Accountability
for Quality

Quality you can count on. Accountability drives results.

Locations

Years of experience

250+

Software QA engineers

200+

Integrations into an existing development & testing process

300+

Projects tested from scratch

50+

Reviews on

Accountability for quality implies taking responsibility for ensuring the high quality of a developed software product. This includes exercising control, setting up QA processes, conducting testing, managing defects, and taking steps to improve the quality of the product, etc. All these efforts aim to ensure that the product meets high industry standards and customer expectations. With years of experience in the field, DeviQA brings a wealth of expertise to every project. Elevate your product to new heights of excellence with our expert services.

When Do You Need to Hand Over Accountability for Quality to Us?

You have a lack of expertise in QA.

You are unsure of where to begin.

You want to entrust the quality of your software to experts who know when, how, and what to test.

You do not want to burden yourself with QA-related issues but prefer to focus on development and innovation.

Our Approach to Taking Accountability for Quality

Accountability for quality encompasses comprehensive control and responsibility for quality across various aspects of software development. Here's what you can expect from this service:

Strategic Analysis

We conduct a thorough assessment of project goals, peculiarities, workflows, and risks to enable informed and strategic decision-making.

Testing Strategy

We define test objectives, scenarios, and techniques to ensure quality and reliability, maximizing test coverage and minimizing the number of defects.

Test Planning

We create detailed plans outlining testing activities, timelines, and resources for efficient test execution aligned with project objectives.

Technology Integration

We seamlessly integrate advanced testing tools, focusing on efficiency, scalability, and performance.

Test Execution

We comprehensively test your software by executing all the required types of testing, both manually and with the help of automation.

Quality Monitoring

We continuously monitor and evaluate product performance, reliability, and adherence to quality standards, proactively addressing issues.

Reporting and Analysis

We capture and analyze project metrics to provide stakeholders with visibility into project status and drive informed decision-making.

Challenges You May Overcome by Making Us Accountable for Quality

Inconsistent Testing Processes

Challenge

Many businesses struggle with inconsistent testing procedures, leading to unpredictable software quality.

Solution

Our well-structured QA approach, from analysis to reporting, ensures uniform testing protocols, reducing errors and enhancing overall software reliability.

Quality Resource Constraints

Challenge

Limited QA resources can hinder the thorough testing required for high-quality software.

Solution

DeviQA offers flexible and scalable testing solutions, adapting to your needs while maintaining a stringent focus on quality assurance.

Cross-Functional Collaboration

Challenge

Communication gaps between development and testing teams can result in misunderstandings and overlooked issues.

Solution

Our integrated approach fosters seamless collaboration, with clear communication channels and shared project visibility to enhance efficiency and accountability.

We serve

Our expertise and resources allow us to cover the unique needs of each project, ensuring the delivery of high-quality software that meets users’ requirements and business goals.

Industries

Healthcare

FinTech

Real Estate

Cybersecurity

Retail

AdTech

Solutions

Banking Apps

SaaS Solutions

ERP Software

CRM Systems

eCommerce

Technologies

Blockchain

Cloud Computing

Internet of Things

Big Data

Partner with DeviQA: see the difference

Test coverage :

90%

Before

After

2.5 weeks to run regression testing

1 day to run regression testing

7 days to run smoke testing

1 day to run smoke testing

Outdated test cases

60% increase in the number of regression tests and relevant test cases

50% test coverage

90% test coverage

Supported localizations were not tested

27 localizations supported by QA engineers

No automation testing

>1500 automated test scenarios created

Read Story

Test coverage :

97%

Before

After

Existing workflow in Jira didn’t allow to understand how many bugs were left unfixed before the release and their priorities

Adjusted the Jira workflow, integrated TestRail with Jira to be able to see statisticls of the issues per release

The lack of test documentation

Developed necessary test artifacts that adhere to industry standards and are easily maintainable

No Automation test coverage

Added multithreading to run tests in parallel on 10 different threads, which reduced the time of the test run in 7 times

Read Story

Releases per day:

Before

After

1 huge release every 1-2 months

4-5 releases per day

1 large team with an unclear scope of work

~15 squads each with a straight and clear working plan

0 test cases

200+ e2e test cases for the whole app

1-2 months to release a new feature

2 weeks max to release a new feature

Convoluted and complex process of urgent bug-fix releases

Clear and fast way to release any fix

Read Story

Test coverage:

90%

Before

After

The architecture of the test suite could not be scaled and was difficult to maintain for a large number of tests

