Software Testing and QA Services run by people who did not write the code.
Software testing and QA services are the testing itself, bought as an ongoing team or as one scoped cycle: the defects found before your users find them, the fixes proved, and a straight answer on what is still open.
- 120+Projects delivered across 12 countries since 2012
- 100+Senior in-house engineers, six countries
- 5.0Unified rating across 61 client reviews on Clutch
- ISTQBCertified QA inside every sprint
- ISO 9001Certified quality management, audited by Quay Audit UK
01Overview
Who this is for, and what we take on
We take the testing itself: the test plan, the cases behind it, the manual passes and the automated ones, run against your product in your own environments. It is for the person who owns a release and has nobody outside the build team checking it before it goes out.
- Nobody here is defending the codeAn author is blind to their own assumptions. The people testing your product have no stake in the decisions inside it, which is what makes a not-yet from them worth hearing.
- Manual and automated from one set of casesBoth come out of one written case library, so the automated checks never drift into a second suite that disagrees with the first and nobody trusts.
- Your tracker, your pipeline, your environmentsDefects are filed where your team already works, and the automated checks run in your own build pipeline, your CI, against your environments rather than a copy of the product we control.
- The rest of the quality clusterTest automation when the thing you want built is the suite, a QA audit when what you want back is a recommendation rather than the work, and AI QA and evals when the output under test has no single right answer.
02Proof
Quality, proven
Testing produces an absence, and an absence is hard to show: nobody logs the outage that did not happen. What can be shown is what a client walked away holding, how long the work has run under live load, and how fast a team appeared.
- Open Room Inc. built it, we tested itOpen Room Inc. did the development on its Forest real estate platform in Japan in-house, and engaged unicrew as its independent Quality Assurance service provider on top of that. We set up the QA workflow, a tailored Test Cases System (the written case that sets out what each automated test has to do), the TestCafe automation generated from it, and a Testing Roadmap that applies at every stage of development.4artefacts Open Room kept: the QA workflow, the Test Cases System, the automation and the Testing Roadmap
- WaiverKing kept shipping while it grewWaiverKing was in use by hundreds of active clients when the work started, so all the refactoring had to happen without a major impact on their experience. That engagement has run since January 2014, with unicrew providing development, QA and project management throughout.Around 2,000companies on the WaiverKing platform, up from a couple hundred when the work began
- Barrett Values Centre had a team in two weeksDeciding to buy is not the same as having a team. Assembling the team for a report-automation build at Barrett Values Centre took two weeks of lead time, with the high-level discussions moving forward throughout. That build went over with little to no defects.2 weekslead time to assemble the team on a Barrett Values Centre build
03Compare
Who is allowed to say a release is not ready?
Choose on who can hold a release, not on who tests best: an author cannot hold that position about their own code. Two other options sit beside the table. A test-automation licence gives your own QA lead a tool to run. A crowdtesting campaign pays a distributed pool of testers to work over a live consumer product and turns up surface defects. Neither one owns the test plan when it ends, which is the job an outside QA team takes on.
| An outside QA teamunicrew | Your own QA hiresHire | Developers testing their own workDIY |
|---|---|---|
| Best forCoverage now across functional, performance, security and usability, with no hiring cycle in front of it. | Best forQA as a permanent, growing function, when you can absorb a hiring cycle before the next release. | Best forSmall teams and early products, where a defect costs an apology rather than a customer. |
| Works best withTesting that spans several kinds of coverage and several releases, run by one team under one plan. | Works best withMonths to hire, and enough testers to cover manual, automation, performance and security at the same depth. | Works best withDeadlines loose enough that regression coverage survives them, and features small enough for their authors to check. |
| You end up owningThe test plan, the case system and the automated suites, in your own tracker and repository. | You end up owningA permanent QA function, plus the hiring, ramp-up and retention behind it. | You end up owningShipped features, and whatever regression coverage survived the last deadline. |
Quick self-check
Tick what is true for you. The read-out updates as you go.
