QA Wolf vs Testim
QA Wolf (Agentic end-to-end testing) and Testim (Agentic end-to-end testing) differ on 10 documented facts below. Each cell shows its evidence level, source and verification date. This page does not rank or rate either tool.
Oldest fact on this page:
Facts side by side
| Fact | QA Wolf | Testim |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Agentic end-to-end testing (also Managed AI QA services) | Agentic end-to-end testing (also Test maintenance and self-healing, Mobile testing with AI) |
| Status | Active | Acquired |
| Test creation | Prompt to test, Natural language, Code generation | Recording |
| Test output | Mixed | Proprietary runner |
| Surfaces | Web, Mobile native, Desktop | Web, Mobile native |
| Hosting | Cloud | Cloud, Hybrid |
| Pricing model | Usage credits, Managed service, Enterprise quote | Free tier, Enterprise quote |
| Published prices | Platform (AI credits): 1¢ per AI credit (usage-based); Platform (runner minutes): 15¢ per runner minute (usage-based) | Not documented |
| Free tier | Not documented | Yes |
| CI integrations | GitHub Actions, GitLab, CircleCI, Other | Azure DevOps, CircleCI, Jenkins, GitLab, Other |
| Self-healing | Documented | Documented |
| Agent integration | QA Wolf MCP, installed as a plugin for Claude Code (qawolf/agent-plugins marketplace) and Codex; other coding agents via client-specific setup guide | Not documented |
| Open source | Not documented | Not documented |
Documented differences
Listed only where both tools document the fact, or where one documents it and the other's documentation does not mention it. Vendor-stated values appear in the table but do not create a difference here.
- Status: active for QA Wolf; acquired for Testim. [1][2]
- Test creation: prompts, natural-language steps and generated code for QA Wolf; recording for Testim. [1][2]
- Test output: a vendor runner plus exportable framework code for QA Wolf; tests that run on the vendor's runner for Testim. [1][2]
- Surfaces: web, native mobile and desktop for QA Wolf; web and native mobile for Testim. [1][2]
- Hosting: cloud for QA Wolf; cloud and hybrid for Testim. [1][2]
- Pricing model: usage-credit, managed-service and enterprise-quote pricing for QA Wolf; enterprise-quote pricing for Testim. [1][2]
- Free tier: not documented for QA Wolf; available for Testim. [1]
- CI integrations: GitHub Actions, GitLab, CircleCI and other CI systems for QA Wolf; Azure DevOps, CircleCI, Jenkins, GitLab and other CI systems for Testim. [1][2]
- Agent integration: yes for QA Wolf; not documented for Testim. [1]
- Published prices: listed for QA Wolf; not documented for Testim. [1]
When each fits
QA Wolf
Fits a team that needs a vendor runner plus exportable framework code as test output; test creation by prompts, natural-language steps and generated code; desktop testing. Documented for QA Wolf.
Drawn from documented scope only. Neither text compares the two tools on quality.
Related pages
Sources
- docs.qawolf.com (QA Wolf: Category; QA Wolf: Self-healing; QA Wolf: Agent integration)
- docs.tricentis.com (Testim: Category; Testim: Test creation; Testim: Test output)
- qawolf.com (QA Wolf: Status; QA Wolf: Pricing model; QA Wolf: Published prices)
- tricentis.com (Testim: Status)
- docs.qawolf.com (QA Wolf: Test creation)
- docs.qawolf.com (QA Wolf: Test output)
- docs.qawolf.com (QA Wolf: Surfaces; QA Wolf: Hosting)
- docs.tricentis.com (Testim: Surfaces; Testim: Hosting)
- testim.io (Testim: Pricing model; Testim: Free tier)
- docs.qawolf.com (QA Wolf: CI integrations)
- docs.tricentis.com (Testim: CI integrations)
- docs.tricentis.com (Testim: Self-healing)
Spotted an outdated or wrong fact about QA Wolf vs Testim? Send the source and we apply it at the next monthly update.