a company actually works with. That gap sits outside every tag on this page, in the same place a case study or a direct question would need to fill it.

We have already settled on the tool. Is this page enough to choose a vendor from?

Not on its own. Half the tags tracked in this composition reach a single company each and the largest reaches five, so narrowing by any one of them leaves a group too small to compare inside. No profile here carries a verified certificate of any kind, and three publish no case study at all. What the page establishes is which companies state they work in the tool and where they deliver from. Which of them to prefer rests on material this axis does not carry, and eight profiles sit one above the seven-company floor below which the page would stop being published at all.

Best SoapUI QA companies in 2026

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

8 testing companies in this catalog list SoapUI among the frameworks and tools they work with. They are grouped below by what each is best suited for, in 8 groups. 0 of them hold a certificate confirmed by a register entry and 7 publish a rate card. Composition and order last changed on September 3, 2026.

8 companies. Ordered by the number of verified reviews on external platforms, highest first. Companies with an equal count are ordered by name.

The companies

SoapUI: 8 companies, grouped by what they are best suited for.
#	Company	Case studies	Published rates	Team size	Reviews
Nearshore for the EU At least one delivery location in the EU or the EEA, or in Ukraine, Georgia, Serbia or Moldova.
1	ScienceSoft	2	Blended $50-99/hclutch.co	501-1000 people	85
2	Luxe Quality	2	Blended $25-49/hclutch.co	51-200 people	21
3	a1qa	3	Blended $25-49/hclutch.co	1000 or more people	20
4	QATestLab	2	Blended $25-49/hclutch.co	501-1000 people	17
5	Digi Test Lab	Not published	Blended $25-49/hclutch.co	11-50 people	5
Automation first Test automation is offered as a service, and at least one published case study reports a coverage or regression time metric.
1	ScienceSoft	2	Blended $50-99/hclutch.co	501-1000 people	85
2	Luxe Quality	2	Blended $25-49/hclutch.co	51-200 people	21
6	QAlified	5	Blended $25-49/hclutch.co	11-50 people	21
3	a1qa	3	Blended $25-49/hclutch.co	1000 or more people	20
Nearshore for the USA At least one delivery location in Canada, Mexico, Central America or South America.
1	ScienceSoft	2	Blended $50-99/hclutch.co	501-1000 people	85
6	QAlified	5	Blended $25-49/hclutch.co	11-50 people	21
3	a1qa	3	Blended $25-49/hclutch.co	1000 or more people	20
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.
1	ScienceSoft	2	Blended $50-99/hclutch.co	501-1000 people	85
4	QATestLab	2	Blended $25-49/hclutch.co	501-1000 people	17
Device lab coverage A published device lab of 100 real devices or more, with a source.
4	QATestLab	2	Blended $25-49/hclutch.co	501-1000 people	17
Embedded team model The dedicated team engagement model is offered, and at least one published case study.
3	a1qa	3	Blended $25-49/hclutch.co	1000 or more people	20
Fast onboarding A published onboarding time of 14 days or less, with a source.
4	QATestLab	2	Blended $25-49/hclutch.co	501-1000 people	17
Performance engineering Performance testing is offered as a service, and at least one published case study reports a throughput or latency metric.
4	QATestLab	2	Blended $25-49/hclutch.co	501-1000 people	17
Other companies in this axis No applicability tag met its criterion for these profiles.
7	Lotus Quality Assurance	Not published	Not published	201-500 people	9
8	Testrig Technologies	Not published	Blended up to $25/hclutch.co	51-200 people	7

Where the two largest tag groups meet

Nearshore for the EU reaches 5 of the 8 companies in this composition, the largest tag group on this page. Automation first reaches 4, the second largest. Three companies carry both tags: ScienceSoft, Luxe Quality and a1qa. QAlified carries Automation first without also carrying Nearshore for the EU. QATestLab and Digi Test Lab carry Nearshore for the EU without Automation first.

