Quality assurance & testing
We break things before your users do
Our QA and software testing services — automated, manual, and everything in between — make sure your product behaves like it should.
Where coverage should go
Risk-weighted
- Payments & authNear-total
- Core user flowsHigh
- Admin & reportingModerate
- Static contentThin, deliberately
Chasing a single coverage number is how suites get slow and then ignored.
You had a problem. Now you don't.
Before
Every bug a user finds costs more than the same bug found in CI — in support time, in trust, and in the release you have to rush out on a Friday. Most teams know this and still ship without a safety net, because building one competes with shipping features.
After
We build the net. Automated coverage where it pays for itself, manual testing where judgement is required, and a pipeline that blocks the regression rather than reporting it after the fact.
What we do
Test automation
End-to-end, integration, and API suites that run on every commit and are stable enough that a red build means something.
- Cypress and Playwright
- API contract tests
- CI integration
Manual and exploratory testing
The testing automation cannot do: judgement about whether a flow makes sense, and the deliberate hunt for what nobody thought to specify.
Mobile device testing
Real devices, real OS versions, real network conditions — including the older Android your analytics say a third of your users are on.
Performance and load testing
What happens at ten times the traffic, found before the campaign rather than during it, with the bottleneck named.
Accessibility testing
Keyboard paths, screen-reader semantics, and contrast checked against WCAG — automated where it can be, by hand where it must be.
QA process and strategy
Where to spend testing effort, what to automate first, and how to make quality a gate in the pipeline rather than a stage at the end.
How it works
- 01
Assess
What is covered, what is not, and where your bugs actually come from. Escaped-defect history is the most useful document nobody reads.
- 02
Prioritise by risk
Coverage aimed at the flows where failure costs most — payment, auth, data integrity — rather than at a coverage percentage.
- 03
Automate the regression path
The suite that runs on every commit, kept fast and kept trustworthy. A flaky test that gets ignored is worse than no test.
- 04
Test what needs a human
Exploratory passes on new work, on real devices, by people who are trying to break it.
- 05
Gate the pipeline
Quality checks that block a release rather than filing a report about one, with the results visible to everyone.
Client Testimonials
Verified reviews from our clients on Clutch.
Within 60 days of launch, the app ranked #9 on all categories combined and #1 in the Business category in the App Store with over 250,000 installs. Developers at Blink22 were highly-proficient, handling all difficult integrations with grace and friendliness.
Blink22 has helped to improve development capabilities. They hold themselves to high standards, which has enabled successful collaboration. Upon joining the engineering board, they have augmented resources to help execute the platform.
Thanks to Blink22, the company expedited the delivery of their key projects and accelerated the integration of new payment methods. The team's flexibility, agility, and structured way of working made the process seamless.
Sami LoualiFormer EVP, Jumia Group
They delivered everything perfectly on time, and their response rate was exceptional — usually within minutes through any channel of communication. What impressed us most was their commitment and highly competent team. Everything was perfect.
The communication has been exceptional. We have worked with other teams in the past, and Blink has been far superior. They meet deadlines, communicate well, and are kind and easy to work with!
Rex DuvalCo-Founder & CEO, Nookly
The quality of the product was a testament to how well the team works, it was such a short period of time but they were able to achieve amazing results. The team is very agile, punctual and extremely professional.
Mariam Al MarriFounder, Boom
What we test with
Automation
Cypress · Playwright · Appium · Jest
Performance
k6 · JMeter · Lighthouse
Devices
Real device labs · BrowserStack · iOS and Android matrices
Pipeline
GitHub Actions · Sentry · OpenReplay
Stuff you'd normally have to email us about
Both, aimed at different things. Automation owns the regression path — the same checks, every commit, faster than a person. Manual owns judgement and exploration, which is where the interesting bugs live. A team doing only one of the two is paying for the other in escaped defects.
No, and chasing it is how suites become slow and ignored. We aim coverage at the flows where failure is expensive, and deliberately leave cheap-to-fix surfaces thinner.
Yes. We usually start by making the existing suite trustworthy, because a flaky suite that everyone re-runs until it passes is providing no safety at all.
Yes — automated checks for what tooling catches reliably, plus manual keyboard and screen-reader passes for the roughly half of WCAG that no tool can assess.
Latest from the blog
Ready to stop finding bugs in production?
Tell us what keeps breaking. We'll tell you what it would take to catch it first.
Talk to us about QA