Ranking / Vendor profile

TestDevLab

Overall score: 28.5 / 100, rank 5 of 12
Headquarters: Riga, Latvia [e-0058]
Headcount range: 250 to 999 [e-0058][e-0078]
QA-only company: Yes, QA and testing only [e-0059][e-0060]
Evidence verified on: 2026-11-11

Not ideal for

Situations where the published evidence does not support this vendor. Each line links to its source.

Buyers who need an engagement longer than 12 months on a security product: no published case states a duration. [e-0057]
Buyers of endpoint, network or SIEM products: the only security-product QA case found covers an authentication app. [e-0057]
Buyers who need a reviewed track record: no Clutch review tagged cybersecurity was found. [e-0058]

Security-product QA evidence

Case studies and reviews that describe QA work on a product whose primary purpose is security. Penetration testing for other clients is excluded under the methodology.

e-0057
case-studyCase study for Smart-ID, identity and access management
testdevlab.com · 2017-12-14 · B single source · verified 2026-11-11
Identity and access management; tests: compatibility; client: Smart-ID

Score breakdown

Eight dimensions, each scored 0 to 10 by the frozen rules and multiplied by its weight. Bars are drawn from data/scores.json.

1 Security-product evidence depth weight 204.0 / 10
One verified security-product QA item, one of them older than 60 months and counted at half. Of these, one names the client, zero state team size or duration and zero state a metric. [e-0057]
2 Product-class coverage weight 122.0 / 10
One product class evidenced: Identity and access management. [e-0057]
3 Test-type depth weight 152.0 / 10
One test type evidenced on security products: compatibility. [e-0057]
4 Engagement longevity weight 100.0 / 10
No engagement length with a security vendor is stated in the verified evidence.
5 Third-party review signal weight 120.0 / 10
No verified Clutch, GoodFirms or G2 review of security-product QA work dated within 60 months.
6 Vendor's own security posture weight 101.0 / 10
Evidenced: a security page or named security officer. ISO 27001 is claimed without a certificate number. [e-0059][e-0060]
7 Team scale and specialisation weight 99.0 / 10
Headcount 250 to 999, 3 points; QA-only company, 3 points; dedicated security-product QA page, 3 points. [e-0058][e-0078][e-0059][e-0060][e-0061]
8 Transparency weight 125.0 / 10
Two of four items present: public rate, team locations; missing: named leadership with profiles, published QA process page. [e-0058]

Product classes covered

Verified security-product QA items per class. A class counts only when the source names the product type, for example EDR¹ for endpoint or SIEM² for detection platforms.

Product class	Evidence items
Endpoint protection and EDR	0, no evidence
SIEM, XDR and detection platforms	0, no evidence
Identity and access management	1
Network security	0, no evidence
Email and web security	0, no evidence
Data protection and backup	0, no evidence
Vulnerability and exposure management	0, no evidence
SOAR and incident response	0, no evidence
Cryptography and key management	0, no evidence
Mobile and application security products	0, no evidence

Test types evidenced on security products: OS, browser or agent compatibility. [e-0057]

1 EDR: Software that watches laptops, servers and phones for suspicious behavior, records what it sees, and alerts administrators so they can investigate and respond. Source
2 SIEM: A system that collects log data from many sources into one place so security teams can search it, correlate events and spot attacks. Source

Vendor's own security posture

Controls a security vendor usually asks of a QA partner that will handle builds and test data.

ISO 27001: Claimed, certificate reference not published [e-0060]
SOC 2: Not published
Test-data handling: Not published
Security page or officer: Viktors Trifanovs, CISO [e-0059]

Transparency

The four items scored in dimension 8 of the methodology.

Public rate: $25 to $49 / hr [e-0058]
Leadership: Ervins Grinfelds, co-CEO; Andrejs Frisfelds, co-CEO [e-0059]
QA process page: Not published
Team locations: Riga, Latvia; Skopje, North Macedonia; Tartu, Estonia; Malaga, Spain; Vilnius, Lithuania [e-0058]

Compare and browse

The two vendors nearest by overall score, and the facet pages that list this vendor.

QA Mentor vs TestDevLab QA Mentor overall 32.4
TestDevLab vs Transition Technologies PSC Transition Technologies PSC overall 31.0
Identity and access management facet page
Compatibility testing facet page
Europe facet page
RFP questions to send this vendor
How to shortlist a QA vendor for a security product
Full ranking of 12 vendors

Logged corrections: changelog. Raw evidence: data download.

Scores are computed from publicly available evidence as of the verifiedOn date on each item. They describe published evidence, not service quality. Re-verify with the vendor before contracting.