What proves that an accessibility audit reached a stated WCAG conformance level, and is that the same as a certificate?

A VPAT or an accessibility conformance statement is a document a vendor writes and publishes itself; it is not a credential issued by an outside accreditation body the way ISO/IEC 27001 is for the Security focus tag. The certificate field records verified certifications such as ISO 9001 or ISO/IEC 27001, and 8 of the 43 companies in this group carry one; of the three companies with the Accessibility specialists tag, only one carries a verified certificate at all, ISO 9001, a quality-management standard instead of an accessibility credential. A buyer who wants evidence of a specific WCAG level needs the conformance statement itself, because the certificate field only records third-party accreditation, and a self-published VPAT does not qualify as one under that definition.

If a public-sector contract or an app-store listing requires proof that a vendor has handled a legally mandated accessibility requirement before, what does a named client on the profile actually confirm?

Naming a client on a public profile confirms that a business relationship existed; it does not confirm that the engagement involved a specific accessibility law such as Section 508 or the European Accessibility Act. 35 of the 43 companies in this group name at least one client, and 8 name none, and the field does not separate an accessibility engagement from any other type of testing work the same client may have bought. A buyer preparing a procurement file or an app-store accessibility declaration should ask the vendor for a reference tied specifically to an accessibility engagement, since the named-client field alone does not establish that link.

Does an accessibility testing engagement mean manual testing with a screen reader, or an automated scan for WCAG violations?

None of the three companies carrying the Accessibility specialists tag also carry the Automation first tag, which requires a published case study reporting a coverage or regression-time metric from an automated testing practice. That split points to manual verification work behind the accessibility-specific case studies rather than an automated regression pipeline, since a scanner alone does not catch issues like screen-reader focus order or the quality of alternative text. The tag condition also does not separate a case study built around a web site from one built around a mobile app, so a report describing one platform is not evidence that the other received the same depth of review.

How many companies in this group have a signed BAA or a GDPR data processing agreement on record?

4 of the 43 companies in this group have a signed BAA or a GDPR data processing agreement on record, and the other 39 have no public statement for that field. A blank field does not mean a vendor would refuse to sign one; the count reflects what is published on a profile at the time of the last check rather than what a vendor might agree to in a future negotiation. Accessibility testing does not itself involve handling protected health data or EU personal data the way the BAA and DPA fields are built to cover, so a missing agreement here says nothing about a vendor's readiness to run a WCAG conformance audit.

Best Accessibility testing companies in 2026

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

43 testing companies in this catalog list Accessibility testing among their services. They are grouped below by what each is best suited for, in 11 groups. 8 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.

