Ranking / Vendor profile

Transition Technologies PSC

Overall score: 31.0 / 100, rank 4 of 12
Headquarters: Lodz, Poland [e-0052]
Headcount range: 1,000 to 9,999 [e-0052][e-0077]
QA-only company: No, also sells development or other services [e-0053]
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 performance, API or compatibility testing of a security product: the published cases describe automation only. [e-0050][e-0051]
Buyers who want verified third-party reviews of security-product QA: none was found on the Clutch profile, so dimension 5 scores zero. [e-0052]

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-0050
case-studyCase study, identity and access management
ttpsc.com · 2026-02-05 · B single source · verified 2026-11-11
Identity and access management; tests: automation; team: 10; duration: 41 months; client not named
e-0051
case-studyCase study for OneSpan, identity and access management
ttpsc.com · 2022-12-09 · B single source · verified 2026-11-11
Identity and access management; tests: automation; duration: 34 months; client: OneSpan

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
Two verified security-product QA items. Of these, one names the client, two state team size or duration and zero state a metric. [e-0050][e-0051]
2 Product-class coverage weight 122.0 / 10
One product class evidenced: Identity and access management. [e-0050][e-0051]
3 Test-type depth weight 152.0 / 10
One test type evidenced on security products: automation. [e-0050][e-0051]
4 Engagement longevity weight 108.0 / 10
Longest evidenced engagement with a security vendor: 41 months. [e-0050]
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 100.0 / 10
No certificate reference, SOC 2 statement, data-handling statement or security page found.
7 Team scale and specialisation weight 94.0 / 10
Headcount 1,000 to 9,999, 4 points; not QA-only, 0 points; no dedicated security-product QA page, 0 points. [e-0052][e-0077]
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-0052]

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	2
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: automation. [e-0050][e-0051]

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: Not published
SOC 2: Not published
Test-data handling: Not published
Security page or officer: Not published

Transparency

The four items scored in dimension 8 of the methodology.

Public rate: $25 to $49 / hr [e-0052]
Leadership: Not published with profiles
QA process page: Not published
Team locations: Lodz, Poland [e-0052]

Compare and browse

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

QA Mentor vs Transition Technologies PSC QA Mentor overall 32.4
TestDevLab vs Transition Technologies PSC TestDevLab overall 28.5
Identity and access management facet page
Test automation 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.