Our roadmap needs browser and device coverage as well as hands-on testing. What else sits on the published service lists?

Compatibility testing across browsers, operating systems and devices comes up as often as manual testing: both are offered by four of the eight companies, the highest count recorded for any service here. Performance testing and test automation follow at three companies each, and API testing, localization testing, security testing and penetration testing each appear at two. Compliance testing, QA consulting and accessibility testing are listed by one company each. The shortest published list is a single line, penetration testing, and the longest runs to six services, so no profile here publishes a full-service menu.

Device coverage has to come from somewhere. Is it owned hardware here, or a crowd?

Two companies publish their own real-device lab, and a third publishes a crowdtesting pool instead of a lab, each showing capacity a different way. One device lab lists 700 real devices, the other 150, both figures taken from each company's own site and checked in 2026. The crowdtesting pool lists 1,300 registered testers, sourced from an independent Philippine industry news article dated March 2022 rather than from the company's own site. A device count is hardware a company owns; a pool figure is people it can call on, and the catalog keeps them as separate fields. The other five companies publish neither figure.

We sell into banking, not games. Which sectors does the record actually name?

Banking, healthcare and energy and utilities each appear on three companies, the highest count after gaming, which appears on five. Ecommerce and the public sector each appear on two, and education, media, telecom, insurance and logistics on one company each. Eleven sectors are named in all, and every one of them except gaming is named by three companies or fewer. A buyer who needs banking or healthcare experience is choosing among three profiles that name the sector, a narrower field than the five that name gaming, and the sector on a profile is a statement of experience rather than a finished piece of work.

Best QA companies in the Philippines, 2026

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

8 testing companies in this catalog have a delivery location in one of the countries the Philippines covers. One of them has been acquired and is marked in the table below. 1 of them holds a certificate confirmed by a register entry and 1 publishes a rate card. Composition and order last changed on September 4, 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

the Philippines: 8 companies, grouped by what they are best suited for.
#	Company	Delivery locations	Published rates	Team size	Reviews
Device lab coverage A published device lab of 100 real devices or more, with a source.
1	SnoopGame	Estonia, Poland, Romania, Ukraine, North Macedonia, Mexico, the Philippines	Blended up to $25/hclutch.co	51-200 people	9
2	Latis Global	South Korea, the Philippines	Not published	51-200 people	0
Nearshore for the EU At least one delivery location in the EU or the EEA, or in Ukraine, Georgia, Serbia or Moldova.
1	SnoopGame	Estonia, Poland, Romania, Ukraine, North Macedonia, Mexico, the Philippines	Blended up to $25/hclutch.co	51-200 people	9
3	Testronic	the UK, Poland, the USA, the Philippines, Romania, Serbia	Not published	1000 or more people	0
Automation first Test automation is offered as a service, and at least one published case study reports a coverage or regression time metric.
4	Planitacquired	Australia, New Zealand, the Philippines, India, the UK	Not published	1000 or more people	0
Embedded team model The dedicated team engagement model is offered, and at least one published case study.
1	SnoopGame	Estonia, Poland, Romania, Ukraine, North Macedonia, Mexico, the Philippines	Blended up to $25/hclutch.co	51-200 people	9
Fast onboarding A published onboarding time of 14 days or less, with a source.
5	CHEQ Systems	the Philippines	Not published	201-500 people	0
Nearshore for the USA At least one delivery location in Canada, Mexico, Central America or South America.
1	SnoopGame	Estonia, Poland, Romania, Ukraine, North Macedonia, Mexico, the Philippines	Blended up to $25/hclutch.co	51-200 people	9
Other companies in this axis No applicability tag met its criterion for these profiles.
6	Alliance Software Inc.	the Philippines	Not published	501-1000 people	0
7	Pointwest	the Philippines, the USA	Not published	51-200 people	0
8	Secuna	the Philippines	Not published	11-50 people	0

Philippine delivery sits inside a wider footprint for most of this composition

Every company on this page records at least one delivery location in the Philippines, and that field alone decides membership here. Headquarters is a separate field, and it lines up with delivery for under half of this composition: 4 of the 8 companies, CHEQ Systems, Alliance Software Inc., Pointwest and Secuna, also record a headquarters in the Philippines. The other 4 are headquartered elsewhere: SnoopGame in Estonia, Latis Global in South Korea, Testronic in the United Kingdom, and Planit in Australia. For these four, the Philippines is one of several recorded delivery countries, and none of the four records the Philippines as its headquarters country.