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

The companies

Accessibility testing: 43 companies, grouped by what they are best suited for.
#	Company	Frameworks	Case studies	Published rates	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	Selenium, Appium, REST Assured, Apache JMeter, SoapUI, Postman	2	Blended $50-99/hclutch.co	85
2	Testlio	Not published	5	Blended $25-49/hgoodfirms.co	76
3	Global App Testing	Not published	4	Not published	66
4	DeviQA	Playwright, Cypress, Selenium, Appium, k6	5	Blended $25-49/hclutch.co	44
5	QA Madness	Cypress, Playwright, Selenium, Appium, Robot Framework, WebdriverIO, k6, Apache JMeter	2	Blended $25-49/hclutch.co	44
6	Applause	Not published	3	Not published	39
7	TestFort	SAP, Selenium, Appium	5	Blended $25-49/hclutch.co	32
8	UNGUESS	Not published	1	Not published	27
9	a1qa	Selenium, Playwright, Cypress, WebdriverIO, Appium, Apache JMeter, Postman, Cucumber, k6, REST Assured, TestComplete, Katalon, SoapUI	3	Blended $25-49/hclutch.co	20
10	QATestLab	Salesforce, Selenium, Appium, Robot Framework, TestComplete, Apache JMeter, SoapUI, Postman	2	Blended $25-49/hclutch.co	17
11	White Test Lab	Not published	Not published	Blended up to $25/hclutch.co	14
12	QAwerk	Selenium, Robot Framework, Appium, TestNG, JUnit	3	Blended $25-49/hclutch.co	13
13	Codoid	Selenium	2	Blended up to $25/hclutch.co	5
14	PlaytestCloud	Not published	3	Not published	2
15	appmatics GmbH	Selenium, Playwright, Cypress, Appium, Postman, Robot Framework, TestNG, k6	7	Not published	0
16	BetterQA	Selenium, Playwright, Cypress, WebdriverIO, Appium, Jest, pytest, k6, Apache JMeter, Postman, REST Assured	4	Not published	0
17	ILUNION Accesibilidad	Not published	1	Not published	0
18	imbus AG	SAP, Robot Framework	Not published	Not published	0
19	sepp.med gmbh	Not published	Not published	Not published	0
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	Selenium, Appium, REST Assured, Apache JMeter, SoapUI, Postman	2	Blended $50-99/hclutch.co	85
20	QA Wolf	Playwright, Appium	3	Not published	65
4	DeviQA	Playwright, Cypress, Selenium, Appium, k6	5	Blended $25-49/hclutch.co	44
5	QA Madness	Cypress, Playwright, Selenium, Appium, Robot Framework, WebdriverIO, k6, Apache JMeter	2	Blended $25-49/hclutch.co	44
21	QualityLogic	Selenium, Cypress, WebdriverIO, Katalon, TestComplete, Appium, Espresso, XCUITest, Playwright	3	Blended $25-49/hclutch.co	37
22	BugRaptors	Selenium, WebdriverIO, Cypress, Playwright	2	Blended up to $25/hclutch.co	26
23	Abstracta	Appium, Gatling	4	Blended $50-99/hclutch.co	24
24	QAlified	Postman, SoapUI	5	Blended $25-49/hclutch.co	21
9	a1qa	Selenium, Playwright, Cypress, WebdriverIO, Appium, Apache JMeter, Postman, Cucumber, k6, REST Assured, TestComplete, Katalon, SoapUI	3	Blended $25-49/hclutch.co	20
25	OnPath Testing	Selenium, Cypress, Postman, Cucumber, Apache JMeter	3	Blended $25-49/hclutch.co	17
12	QAwerk	Selenium, Robot Framework, Appium, TestNG, JUnit	3	Blended $25-49/hclutch.co	13
26	QAble	Selenium, Cypress, Playwright, Appium, WebdriverIO, k6, Apache JMeter, Gatling, Postman, REST Assured	4	Blended up to $25/hclutch.co	8
13	Codoid	Selenium	2	Blended up to $25/hclutch.co	5
15	appmatics GmbH	Selenium, Playwright, Cypress, Appium, Postman, Robot Framework, TestNG, k6	7	Not published	0
16	BetterQA	Selenium, Playwright, Cypress, WebdriverIO, Appium, Jest, pytest, k6, Apache JMeter, Postman, REST Assured	4	Not published	0
27	ImpactQA	Oracle applications, SAP, Tricentis Tosca	5	Not published	0
Embedded team model The dedicated team engagement model is offered, and at least one published case study.
2	Testlio	Not published	5	Blended $25-49/hgoodfirms.co	76
20	QA Wolf	Playwright, Appium	3	Not published	65
4	DeviQA	Playwright, Cypress, Selenium, Appium, k6	5	Blended $25-49/hclutch.co	44
5	QA Madness	Cypress, Playwright, Selenium, Appium, Robot Framework, WebdriverIO, k6, Apache JMeter	2	Blended $25-49/hclutch.co	44
7	TestFort	SAP, Selenium, Appium	5	Blended $25-49/hclutch.co	32
9	a1qa	Selenium, Playwright, Cypress, WebdriverIO, Appium, Apache JMeter, Postman, Cucumber, k6, REST Assured, TestComplete, Katalon, SoapUI	3	Blended $25-49/hclutch.co	20
12	QAwerk	Selenium, Robot Framework, Appium, TestNG, JUnit	3	Blended $25-49/hclutch.co	13
26	QAble	Selenium, Cypress, Playwright, Appium, WebdriverIO, k6, Apache JMeter, Gatling, Postman, REST Assured	4	Blended up to $25/hclutch.co	8
28	Ubertesters	Not published	1	Blended $25-49/hclutch.co	7
15	appmatics GmbH	Selenium, Playwright, Cypress, Appium, Postman, Robot Framework, TestNG, k6	7	Not published	0
27	ImpactQA	Oracle applications, SAP, Tricentis Tosca	5	Not published	0