Nearshore reach across two regions

Nearshore for the EU and Nearshore for the USA read two separate delivery footprints on this page. Two companies clear both: ScienceSoft and a1qa. QAlified clears Nearshore for the USA without also clearing Nearshore for the EU. The other three members of Nearshore for the EU, Luxe Quality, QATestLab and Digi Test Lab, do not carry the USA tag on this page.

Security focus sits entirely inside Nearshore for the EU

Security focus names two companies on this page, ScienceSoft and QATestLab, and both also carry Nearshore for the EU. The overlap is complete in one direction only: Security focus adds no company to the five that Nearshore for the EU already holds, while three members of Nearshore for the EU stay outside Security focus. The criterion behind Security focus does not read delivery location at all.

QATestLab and the single-member tags

QATestLab carries five tags on this page: Nearshore for the EU, Security focus, Device lab coverage, Fast onboarding and Performance engineering. Counting every company's tags on this page, no other company reaches more than four, a count shared by ScienceSoft and a1qa. Device lab coverage, Fast onboarding and Performance engineering each name exactly one company on this page, and in each of the three cases that company is QATestLab. Embedded team model also names exactly one company, and it is a1qa: the fourth single-member tag on this page points to a company other than QATestLab.

The two companies no tag on this page reaches

Lotus Quality Assurance and Testrig Technologies carry none of the eight tags used on this page. Sitting outside every tag on this page reflects what the catalog can verify from published, sourced facts at the time of the check, not what either company offers as a service.

How this ranking was put together

Membership is computed from the profile, not chosen: companies appear here when they list SoapUI 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.

Nearshore for the EU: At least one delivery location in the EU or the EEA, or in Ukraine, Georgia, Serbia or Moldova.
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 USA: At least one delivery location in Canada, Mexico, Central America or South America.
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.
Embedded team model: The dedicated team engagement model is offered, and at least one published case study.
Fast onboarding: A published onboarding time of 14 days or less, 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.

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

Does a company's SoapUI listing show whether it tests SOAP services, REST APIs, or both?: No. A company's SoapUI listing shows only that it works with the tool, since SoapUI runs functional tests against SOAP services and REST APIs from the same installation, and the listing does not break usage out by protocol. Case studies are on file for 5 of the 8 companies in this composition, and reading one is the direct way to see which protocol the described work actually covers. The remaining 3 companies carry no case study to check against.
If our WSDL or REST schema isn't finished yet, can we tell which vendors would produce one before testing starts?: No. A SoapUI listing records that a company works with the tool; it does not say whether an engagement began with a finished WSDL or schema, or whether the company produced one as a first step. Engagement models, the field that would normally describe how such preparatory work is scoped and billed, are unpublished for 2 of the 8 companies in this composition, and a published engagement model does not itself spell out what counts as in-scope discovery work. That distinction sits in a written scope, not in this record.
Which of the usual vendor tags actually measure SOAP or REST testing depth, as opposed to delivery location or process factors?: None. The tags used across this composition mark delivery footprint, service model, security posture, device coverage, onboarding time and performance throughput; none of them describe which protocol a company actually works with. That gap sits outside every tag on this page, in the same place a case study or a direct question would need to fill it.
We have already settled on the tool. Is this page enough to choose a vendor from?: Not on its own. Half the tags tracked in this composition reach a single company each and the largest reaches five, so narrowing by any one of them leaves a group too small to compare inside. No profile here carries a verified certificate of any kind, and three publish no case study at all. What the page establishes is which companies state they work in the tool and where they deliver from. Which of them to prefer rests on material this axis does not carry, and eight profiles sit one above the seven-company floor below which the page would stop being published at all.

Other axes these companies appear on

Type of testing: Test automation 8 of these 8 companies also stand there
Industry: Ecommerce 7 of these 8 companies also stand there
Industry: Healthcare 7 of these 8 companies also stand there
Type of testing: Manual testing 7 of these 8 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.