Designed the architecture of the test framework from scratch

Tests couldn’t be integrated with other testing and DevOps tools

Integrated auto tests with Jenkins, TestRail, and Jira to have a complete test ecosystem up and running

Tests took many hours to be completed

Built a test suite that ran auto-tests using 16 threads on multiple machines

Read Story

Test coverage:

80%

Before

After

Test suite was developed without maintenance and scalability support in mind

We conducted a comprehensive review of the existing test suite, identified areas of improvement and implemented best testing practices

The high number of issues or defects that were present in the software

The number of issues reduced to 25 % after automation was properly implemented

Slow test results and the lack of stable automated tests, leading to hindered deployment capabilities

SoftNAS experienced several benefits, including faster test results and the acquisition of stable automated tests, resulting in improved deployment capabilities

Read Story

Supported platforms:

Before

After

Developers were responsible for testing, and they executed it chaotically

>90% of the application was covered with test cases

Many bugs were overlooked during regular test runs

100% coverage was ensured for smoke and sanity testing

There was a lack of test documentation

>300 blocker issues were detected

There were many major and critical issues in a production environment

The number of customer support issues was reduced by more than 50%

Read Story

Parallel threads:

Before

After

Outdated BE autotests

All existing autotests are up-to-date

Only smoke tests were automated on BE

~2800 autotests added

No autotests on FE

>90% of test cases are automated

Manual smoke testing on FE

~99% of smoke tests are automated

Manual release testing

~95% decrease in post-release regression bugs, the implementation of test automation has proven to be highly effective

Read Story

Test coverage:

90%

Before

After

There was no formal QA process

An efficient and transparent QA process was set up from scratch

There was no test documentation

Well-structured test cases were created to cover the main scenarios

Automation scripts were useless because they didn’t check the required functionality

Following best practices, automation testing utilized independent tests, API-driven data creation, and the Page Object Pattern

Read Story

Test coverage:

>80%

Before

After

4 days were needed to run regression testing

~2 hours were needed to run regression testing

Regression tests were executed on one device only

5 various devices with different operating systems, screen resolutions, and browsers were used to run regression testing

There were less than 200 automated tests

>1000 automated tests were developed

1 browser was used

4 browsers were supported

Read Story

Test coverage:

99%

Before

After

There was no formal QA process

Manual story testing and verification was built from scratch

There was a lack of QA resources to test all platforms and product areas

99% of the application was covered with test cases and the smoke and regression checklists

The test documentation was incomplete

A well-structured test plan enabling thorough validation was created

Testing was executed by developers

A fully autonomous QA process was set up where QA engineers were fully responsible for testing

Read Story

Regression testing run:

Before

After

2 weeks were needed to run regression testing

<1 week is needed to run regression testing

Regression testing was performed only on 2 web devices

>6 various devices with the latest OS versions are used to run regression testing

There were no auto-tests

>150 automated tests have been created

>100 bugs have been reported

3 browsers are supported

2x faster task handling

Read Story

Test coverage:

>85%

Before

After

Regression testing was not executed

3 hours were needed to complete regression testing

The product contained a lot of bugs and had a bad UX

>300 functional and non-functional bugs were reported

There were no automated tests

350+ automation scenarios were created

Test coverage was low

>85% of the product was covered with automated tests

There were no test cases

350+ test cases were created from scratch

Read Story

Bugs reported:

>1000

Before

After

The QA process was unstructured and inconsistent

A QA team participates in creating ticket scope for upcoming releases

The previous QA team was not efficient enough

All the required test documentation has been rewritten

The test documentation was incomplete and out of date

>6,000 test cases have been written for a regression test suite for client applications

There were a lot of issues reported by clients

The DeviQA engineers have reduced the number of bugs reported by clients/therapists

Read Story

Test coverage of the API:

100%

Before

After

A bug-tracking system was not used

280+ regression E2EE cases have been created, which let a team reduce the time of regression testing to 1.5 days

There were no regression checklists

~40% of tests have been automated, and this value is growing

There was poor documentation coverage

100% of the core flow is covered with documentation

The tests were not automated

5+ performance suites have been created

Read Story

Test coverage :

90%

Before

After

2.5 weeks to run regression testing

1 day to run regression testing

7 days to run smoke testing

1 day to run smoke testing

Outdated test cases

60% increase in the number of regression tests and relevant test cases

50% test coverage

90% test coverage

Supported localizations were not tested

27 localizations supported by QA engineers

No automation testing

>1500 automated test scenarios created

Read Story

Dev capacity:

+15%

Before

After

Didn’t have a formal QA process

Built smooth and well-working processes

Didn’t make automated testing

Test automation : smoke, API, UI on all supported browsers

Testing was carried out by the devs

Full coverage of the application by test cases

Read Story

Test coverage :

97%

Before

After

Existing workflow in Jira didn’t allow to understand how many bugs were left unfixed before the release and their priorities

Adjusted the Jira workflow, integrated TestRail with Jira to be able to see statisticls of the issues per release

The lack of test documentation

Developed necessary test artifacts that adhere to industry standards and are easily maintainable

No Automation test coverage

Added multithreading to run tests in parallel on 10 different threads, which reduced the time of the test run in 7 times

Read Story

Releases per day:

Before

After

1 huge release every 1-2 months

4-5 releases per day

1 large team with an unclear scope of work

~15 squads each with a straight and clear working plan

0 test cases

200+ e2e test cases for the whole app

1-2 months to release a new feature

2 weeks max to release a new feature

Convoluted and complex process of urgent bug-fix releases

Clear and fast way to release any fix

Read Story

Test coverage:

90%

Before

After

The architecture of the test suite could not be scaled and was difficult to maintain for a large number of tests

Designed the architecture of the test framework from scratch

Tests couldn’t be integrated with other testing and DevOps tools

Integrated auto tests with Jenkins, TestRail, and Jira to have a complete test ecosystem up and running

Tests took many hours to be completed

Built a test suite that ran auto-tests using 16 threads on multiple machines

Read Story

Test coverage:

80%

Before

After

Test suite was developed without maintenance and scalability support in mind

We conducted a comprehensive review of the existing test suite, identified areas of improvement and implemented best testing practices

The high number of issues or defects that were present in the software

The number of issues reduced to 25 % after automation was properly implemented

Slow test results and the lack of stable automated tests, leading to hindered deployment capabilities

SoftNAS experienced several benefits, including faster test results and the acquisition of stable automated tests, resulting in improved deployment capabilities

Read Story

Supported platforms:

Before

After

Developers were responsible for testing, and they executed it chaotically

>90% of the application was covered with test cases

Many bugs were overlooked during regular test runs

100% coverage was ensured for smoke and sanity testing

There was a lack of test documentation

>300 blocker issues were detected

There were many major and critical issues in a production environment

The number of customer support issues was reduced by more than 50%

Read Story

Parallel threads:

Before

After

Outdated BE autotests

All existing autotests are up-to-date

Only smoke tests were automated on BE

~2800 autotests added

No autotests on FE

>90% of test cases are automated

Manual smoke testing on FE

~99% of smoke tests are automated

Manual release testing

~95% decrease in post-release regression bugs, the implementation of test automation has proven to be highly effective

Read Story

Test coverage:

90%

Before

After

There was no formal QA process

An efficient and transparent QA process was set up from scratch

There was no test documentation

Well-structured test cases were created to cover the main scenarios

Automation scripts were useless because they didn’t check the required functionality

Following best practices, automation testing utilized independent tests, API-driven data creation, and the Page Object Pattern

Read Story

Test coverage:

>80%

Before

After

4 days were needed to run regression testing

~2 hours were needed to run regression testing

Regression tests were executed on one device only

5 various devices with different operating systems, screen resolutions, and browsers were used to run regression testing

There were less than 200 automated tests

>1000 automated tests were developed

1 browser was used

4 browsers were supported

Read Story

Test coverage:

99%

Before

After

There was no formal QA process

Manual story testing and verification was built from scratch

There was a lack of QA resources to test all platforms and product areas

99% of the application was covered with test cases and the smoke and regression checklists

The test documentation was incomplete

A well-structured test plan enabling thorough validation was created

Testing was executed by developers

A fully autonomous QA process was set up where QA engineers were fully responsible for testing

Read Story

Regression testing run:

Before

After

2 weeks were needed to run regression testing

<1 week is needed to run regression testing

Regression testing was performed only on 2 web devices

>6 various devices with the latest OS versions are used to run regression testing

There were no auto-tests

>150 automated tests have been created

>100 bugs have been reported

3 browsers are supported

2x faster task handling

Read Story

Test coverage:

>85%

Before

After

Regression testing was not executed

3 hours were needed to complete regression testing

The product contained a lot of bugs and had a bad UX

>300 functional and non-functional bugs were reported

There were no automated tests

350+ automation scenarios were created

Test coverage was low

>85% of the product was covered with automated tests

There were no test cases

350+ test cases were created from scratch

Read Story

Bugs reported:

>1000

Before

After

The QA process was unstructured and inconsistent

A QA team participates in creating ticket scope for upcoming releases

The previous QA team was not efficient enough

All the required test documentation has been rewritten

The test documentation was incomplete and out of date

>6,000 test cases have been written for a regression test suite for client applications

There were a lot of issues reported by clients

The DeviQA engineers have reduced the number of bugs reported by clients/therapists

Read Story

Test coverage of the API:

100%

Before

After

A bug-tracking system was not used

280+ regression E2EE cases have been created, which let a team reduce the time of regression testing to 1.5 days

There were no regression checklists

~40% of tests have been automated, and this value is growing

There was poor documentation coverage

100% of the core flow is covered with documentation

The tests were not automated

5+ performance suites have been created

Read Story

Test coverage :

90%

Before

After

2.5 weeks to run regression testing

1 day to run regression testing

7 days to run smoke testing

1 day to run smoke testing

Outdated test cases

60% increase in the number of regression tests and relevant test cases

50% test coverage

90% test coverage

Supported localizations were not tested

27 localizations supported by QA engineers

No automation testing

>1500 automated test scenarios created

Read Story

Test coverage :

97%

Before

After

Existing workflow in Jira didn’t allow to understand how many bugs were left unfixed before the release and their priorities

Adjusted the Jira workflow, integrated TestRail with Jira to be able to see statisticls of the issues per release

The lack of test documentation

Developed necessary test artifacts that adhere to industry standards and are easily maintainable

No Automation test coverage

Added multithreading to run tests in parallel on 10 different threads, which reduced the time of the test run in 7 times

Read Story

Releases per day:

Before

After

1 huge release every 1-2 months

4-5 releases per day

1 large team with an unclear scope of work

~15 squads each with a straight and clear working plan

0 test cases

200+ e2e test cases for the whole app

1-2 months to release a new feature

2 weeks max to release a new feature

Convoluted and complex process of urgent bug-fix releases

Clear and fast way to release any fix

Read Story

Test coverage:

90%

Before

After

The architecture of the test suite could not be scaled and was difficult to maintain for a large number of tests

Designed the architecture of the test framework from scratch

Tests couldn’t be integrated with other testing and DevOps tools

Integrated auto tests with Jenkins, TestRail, and Jira to have a complete test ecosystem up and running

Tests took many hours to be completed

Built a test suite that ran auto-tests using 16 threads on multiple machines

Read Story

Test coverage:

80%

Before

After

Test suite was developed without maintenance and scalability support in mind

We conducted a comprehensive review of the existing test suite, identified areas of improvement and implemented best testing practices

The high number of issues or defects that were present in the software

The number of issues reduced to 25 % after automation was properly implemented

Slow test results and the lack of stable automated tests, leading to hindered deployment capabilities

SoftNAS experienced several benefits, including faster test results and the acquisition of stable automated tests, resulting in improved deployment capabilities

Read Story

Supported platforms:

Before

After

Developers were responsible for testing, and they executed it chaotically

>90% of the application was covered with test cases

Many bugs were overlooked during regular test runs

100% coverage was ensured for smoke and sanity testing

There was a lack of test documentation

>300 blocker issues were detected

There were many major and critical issues in a production environment

The number of customer support issues was reduced by more than 50%

Read Story

Parallel threads:

Before

After

Outdated BE autotests

All existing autotests are up-to-date

Only smoke tests were automated on BE

~2800 autotests added

No autotests on FE

>90% of test cases are automated

Manual smoke testing on FE

~99% of smoke tests are automated

Manual release testing

~95% decrease in post-release regression bugs, the implementation of test automation has proven to be highly effective

Read Story

Test coverage:

90%

Before

After

There was no formal QA process

An efficient and transparent QA process was set up from scratch

There was no test documentation

Well-structured test cases were created to cover the main scenarios

Automation scripts were useless because they didn’t check the required functionality

Following best practices, automation testing utilized independent tests, API-driven data creation, and the Page Object Pattern

Read Story

Test coverage:

>80%

Before

After

4 days were needed to run regression testing

~2 hours were needed to run regression testing

Regression tests were executed on one device only

5 various devices with different operating systems, screen resolutions, and browsers were used to run regression testing