Nearshore for the USA At least one delivery location in Canada, Mexico, Central America or South America.
1	ScienceSoft	Selenium, Appium, REST Assured, Apache JMeter, SoapUI, Postman	2	Blended $50-99/hclutch.co	85
23	Abstracta	Appium, Gatling	4	Blended $50-99/hclutch.co	24
24	QAlified	Postman, SoapUI	5	Blended $25-49/hclutch.co	21
9	a1qa	Selenium, Playwright, Cypress, WebdriverIO, Appium, Apache JMeter, Postman, Cucumber, k6, REST Assured, TestComplete, Katalon, SoapUI	3	Blended $25-49/hclutch.co	20
29	Fable	Not published	5	Not published	0
18	imbus AG	SAP, Robot Framework	Not published	Not published	0
30	PLATO	Not published	1	Not published	0
Performance engineering Performance testing is offered as a service, and at least one published case study reports a throughput or latency metric.
21	QualityLogic	Selenium, Cypress, WebdriverIO, Katalon, TestComplete, Appium, Espresso, XCUITest, Playwright	3	Blended $25-49/hclutch.co	37
7	TestFort	SAP, Selenium, Appium	5	Blended $25-49/hclutch.co	32
22	BugRaptors	Selenium, WebdriverIO, Cypress, Playwright	2	Blended up to $25/hclutch.co	26
23	Abstracta	Appium, Gatling	4	Blended $50-99/hclutch.co	24
10	QATestLab	Salesforce, Selenium, Appium, Robot Framework, TestComplete, Apache JMeter, SoapUI, Postman	2	Blended $25-49/hclutch.co	17
31	MuukTest	Playwright, Selenium, Appium	5	Not published	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.
1	ScienceSoft	Selenium, Appium, REST Assured, Apache JMeter, SoapUI, Postman	2	Blended $50-99/hclutch.co	85
4	DeviQA	Playwright, Cypress, Selenium, Appium, k6	5	Blended $25-49/hclutch.co	44
5	QA Madness	Cypress, Playwright, Selenium, Appium, Robot Framework, WebdriverIO, k6, Apache JMeter	2	Blended $25-49/hclutch.co	44
10	QATestLab	Salesforce, Selenium, Appium, Robot Framework, TestComplete, Apache JMeter, SoapUI, Postman	2	Blended $25-49/hclutch.co	17
12	QAwerk	Selenium, Robot Framework, Appium, TestNG, JUnit	3	Blended $25-49/hclutch.co	13
16	BetterQA	Selenium, Playwright, Cypress, WebdriverIO, Appium, Jest, pytest, k6, Apache JMeter, Postman, REST Assured	4	Not published	0
Crowdtesting at scale The crowdtesting engagement model is offered, and a published tester pool of 10,000 people or more, with a source.
3	Global App Testing	Not published	4	Not published	66
6	Applause	Not published	3	Not published	39
8	UNGUESS	Not published	1	Not published	27
28	Ubertesters	Not published	1	Blended $25-49/hclutch.co	7
32	Digivante	Not published	4	Not published	0
Device lab coverage A published device lab of 100 real devices or more, with a source.
4	DeviQA	Playwright, Cypress, Selenium, Appium, k6	5	Blended $25-49/hclutch.co	44
21	QualityLogic	Selenium, Cypress, WebdriverIO, Katalon, TestComplete, Appium, Espresso, XCUITest, Playwright	3	Blended $25-49/hclutch.co	37
10	QATestLab	Salesforce, Selenium, Appium, Robot Framework, TestComplete, Apache JMeter, SoapUI, Postman	2	Blended $25-49/hclutch.co	17
33	PLUS QA	pytest, TestNG, JUnit, Selenium, Appium, Postman	Not published	Blended $50-99/hclutch.co	8
28	Ubertesters	Not published	1	Blended $25-49/hclutch.co	7
Accessibility specialists Accessibility testing is offered as a service, and at least one published case study reports an accessibility conformance metric.
34	Vervali Systems	Not published	1	Blended $25-49/hclutch.co	11
17	ILUNION Accesibilidad	Not published	1	Not published	0
30	PLATO	Not published	1	Not published	0
Fast onboarding A published onboarding time of 14 days or less, with a source.
10	QATestLab	Salesforce, Selenium, Appium, Robot Framework, TestComplete, Apache JMeter, SoapUI, Postman	2	Blended $25-49/hclutch.co	17
Regulated industries At least two verified certificates from ISO 13485, HITRUST CSF, PCI QSA and ISO/IEC 27001.
16	BetterQA	Selenium, Playwright, Cypress, WebdriverIO, Appium, Jest, pytest, k6, Apache JMeter, Postman, REST Assured	4	Not published	0
Other companies in this axis No applicability tag met its criterion for these profiles.
35	Indium Software	Salesforce	1	Not published	21
36	Coderio	Selenium, Cypress, Playwright, Appium, XCUITest, Postman, REST Assured, Apache JMeter	Not published	Blended $50-99/hclutch.co	10
37	Kualitatem	Not published	Not published	Blended $25-49/hclutch.co	9
38	Lotus Quality Assurance	Selenium, Cypress, Appium, SoapUI, Apache JMeter	Not published	Not published	9
39	iBeta Quality Assurance	Selenium, Appium, Playwright, Robot Framework, Cypress, Apache JMeter	1	Blended $50-99/hclutch.co	4
40	Bugwolf	Salesforce, Workday, SAP, Microsoft Dynamics 365, ServiceNow	Not published	Not published	0
41	QualiZeal	SAP, Tricentis Tosca	Not published	Not published	0
42	RTTS	Salesforce	Not published	Not published	0
43	Zoonou	Not published	Not published	Not published	0

