How many companies in this composition hold a verified certificate, and how many distinct certificate types appear among them?

6 of the 38 companies in this composition hold a verified certificate on file. The certificates recorded across those 6 are ISO/IEC 27001, ISO 9001, CREST and TMMi, four distinct types in total, and one of the 6 holds two of them at once.

A case study on file proves a vendor finished some project. What does it not prove about whether that project involved content-protection or DRM testing?

A published case study confirms that a vendor completed and chose to describe some project; it says nothing about whether that project involved content-protection or DRM testing rather than an unrelated kind of work, since the topic is whatever the company picked to publish. Case studies are missing entirely for 11 of the 38 companies in this composition, and among the other 27 the recorded topics run from load testing to accessibility work; there is no fixed catalog a buyer can filter by subject. Before assuming coverage, ask the vendor directly for a reference project involving conditional-access or content-protection testing.

A live broadcast draws its heaviest traffic in a short window around one event. What does a Performance engineering listing show about readiness for that kind of spike?

A Performance engineering listing reflects a throughput or latency metric a vendor already measured on a scenario of its own choosing, and it does not reflect whether that scenario resembles a short, concentrated spike tied to one live broadcast rather than a steady load. Planning a short, high-intensity engagement around a broadcast date usually means negotiating a rate directly rather than reading one off a table, because published rates are missing for 16 of the 38 companies in this composition. The load profile behind a published metric is a separate fact from the metric itself, and neither the profile nor the concurrency it was run at is a field this catalog records.

Broadcast distribution often carries a requirement to caption content and meet an accessibility conformance standard. What does an accessibility conformance metric in a case study confirm?

An accessibility conformance metric in a case study shows that some test produced a measurable score against some standard, and it says nothing about whether that standard is the one a particular broadcast distributor requires for captions or conformance. Named clients are missing for 9 of the 38 companies in this composition, so the project behind a given metric cannot always be traced to a public reference the buyer could call to check independently. Which conformance standard applies is a property of the distribution agreement rather than of the testing vendor, and no field on this page carries it.

Best Media QA companies in 2026

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

38 testing companies in this catalog list Media among the industries they work in. They are grouped below by what each is best suited for, in 10 groups. 6 of them hold a certificate confirmed by a register entry and 22 publish a rate card. Composition and order last changed on September 6, 2026.