0 of 4 true
Start with automation or an audit
Your answers point at the testing you already have. If the regression pass is what drags, test automation speeds it up. If the open question is how good your QA is, a QA audit hands back ranked findings.
Talk it throughOne signal is usually a document, not a team
A missing test plan is something to write down. One untested performance path is one scoped cycle. Either is a far smaller purchase than a team, and worth settling before you budget for anyone permanent.
Talk it throughNobody ever decided what would be covered
Two signals is what a gap looks like when nobody ever decided what would be covered, which is a different problem from one rushed quarter. Planning and test design come before execution, so the first thing back is the risk ranking and what we would test first.
Book a discovery callThis is the case for an outside team
Three signals and the argument is over: the testing has to be done from outside the build team, and nobody on your side can do it. What is left to settle is whether we keep the test plan running or hand it back.
Book a discovery callA team, with the handover agreed up front
Four signals is the profile a tool licence or a crowd of testers fails, because neither owns the test plan once the campaign ends. Most engagements start within two to four weeks.
Talk about the teamRegression testing protects what already works, and experience-based testing finds what scripts miss. We plan both from the first sprint, so every release is checked both ways before it reaches your users.
Ihor PrudyvusDelivery Director, unicrew04Capabilities
Types of software testing we cover
Full-cycle means these eight run under one plan and one team rather than as eight separate purchases. Each card links to the deeper page or to the work behind it.
- Functional testing services
Functional testing
Spec and acceptance criteriaEvery function checked against the specification and the acceptance criteria, by hand where judgment matters and by script where repetition does. This is the baseline everything else layers on.
- Regression testing services
Regression testing
A maintained suiteNew code should not break old code. A maintained regression suite checks each release against everything that already worked, which is what turns a weekly release into routine.
- Automated testing services
Test automation
JavaScript or TypeScriptThe automated cases come out of the same library as the manual ones and live in your repository, in a language your own developers read. On an estate-agency platform in Japan that is TestCafe, which runs the same tests across several browsers and platforms and writes its own reports. Where the suite itself is the thing being built or rescued, that is test automation and a different purchase.
- Performance and load testing services
Performance and load testing
Speed, scalability, stabilityWe measure speed, scalability and stability under load, and find the bottleneck before your traffic does. On a European scented-products manufacturer's re-platformed shops the load and stress runs sat inside the quality assurance process that ran across the whole build, rather than in one week bolted on at the end.
- Security testing services
Security testing
Inside the QA cycleWe check the vulnerability classes that matter to your stack and your data as part of the QA cycle. When what you need is an adversarial engagement rather than a pass, that is penetration testing and a separate service.
- Usability testing services
Usability testing
Can they finish the taskWe test whether people can actually complete the task, not only whether the button fires. When the answer is a design problem, it hands off to UX research.
- Mobile app testing services
Mobile and cross-platform testing
iOS, Android and the webiOS and Android builds covered alongside the web application they share a backend with. We designed, developed and delivered a paperless vehicle inspection platform for a finished-vehicle logistics operator across exactly that spread.
- API and integration testing services
API and integration testing
Payment, ERP and carrier pathsMost interesting defects live between systems, not inside them. Payment, ERP, carrier and third-party integration paths get their own cases, because that is where schedule risk actually hides.
05Trust
What a QA engagement hands over
Three artefacts do the work after we stop: the plan that says what gets tested and why, the cases and automation that execute it, and the roadmap your own team keeps running. All three are written to be read by somebody who was not in the room when they were made.
- Written downA test plan with a risk rankingWhat is in scope, in what order a failure would cost you, and which environments, browsers and devices are covered
- In your repoTest cases and automated suitesWritten in JavaScript or TypeScript, running in your own pipeline against your own environments
- Yours to runA Testing Roadmap and QA documentationWhat gets tested at which stage, in a form that survives the engagement ending
06Stack
Stacks and test tooling we work in
Test tooling is the smallest decision in a QA engagement. What decides whether a defect gets found is whether the tester can reach the thing that breaks, in the same integration and the same browser a customer would hit it in. So the stack under test picks the tooling, and these are the stacks the products we have tested were built on.