What the accessibility testing criterion covers

A company appears on this page when its profile lists accessibility testing as a service it sells. That criterion alone says nothing about which assistive technologies were tested or whether an audit reaches a specific WCAG level. A separate, narrower condition sits behind the Accessibility specialists tag: it requires the service claim plus at least one published case study that reports an accessibility conformance metric. Three of the 43 companies here clear that second bar: Vervali Systems, ILUNION Accesibilidad and PLATO. Each of the three has a published case study built around a specific accessibility engagement, which is what the tag's case study requirement asks for. Carrying the tag confirms that a conformance metric exists in at least one published case, a fact about that engagement and not a rating of every project the company runs.

Tag coverage across the 43 companies

Nine of the 43 companies here carry none of the eleven applicability tags used to split this list: their public profiles do not document a case study, a specific engagement model or a certificate that meets any of the eleven conditions. At the other end, two companies carry five tags each, more than any other company in this group: DeviQA and QATestLab. Both combine a delivery-location tag with several service-model tags at once.

Where the delivery-model tags overlap

Nearshore for the EU is the largest tag on this page, at 19 of the 43 companies, and Automation first is the second largest, at 16. Eight companies carry both tags: ScienceSoft, DeviQA, QA Madness, a1qa, QAwerk, Codoid, appmatics GmbH and BetterQA. Nearshore for the USA applies to 7 companies, and three of them also carry Nearshore for the EU: ScienceSoft, a1qa and imbus AG. Embedded team model applies to 11 companies. Eight of them also carry Automation first. Of the remaining three, TestFort carries Performance engineering instead, Ubertesters carries Crowdtesting at scale and Device lab coverage, and Testlio carries no other service-model tag.