Automation first resolves to one company, and two others fall just short

The Automation first tag on this page applies to exactly 1 of the 8 companies, Planit, which since October 2025 has operated as a line of business inside its parent rather than as a standalone company. Among the other 7 companies on this page, none carries this tag. Two of those seven, CHEQ Systems and Pointwest, also list test automation among their services, but neither has a published case study attached to a coverage or regression metric, so neither meets the tag's second condition. Device lab coverage and Nearshore for the EU each apply to 2 companies: SnoopGame and Latis Global carry the device lab tag, and SnoopGame and Testronic carry the nearshore tag. Embedded team model and Nearshore for the USA both resolve to SnoopGame, the only company in this composition that carries either tag. Fast onboarding resolves to a different single company, CHEQ Systems. Three companies, Alliance Software Inc., Pointwest and Secuna, carry no applicability tag in this composition; a missing tag does not remove a company from this page.

Founding years span two decades, team sizes span five bands

Founding year is recorded for all 8 companies on this page, ranging from 1997 to 2017, a span of 20 years. Planit holds the earliest year alone; Secuna holds the latest year alone. Team size band splits into five groups: 1 company reports 11 to 50 (Secuna), 3 report 51 to 200 (SnoopGame, Latis Global and Pointwest), 1 reports 201 to 500 (CHEQ Systems), 1 reports 501 to 1,000 (Alliance Software Inc.), and 2 report 1,000 or more (Testronic and Planit). No band on this page holds more than 3 companies.

Where these eight profiles are thinnest

None of the 8 companies on this page has a signed BAA or a GDPR data processing agreement recorded in its profile. Client stages and published rates are each recorded for only 1 of the 8. Case studies are recorded for 2 of the 8, and frameworks for 3 of the 8. Named clients fare better: 4 of the 8 profiles record at least one named client backed by a source. Engagement models are recorded for 5 of the 8, and services and industries are each recorded for 7 of the 8, the fullest fields tracked in this composition summary. None of these fields is part of the criterion for this page: a sparse profile is listed here on the same terms as a full one.

How this ranking was put together

Membership is computed from the profile, not chosen: companies appear here when they have a delivery location in one of the countries the Philippines covers, 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: delivery locations, 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.

Device lab coverage: A published device lab of 100 real devices or more, with a source.
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.
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.
Nearshore for the USA: At least one delivery location in Canada, Mexico, Central America or South America.

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

Our roadmap needs browser and device coverage as well as hands-on testing. What else sits on the published service lists?: Compatibility testing across browsers, operating systems and devices comes up as often as manual testing: both are offered by four of the eight companies, the highest count recorded for any service here. Performance testing and test automation follow at three companies each, and API testing, localization testing, security testing and penetration testing each appear at two. Compliance testing, QA consulting and accessibility testing are listed by one company each. The shortest published list is a single line, penetration testing, and the longest runs to six services, so no profile here publishes a full-service menu.
Device coverage has to come from somewhere. Is it owned hardware here, or a crowd?: Two companies publish their own real-device lab, and a third publishes a crowdtesting pool instead of a lab, each showing capacity a different way. One device lab lists 700 real devices, the other 150, both figures taken from each company's own site and checked in 2026. The crowdtesting pool lists 1,300 registered testers, sourced from an independent Philippine industry news article dated March 2022 rather than from the company's own site. A device count is hardware a company owns; a pool figure is people it can call on, and the catalog keeps them as separate fields. The other five companies publish neither figure.
We sell into banking, not games. Which sectors does the record actually name?: Banking, healthcare and energy and utilities each appear on three companies, the highest count after gaming, which appears on five. Ecommerce and the public sector each appear on two, and education, media, telecom, insurance and logistics on one company each. Eleven sectors are named in all, and every one of them except gaming is named by three companies or fewer. A buyer who needs banking or healthcare experience is choosing among three profiles that name the sector, a narrower field than the five that name gaming, and the sector on a profile is a statement of experience rather than a finished piece of work.

Other axes these companies appear on

Type of testing: Compatibility testing 4 of these 8 companies also stand there
Industry: Games 4 of these 8 companies also stand there
Type of testing: Manual testing 4 of these 8 companies also stand there
Type of testing: Performance testing 3 of these 8 companies also stand there

How to choose a vendor on this axis

Published by QA RatingPublished on September 4, 2026Updated on September 4, 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.