JavaScript
TypeScript
Vue
iOS
Android
PHP
Yii2
Laravel
C#
ASP.NET
MySQL
AWS
TestCafe07Engagement
How a QA engagement is shaped, and how you pay
Planning comes first in all three. What changes between them is who owns the test plan afterwards, and how long we stay.
A dedicated QA team
Inside your deliveryAn autonomous QA unit inside your delivery, running the plan release after release and owning the regression suite as the product grows. The shape fits when testing has to keep pace with the product rather than be re-scoped for every release.
- Best when
- You ship continuously and have no independent QA of your own
- You pay
- Billed monthly, per team member
- Typical start
- Two to four weeks
Independent QA partner
No stake in the codeWe test as an outside party with no stake in the code, then hand your team the workflow, the case system, the roadmap and the documentation. You keep all four whether or not we test the next release.
- Best when
- You want an impartial view of quality and a system your own team can run
- You pay
- Billed hourly, quoted per project
- Typical start
- Two to four weeks
Release hardening
Scoped cycleA scoped cycle before a launch or a migration: functional, regression, load and stress passes on the release you are about to make, with every defect ranked so the decision to ship or hold is yours and it is an informed one.
- Best when
- One release carries unusual risk and you need it checked, not staffed
- You pay
- Outcome based, quoted per project
- Typical start
- Two to four weeks
A read on what exists first, and the team is a separate decision
Where a QA function is already in place and the real question is whether the coverage is any good, what you want back first is findings: what gets tested today, what does not, and what to fix in what order. That is our QA consulting and audit service. If the people are fine and the regression pass is the bottleneck, test automation is the buy. There is no minimum engagement period, so the findings are a complete purchase on their own.
08Industries
Industries we test in
A defect only matters in context. In finished-vehicle logistics a missed condition detail becomes an argument about who pays for the damage; in e-commerce a broken tax rule becomes a refund run across seven markets. These six are the sectors the work has actually landed in.
Logistics and transportation
Order management, warehouse and fleet tooling for operations that cannot pause. In finished-vehicle logistics we designed, developed and delivered the paperless vehicle inspection platform field inspectors run on iOS and Android, plus the web platform that centralizes the data and syncs with the operator's internal systems.
Hospitality and leisure
Venue, membership and ticketing platforms whose whole year turns on a few dozen busy nights, including a platform for the entertainment industry. The release that matters ships just before the season does, which is exactly when nobody has time to check it by hand.
Real estate
An offer, a counter-offer and the listing they attach to have to stay consistent for the agent and the buyer at once, and neither of them can see the other's screen. We were the independent QA partner on an estate-agency platform in Japan, where the QA workflow, the Test Cases System, the automation and the Testing Roadmap were all built from nothing.
E-commerce
Storefronts with an ERP and middleware behind them, where the same order has to be right in three systems at once. On one re-platform onto Shopify we ran the automation, load and stress tests inside a constant QA process that covered the whole build.
Fintech
Payment and accounting paths are where a defect becomes a compliance event rather than a bug, so those integration cases get written first. We build the platforms underneath too, including an accounting integration for a UK financial advisory firm.
Healthcare
Monitoring platforms and the integrations into clinical systems behind them, where data that quietly stops arriving is a clinical problem before it is a software one. One home health monitoring platform came to us to be stabilized and then scaled. The work runs under ISO 27001:2022.
The release you are least sure about
The first call is about what you are shipping, what breaks, and what you already test, and it ends with the shape that fits: a QA team, a scoped cycle or an audit.
What happens after you contact us
- We reply within one business dayWhat comes back is written, and it names the parts of what you described that we would test first.
- A call about what you ship and what breaksWhat the product is, what already gets tested and by whom, and which shape of QA engagement fits it.
- A test plan, written downThe scope, a risk ranking, and the environments, browsers and devices we would cover.
- Contracts and NDAs, then a start dateSigned before anyone touches your product or your data. Most engagements start within two to four weeks.