There were less than 200 automated tests

>1000 automated tests were developed

1 browser was used

4 browsers were supported

Read Story

Test coverage:

99%

Before

After

There was no formal QA process

Manual story testing and verification was built from scratch

There was a lack of QA resources to test all platforms and product areas

99% of the application was covered with test cases and the smoke and regression checklists

The test documentation was incomplete

A well-structured test plan enabling thorough validation was created

Testing was executed by developers

A fully autonomous QA process was set up where QA engineers were fully responsible for testing

Read Story

Regression testing run:

Before

After

2 weeks were needed to run regression testing

<1 week is needed to run regression testing

Regression testing was performed only on 2 web devices

>6 various devices with the latest OS versions are used to run regression testing

There were no auto-tests

>150 automated tests have been created

>100 bugs have been reported

3 browsers are supported

2x faster task handling

Read Story

Test coverage:

>85%

Before

After

Regression testing was not executed

3 hours were needed to complete regression testing

The product contained a lot of bugs and had a bad UX

>300 functional and non-functional bugs were reported

There were no automated tests

350+ automation scenarios were created

Test coverage was low

>85% of the product was covered with automated tests

There were no test cases

350+ test cases were created from scratch

Read Story

Bugs reported:

>1000

Before

After

The QA process was unstructured and inconsistent

A QA team participates in creating ticket scope for upcoming releases

The previous QA team was not efficient enough

All the required test documentation has been rewritten

The test documentation was incomplete and out of date

>6,000 test cases have been written for a regression test suite for client applications

There were a lot of issues reported by clients

The DeviQA engineers have reduced the number of bugs reported by clients/therapists

Read Story

Test coverage of the API:

100%

Before

After

A bug-tracking system was not used

280+ regression E2EE cases have been created, which let a team reduce the time of regression testing to 1.5 days

There were no regression checklists

~40% of tests have been automated, and this value is growing

There was poor documentation coverage

100% of the core flow is covered with documentation

The tests were not automated

5+ performance suites have been created

Read Story

What you get

Average time saved by implementing our multithreaded test automation

300%

Reduction in your costs by using outsourced software testing

60%

Improvement in time to market for your products and projects

35%

Accelerate development by

30%

Increase test coverage to

95%

Enhancing project quality by

60%

Feel the improvement in

3 days

Reduce bugs up to

87%

Automation faster in parallel by

56x

QA tools & platforms we hold expertise in

Automation Testing

Cucumber

Selenium

Appium

Mocha

Playwright

Robot Framework

Specflow

TestNG

WebdriverIO

Selenide

Calabash

Watir

Codeception

Cypress

Security Testing Tools

HCL AppScan

Nessus

NMAP

BurpSuite

Acunetix

OWASP ZAP

Metasploit

Wireshark

DBeaver

Rdp-Sec-Check

SNMPCHECK

AiR

SSLSCAN

Performance Testing Tools

JMeter

Load Runner

Visual Studio

API Testing

Rest API

GraphQL

Apiary

Bluetooth Low Energy API

Apple Pay

Google Pay

Apple Maps

Fingerprint API

API Testing Tools

Postman

Swagger

Charles Proxy

Ready API

ACCELQ

Katalon Platform

REST-Assured

Database Testing

SQL Server

MySQL

Oracle

PostgreSQL

Cassandra

MongoDB

RethinkDB

Amazon S3

Redshift

DynamoDB

Amazon RDS

DocumentDB

Amplify

Lambda

Amazon EC2

Elasticache

Azure Datalake

Blob Storage

CosmosDB

SQL Database

Synapse Analytics

Google Cloud SQL

Google Cloud Datastore

Book a call to shift focus from meeting deadlines to building the best product possible

Here’s what people are saying about DeviQA

“It was so easy to integrate your people with us and we didn't have any problems.”

Janosch Greber

VP of Engineering at RealTyme

“DeviQA did an excellent job, and I highly recommend them.“

DeviQA helped develop a cybersecurity software platform. Complex automated scenarios test REST APIs through a Faraday library. An SDK application works with Azure, Google Cloud, Docker, and LXC containers.

Yuval Or

QA Manager at Mimecast

Open details

“Devico has always brought us really high quality candidates for us to be able to seamlessly mesh into our team.”