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

The companies

Media: 38 companies, grouped by what they are best suited for.
#	Company	Certificates	Case studies	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	Testlio	None confirmed	5	51-200 people	76
2	Global App Testing	ISO/IEC 27001register entry	4	51-200 people	66
3	DeviQA	None confirmed	5	201-500 people	44
4	Applause	None confirmed	3	201-500 people	39
5	TestFort	None confirmed	5	51-200 people	32
6	UNGUESS	ISO/IEC 27001register entryISO 9001register entry	1	51-200 people	27
7	a1qa	None confirmed	3	1000 or more people	20
8	QATestLab	None confirmed	2	501-1000 people	17
9	AskYourQA	None confirmed	1	1-10 people	7
10	QA Mentor	None confirmed	Not published	201-500 people	7
11	Codoid	None confirmed	2	51-200 people	5
12	Soflab Technology	None confirmed	1	51-200 people	3
13	appmatics GmbH	None confirmed	7	201-500 people	0
14	Char49	None confirmed	Not published	1-10 people	0
15	Devoteam Cyber Trust	CRESTregister entry	Not published	Not published	0
16	QAValue	None confirmed	Not published	11-50 people	0
17	S21sec	None confirmed	Not published	201-500 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.
3	DeviQA	None confirmed	5	201-500 people	44
18	QualityLogic	None confirmed	3	51-200 people	37
19	QASource	None confirmed	1	1000 or more people	29
20	BugRaptors	None confirmed	2	501-1000 people	26
7	a1qa	None confirmed	3	1000 or more people	20
21	Frugal Testing	None confirmed	1	51-200 people	7
22	Moolya	None confirmed	4	501-1000 people	7
11	Codoid	None confirmed	2	51-200 people	5
13	appmatics GmbH	None confirmed	7	201-500 people	0
23	ImpactQA	None confirmed	5	201-500 people	0
24	QualityAI	None confirmed	2	1000 or more people	0
25	QualityKiosk Technologies	None confirmed	5	1000 or more people	0
26	Testhouse	None confirmed	2	501-1000 people	0
Embedded team model The dedicated team engagement model is offered, and at least one published case study.
1	Testlio	None confirmed	5	51-200 people	76
3	DeviQA	None confirmed	5	201-500 people	44
5	TestFort	None confirmed	5	51-200 people	32
19	QASource	None confirmed	1	1000 or more people	29
7	a1qa	None confirmed	3	1000 or more people	20
13	appmatics GmbH	None confirmed	7	201-500 people	0
23	ImpactQA	None confirmed	5	201-500 people	0
24	QualityAI	None confirmed	2	1000 or more people	0
Performance engineering Performance testing is offered as a service, and at least one published case study reports a throughput or latency metric.
18	QualityLogic	None confirmed	3	51-200 people	37
5	TestFort	None confirmed	5	51-200 people	32
19	QASource	None confirmed	1	1000 or more people	29
20	BugRaptors	None confirmed	2	501-1000 people	26
8	QATestLab	None confirmed	2	501-1000 people	17
12	Soflab Technology	None confirmed	1	51-200 people	3
27	MuukTest	None confirmed	5	11-50 people	0
Crowdtesting at scale The crowdtesting engagement model is offered, and a published tester pool of 10,000 people or more, with a source.
2	Global App Testing	ISO/IEC 27001register entry	4	51-200 people	66
4	Applause	None confirmed	3	201-500 people	39
6	UNGUESS	ISO/IEC 27001register entryISO 9001register entry	1	51-200 people	27
28	Digivante	None confirmed	4	11-50 people	0
Device lab coverage A published device lab of 100 real devices or more, with a source.
3	DeviQA	None confirmed	5	201-500 people	44
18	QualityLogic	None confirmed	3	51-200 people	37
8	QATestLab	None confirmed	2	501-1000 people	17
Nearshore for the USA At least one delivery location in Canada, Mexico, Central America or South America.
19	QASource	None confirmed	1	1000 or more people	29
7	a1qa	None confirmed	3	1000 or more people	20
29	Fable	None confirmed	5	51-200 people	0
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.
3	DeviQA	None confirmed	5	201-500 people	44
8	QATestLab	None confirmed	2	501-1000 people	17
30	Bishop Fox	CRESTregister entry	5	201-500 people	0
Accessibility specialists Accessibility testing is offered as a service, and at least one published case study reports an accessibility conformance metric.
31	Vervali Systems	None confirmed	1	51-200 people	11
Fast onboarding A published onboarding time of 14 days or less, with a source.
8	QATestLab	None confirmed	2	501-1000 people	17
Other companies in this axis No applicability tag met its criterion for these profiles.
32	Indium Software	None confirmed	1	1000 or more people	21
33	Coderio	None confirmed	Not published	501-1000 people	10
34	Kualitatem	TMMiregister entry	Not published	51-200 people	9
35	Testrig Technologies	None confirmed	Not published	51-200 people	7
36	RTTS	None confirmed	Not published	51-200 people	0
37	Testbytes	None confirmed	Not published	51-200 people	0
38	Zoonou	CRESTregister entry	Not published	11-50 people	0

A media label spans companies founded from 1986 to 2020

A company appears on this page because its own profile names media among the industries it declares serving. That declaration comes from the company's own site, and this page does not independently confirm a media client behind it. The 38 companies here were founded between 1986 and 2020 and are headquartered across twelve countries: twelve in the United States, nine in India, six in the United Kingdom, two each in Poland and Portugal, and one each in Italy, Cyprus, Romania, Germany, Canada, the Netherlands and Spain. A declared industry can sit alongside several others on the same profile without ranking which one comes first, so this spread says nothing about how central media work is to any one company's business.

The largest tag here counts delivery locations, not addresses

The 17 companies carrying Nearshore for the EU qualify through at least one delivery location in the EU, the EEA, Ukraine, Georgia, Serbia or Moldova, a condition built on delivery footprint, not headquarters address. Ten of the 17 are themselves headquartered inside a qualifying country, among them DeviQA in Poland and QATestLab in Cyprus. The other 7, including Testlio and a1qa, are headquartered in the United States, the United Kingdom or India, and carry the tag only through an additional delivery location inside the region.

Automation first, Performance engineering and Embedded team model mostly split along nearshore lines

The 13 companies carrying Automation first pair test automation offered as a service with a published case study reporting a coverage or regression-time metric. Four of the 13, including DeviQA and a1qa, also carry Nearshore for the EU; the other 9 carry no EU-adjacent nearshore tag on this page, and the other 13 companies carrying Nearshore for the EU carry no Automation first tag. The 7 companies carrying Performance engineering split along the same divide: three also carry Automation first, three carry Nearshore for the EU instead, and MuukTest carries neither. The 8 companies carrying Embedded team model mostly follow Automation first: six of the eight also carry it, and the other two carry Nearshore for the EU instead, one of the two also carrying Performance engineering. The 4 companies carrying Crowdtesting at scale lean the other way: three also carry Nearshore for the EU, and the fourth, Digivante, carries neither of the two largest tags.