09Delivery
How a software testing and QA engagement works
Planning, test design and environment setup, execution and defect reporting, retest and regression, then roadmap and handover. Each stage ends in something you keep, and each one names the thing it cannot start without.
- Planning and risk rankingWe read whatever exists (requirements, acceptance criteria, tickets, support threads) and rank the product by what a defect would actually cost you, so the thinnest coverage sits where it hurts least. Nothing starts until we have product access, a working environment, and one person who can answer what the product is supposed to do.You getA test plan: the scope, the risk ranking, and the environments, browsers and devices it covers.
- Test design and environment setupWe write the cases and stand up the environment, building the Test Cases System the automated tests are generated from. Manual and automated cases are designed together, so the automation cannot drift into a second suite that disagrees with the first. This stage waits on a stable environment and on somebody able to settle what each screen is meant to do.You getA tailored Test Cases System in your tracker, plus automation scaffolding in your repository, written in JavaScript or TypeScript.
- Test execution and defect reportingWe run the cases and file each defect as a report somebody else can reproduce: the steps, the environment, the severity and an owner. Each cycle starts from a triggering event, a scheduled iteration or an automated run, so reporting arrives on a rhythm instead of when somebody asks for it. It waits on your tracker being open to us and on the environment from stage two staying up.You getPrioritized, reproducible defect reports in your own tracker, and a run report at the end of each cycle.
- Retesting and regressionFixed defects are retested against the report that raised them, then the regression suite checks recent changes against everything that already worked. This is the step that lets a team release weekly without holding its breath, and it moves at the speed your developers ship fixes, not at ours.You getA regression suite that runs on every build, and a retest record for each defect: verified fixed, still open, and who owns it.
- Roadmap and handoverWe write the Testing Roadmap: what gets tested at which stage, which quality standards apply, and what your own team takes over. It needs one person on your side to own the roadmap after we stop, because a roadmap nobody owns is a document.You getA Testing Roadmap and structured QA documentation your team can keep running without us.
10Client voices
Our clients say
Artelogic’s work had a very positive impact on our team’s morale. As our development quality was improving, our engineers were more confident in what they were doing, allowing them to work faster and with more confidence. As a result, our releases took less time and were less stressful.
They’ve been helping us grow our platform together since the beginning, from a couple hundred companies to around 2,000. Artelogic has been front and center in this process.
Artelogic anticipates our needs and meets them before we even identify them. My team lead wants to keep both of Artelogic’s developers on the project until the product’s release. We have a backlog of 40 big projects, so I only see Artelogic’s involvement increasing.
All four websites have successfully passed internal reviews and are online. The accessibility scores are top-notch, and the user engagement is higher. They’ve delivered on time, been flexible when we needed adjustments, and made the entire collaboration feel smooth and supportive.
We were able to get the work completed in the expected time frame. There were little to no defects which was very nice because it allowed us to release and move on to our next project without having to back peddle. They were very accessible and took the time to understand our needs. They truly felt like part of the team.
11Case studies
Our case studies
A live waiver platform whose release cycle changed shape under hundreds of active clients, and the independent QA engagement behind a TestCafe suite and the case system underneath it.
See all case studies
SaaSWaiverKing: Software Development for Waiver Form CreatorWaiverKing is a document management business serving primarily the health and fitness industries. The platform is partnered with MindBody Online, one of the largest business-systems providers for gyms and yoga studios.Weeks to hoursTime for an update to reach live
Real EstateQuality Assurance service for Japanese real estate platformunicrew provided QA consultancy for a leading Japanese real estate platform, which resulted in a tuned QA workflow and test automation.
12Questions
More about software testing and QA
Cost and timeline lead, as they should. Under them sit the questions that actually decide whether an outside QA team fits the way you already work.
Functional, regression, performance and load, security, usability, mobile and API testing, run by one team under one test plan, manual where judgment matters and automated where repetition does. Full-cycle software quality assurance also includes the artifacts, which is the part teams forget to ask for: a test plan, a tailored test-case system, reproducible defect reports in your own tracker, and a Testing Roadmap your team can keep running after we finish.