Danny He

CEO and Founder at Soapbox

Certifications

ISO 9001:2015

At DeviQA, we take pride in being an ISO 9001:2015 certified company. This certification represents our unwavering commitment to maintaining the highest standards of quality in every aspect of our software testing services. With a focus on customer satisfaction, we adhere to internationally recognized quality management practices to ensure that our clients receive exceptional and reliable testing solutions. Through continuous improvement and compliance with regulatory requirements, we consistently deliver top-notch testing services that exceed our clients' expectations

ISO 20000

We understand the crucial role of IT services in modern businesses. As an ISO 20000 certified company, we excel in delivering efficient and effective IT services to our clients. Our customer-centric approach enables us to tailor our testing solutions to suit your unique requirements, ensuring a seamless integration of testing processes into your software development lifecycle. With a focus on continual service improvement, we optimize our IT Service Management practices to guarantee a smooth and satisfying experience for our valued clients

ISO 27001

The security of our clients' data is of paramount importance to us. As an ISO 27001 certified company, we go above and beyond to protect sensitive information and ensure the confidentiality and integrity of all data entrusted to us. With our robust Information Security Management System (ISMS), we implement stringent security controls, evaluate risks, and take proactive measures to safeguard against potential threats. Rest assured that partnering with us means your valuable data is handled with the utmost care and subject to the highest security standards

ISTQB

As a testament to our team's expertise and commitment to excellence, our software testing professionals hold the esteemed ISTQB (International Software Testing Qualifications Board) certifications. The ISTQB certification is a globally recognized standard for software testing professionals, signifying their proficiency in the latest testing methodologies, best practices, and industry standards. With ISTQB-certified experts on board, we bring a wealth of knowledge and skills to every testing project, ensuring thorough and precise testing to uncover even the most intricate software defects. Partner with us and benefit from our skilled ISTQB-certified professionals who are dedicated to elevating the quality and reliability of your software products

Awards and recognitions

Leading Testing Provider by SoftwareTestingNews in 2021

Top Software Testing and QA Company by Superbcompanies in 2023

Finalist of the European Testing Awards in 2019

Finalist of the Software Testing & QA Awards in 2019

Collaboration process overview

1. Initial contact

During our initial call, we aim to understand your testing requirements and goals

2. Assessment

We evaluate your current testing process and create a tailored plan to enhance it

3. Proof of Concept

We offer a complimentary Proof of Concept, allowing you to experience our proficiency and expertise

4. Trial and evaluation of performance

We start a trial period with you, and once complete, we review the results together and discuss options

5. Contract signing and full-scale QA implementation

Upon mutual agreement, we move forward with the QA process by signing a contract and beginning work

6. Partnership with flexibility

Our engagement options give you commercial flexibility to dial up and dial down resources depending on your own needs

Let’s schedule a call

Flexible collaboration options allow you to choose the level of support that best meets your needs

Frequently Asked Questions

faq

FAQ

Is it a good idea to entrust a third-party service provider with accountability for the quality of my software?

Entrusting a third-party service provider with accountability for the quality of your software can be a strategic and beneficial decision, but it requires a partnership with a diligent and trustworthy software testing outsourcing company. Access to specialized skills, cost-effectiveness, and the ability to focus on core business activities are just a few of the benefits that you can yield.

How can I be confident in data confidentiality when holding a third-party service provider accountable for quality?

Ensuring data confidentiality when entrusting a third-party service provider with accountability for quality is a critical consideration. Here are some measures you can take to boost your confidence in data confidentiality:

Ensure that the service provider has robust security protocols in place. Look for certifications such as ISO 27001, which confirms adherence to international data security standards.
Insist on signing a comprehensive Non-Disclosure Agreement that clearly defines the confidentiality terms, the scope of data access, and the obligations of the service provider regarding data security.
Implement strict access controls and strong authentication mechanisms. Limit access to sensitive data only to those individuals who require it for testing purposes.

How can you guarantee the high quality of my software?

Armed with rich expertise, we set up highly efficient QA processes based on your project’s needs and peculiarities. We create comprehensive test documentation, implement test automation, integrate automated tests into CI/CD pipelines, and continuously polish and improve our test strategies and processes. Varied skill sets let us ensure a holistic approach to testing, while the use of advanced tools enables high speed, efficiency, and accuracy.

Which metrics can help me assess your services?

There are a multitude of metrics that can help you evaluate our QA services. For example, you can pay attention to test coverage, bug advocacy rate, release stability, a number of post-release bugs, the percentage of automated tests, the frequency and speed of testing, and, of course, a user satisfaction rate.