Security focus without a verified certificate

Security focus requires security testing offered together with either penetration testing or a verified ISO/IEC 27001 certificate, plus a published case study. Six companies carry the tag. Of those six, only BetterQA has a verified certificate on record here, ISO/IEC 27001 among them. The other five qualify through the penetration-testing branch of the same condition instead of through a certificate.

How this ranking was put together

Membership is computed from the profile, not chosen: companies appear here when they list Accessibility testing among their services, 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: frameworks, case studies, published rates, 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.
Nearshore for the USA: At least one delivery location in Canada, Mexico, Central America or South America.
Performance engineering: Performance testing is offered as a service, and at least one published case study reports a throughput or latency metric.
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.
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.
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.
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

What proves that an accessibility audit reached a stated WCAG conformance level, and is that the same as a certificate?: A VPAT or an accessibility conformance statement is a document a vendor writes and publishes itself; it is not a credential issued by an outside accreditation body the way ISO/IEC 27001 is for the Security focus tag. The certificate field records verified certifications such as ISO 9001 or ISO/IEC 27001, and 8 of the 43 companies in this group carry one; of the three companies with the Accessibility specialists tag, only one carries a verified certificate at all, ISO 9001, a quality-management standard instead of an accessibility credential. A buyer who wants evidence of a specific WCAG level needs the conformance statement itself, because the certificate field only records third-party accreditation, and a self-published VPAT does not qualify as one under that definition.
If a public-sector contract or an app-store listing requires proof that a vendor has handled a legally mandated accessibility requirement before, what does a named client on the profile actually confirm?: Naming a client on a public profile confirms that a business relationship existed; it does not confirm that the engagement involved a specific accessibility law such as Section 508 or the European Accessibility Act. 35 of the 43 companies in this group name at least one client, and 8 name none, and the field does not separate an accessibility engagement from any other type of testing work the same client may have bought. A buyer preparing a procurement file or an app-store accessibility declaration should ask the vendor for a reference tied specifically to an accessibility engagement, since the named-client field alone does not establish that link.
Does an accessibility testing engagement mean manual testing with a screen reader, or an automated scan for WCAG violations?: None of the three companies carrying the Accessibility specialists tag also carry the Automation first tag, which requires a published case study reporting a coverage or regression-time metric from an automated testing practice. That split points to manual verification work behind the accessibility-specific case studies rather than an automated regression pipeline, since a scanner alone does not catch issues like screen-reader focus order or the quality of alternative text. The tag condition also does not separate a case study built around a web site from one built around a mobile app, so a report describing one platform is not evidence that the other received the same depth of review.
How many companies in this group have a signed BAA or a GDPR data processing agreement on record?: 4 of the 43 companies in this group have a signed BAA or a GDPR data processing agreement on record, and the other 39 have no public statement for that field. A blank field does not mean a vendor would refuse to sign one; the count reflects what is published on a profile at the time of the last check rather than what a vendor might agree to in a future negotiation. Accessibility testing does not itself involve handling protected health data or EU personal data the way the BAA and DPA fields are built to cover, so a missing agreement here says nothing about a vendor's readiness to run a WCAG conformance audit.

Previous versions

Each year is frozen as it stood when the snapshot was taken, with the field values recorded at that date. This page always shows the current version.

The 2026 list: 32 companies, taken 2026-09-03. 11 entered and 0 left since.

Other axes these companies appear on

Industry: Ecommerce 36 of these 43 companies also stand there
Industry: Healthcare 34 of these 43 companies also stand there
Industry: Banking 27 of these 43 companies also stand there
Delivery location: Europe 26 of these 43 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.