The size of the job is set by your product, so the price comes out of scoping it with you. The cost drivers are the size of the surface under test, how much of it can be automated, how many environments, browsers and devices you support, and whether you want a permanent team or one hardened release. Three billing models: time and materials, billed hourly and quoted per project; fixed price, outcome based and quoted per project; and team extension, billed monthly per team member. A scoped release-hardening cycle is quoted from the test plan, so the number arrives before you commit to it.
Most engagements start within two to four weeks. After that it depends on the state of what you already have: planning and test design come before execution, and a product with written acceptance criteria and a working staging environment reaches the first execution cycle faster than one with neither. That part is a property of your codebase, so the number comes from it. The useful output starts at the first execution cycle, not at the end of the engagement, so real defect reports arrive early.
You do, and the engagement is built so you can. The test plan states what is in scope and ranks it by what a failure would cost, so there is an agreed answer to what was meant to be covered before anybody argues about what was. Each cycle starts from a triggering event, a scheduled iteration or an automated run, so reporting arrives on a schedule somebody set in advance. Every defect is prioritized and assigned to an owner, and every fix gets a retest record: verified fixed, still open, and whose it is. We report what is open and how bad it is; the call to ship or hold stays on your side of the table, and the artifacts are handed over specifically so you can check the work without us in the room.
Yes, and that is the normal case. We file defects in your tracker, run automated suites in your build pipeline, and test against your own environments, not a sandbox of ours. On a live waiver platform we moved the codebase into Git and automated deployment alongside the test suite, which is what took release time from weeks to a couple of hours. If your product integrates payment providers, an ERP or carrier APIs, those integration paths get their own cases, because that is where the defects that hurt tend to live.
Automated testing tools: TestCafe, Selenium, JUnit, TestNG. Performance testing tools: Apache JMeter, LoadRunner. Security testing tools: OWASP ZAP, Burp Suite. Bug tracking systems: JIRA, Bugzilla. Continuous integration tools: Jenkins, Travis CI. Test management tools: TestRail, QTest. On an estate-agency platform in Japan we built the automation on TestCafe, which runs reliable browser tests written in JavaScript or TypeScript across multiple browsers and platforms. On the application side we test whatever the product is built on, including PHP and Yii2, C# and ASP.NET, Laravel, Vue, MySQL, AWS, iOS and Android.
Either. Some clients have no independent QA at all and we become it. Others have testers and want extra testers, automation skills or a second opinion on quality. On an independent QA engagement for a Japanese real-estate platform the development stayed in-house and we took the testing, then handed the workflow and the documentation back to their team. A report-automation build for a culture-analytics company is the other shape: the deliverables were working code plus automated tests, so the client's own people could QA and UAT the output across their data sets. If your QA function already exists and the real question is whether it is any good, you want our QA consulting and audit service, not a team.
Compare on what you can check: three things are checkable from outside without anybody's permission, and we answer all three before you sign. Ask for a redacted defect report and a test plan from work that shipped, because a defect report somebody else can reproduce is what separates a test team from a ticket queue. Ask whether the testers are in-house and where they sit: ours come from 100+ senior in-house engineers across six countries, and the testing is never subcontracted onward to someone you will not meet. And ask to read the reviews behind the rating, because a review is the client's own account of the work. Every client quoted further down this page links out to their own entry on Clutch.
Our QA engineers are ISTQB certified, which is the international qualification scheme for software testers, and every engagement runs under ISO 27001:2022 and ISO 9001:2015, renewed through a multi-stage audit with Quay Audit UK. For safety-critical or medical-device standards (IEC 62304, DO-178C and the like), the validation package and its conformity assessment come from a specialist regulatory firm and an accredited body. unicrew has 100+ senior in-house engineers across six countries. Our engineers work from Ukraine, Poland, Estonia and the UK, so the testing is not subcontracted onward to someone you never meet.