Device lab coverage, Security focus and the nearshore tags rarely stack

The 3 companies carrying Device lab coverage, DeviQA, QualityLogic and QATestLab, each also carry Automation first or Nearshore for the EU, and DeviQA is the only one of the three carrying both. The 3 companies carrying Security focus include Bishop Fox, which carries no other applicability tag on this page; DeviQA and QATestLab each combine it with several other tags instead. The 3 companies carrying Nearshore for the USA are QASource, a1qa and Fable; a1qa is the only one of the three also carrying Nearshore for the EU, and the only company on this page carrying both nearshore tags together. Two tags on this page reach exactly one company each: Fast onboarding, met by QATestLab's published onboarding time of 14 days or less, and Accessibility specialists, met by Vervali Systems's published case study reporting an accessibility conformance metric. A tag reaching one company records that one specific published figure exists with a source behind it; the underlying service may still be offered more widely without that figure on file.

Seven companies clear no tag's published condition on this page

7 of the 38 companies in this composition meet no tag's published condition on any field recorded for them: Indium Software, Coderio, Kualitatem, Testrig Technologies, RTTS, Testbytes and Zoonou. Two of the seven hold a verified certificate and five hold none, and none of the ten tags on this page is met by a certificate alone, so a certificate by itself clears no condition here. A missing tag records that a specific published condition, such as a case study with a named metric or a delivery location in a listed region, was not met on the fields recorded for a profile; it does not mean the company offers no relevant service.

How this ranking was put together

Membership is computed from the profile, not chosen: companies appear here when they list Media among the industries they work in, 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: certificates, case studies, 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.
Embedded team model: The dedicated team engagement model is offered, and at least one published case study.
Performance engineering: Performance testing is offered as a service, and at least one published case study reports a throughput or latency metric.
Crowdtesting at scale: The crowdtesting engagement model is offered, and a published tester pool of 10,000 people or more, with a source.
Device lab coverage: A published device lab of 100 real devices or more, with a source.
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.
Accessibility specialists: Accessibility testing is offered as a service, and at least one published case study reports an accessibility conformance metric.
Fast onboarding: A published onboarding time of 14 days or less, with a source.

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

How many companies in this composition hold a verified certificate, and how many distinct certificate types appear among them?: 6 of the 38 companies in this composition hold a verified certificate on file. The certificates recorded across those 6 are ISO/IEC 27001, ISO 9001, CREST and TMMi, four distinct types in total, and one of the 6 holds two of them at once.
A case study on file proves a vendor finished some project. What does it not prove about whether that project involved content-protection or DRM testing?: A published case study confirms that a vendor completed and chose to describe some project; it says nothing about whether that project involved content-protection or DRM testing rather than an unrelated kind of work, since the topic is whatever the company picked to publish. Case studies are missing entirely for 11 of the 38 companies in this composition, and among the other 27 the recorded topics run from load testing to accessibility work; there is no fixed catalog a buyer can filter by subject. Before assuming coverage, ask the vendor directly for a reference project involving conditional-access or content-protection testing.
A live broadcast draws its heaviest traffic in a short window around one event. What does a Performance engineering listing show about readiness for that kind of spike?: A Performance engineering listing reflects a throughput or latency metric a vendor already measured on a scenario of its own choosing, and it does not reflect whether that scenario resembles a short, concentrated spike tied to one live broadcast rather than a steady load. Planning a short, high-intensity engagement around a broadcast date usually means negotiating a rate directly rather than reading one off a table, because published rates are missing for 16 of the 38 companies in this composition. The load profile behind a published metric is a separate fact from the metric itself, and neither the profile nor the concurrency it was run at is a field this catalog records.
Broadcast distribution often carries a requirement to caption content and meet an accessibility conformance standard. What does an accessibility conformance metric in a case study confirm?: An accessibility conformance metric in a case study shows that some test produced a measurable score against some standard, and it says nothing about whether that standard is the one a particular broadcast distributor requires for captions or conformance. Named clients are missing for 9 of the 38 companies in this composition, so the project behind a given metric cannot always be traced to a public reference the buyer could call to check independently. Which conformance standard applies is a property of the distribution agreement rather than of the testing vendor, and no field on this page carries it.

Other axes these companies appear on

Type of testing: Manual testing 28 of these 38 companies also stand there
Delivery location: Europe 27 of these 38 companies also stand there
Type of testing: Test automation 27 of these 38 companies also stand there
Type of testing: Performance testing 23 of these 38 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.