Keysight Test as a Service (TaaS) vs. QA Wolf vs. test IO

QA Wolf is great if you want to automate the building and managing of end-to-end regression style tests. They would not be great for new feature buildouts where the tests need to be done very quickly to ship a feature or if the feature is changing rapidly, as there is at least a couple day lag to when test cases get built out. QA Wolf does not do any manual testing so that is not a good use case for the platform.

I think it's definitely more of an e2e testing tool versus just testing individual components.

Incentivized

• Eliminates the need to have and manage in-house QA Engineers
• Handles all the infrastructure for testing
• Runs tests in parallel so Engineers get fast feedback on whether they have introduced a regression error.
• Reduce costs associated with E2E testing
• Amazing customer service
• Excellent integration with our existing workflows

• catch bugs
• test e2e flows
• accurately report bugs with screenshots and videos

Incentivized

• Our situation is somewhat unique such that we have internal QA members liaising with our QA Wolf partners. This has been ideal for communicating and effectively identifying test coverage needs. So, unfortunately for this question, we have not experienced any issues needing improvement in our relationship with QA Wolf.

• honestly, nothing comes to mind - I think it's a great tool

Incentivized

It is easy to use from day 1. I was actually able to login, and given the simplicity of use, I was creating my own tests within the first 10 minutes. I didn't have much confidence at first on my skill to be able to create tests but the interface made it super easy. We were able to leverage QA Wolf system within the same day.

We chose QA Wolf for the quality of the tests that they write, their flexibility, outstanding customer support, workflow integrations, excellent infrastructure, and competitive pricing. We were not happy with the quality of the tests we were getting with ProdPerfect. We were going to evaluate MuukTest once our proof of concept with QA Wolf was completed, but we were already convinced we had what we wanted, and going with a less capable infrastructure wasn't worth the cost savings.

test IO is MUCH easier to set up test cases and because it uses actual humans, it's a better real life tool. Rainforest was too picky on the test cases and you had to be overly specific.

Incentivized

• QA Wolf saves us from having to build a QA automation team. We implemented QA Wolf early so our team never needed to build a motion around automated regression testing outside of QA Wolf.
• QA Wolf is capable enough to figure out how our product works without much guidance, so when delivering test cases, we're able to send a video of the behavior without much training, and they're able to build the test cases with very little additional guidance.

• Catching bugs before customers do
• Catching bugs during a release

Incentivized