How do their growth rates compare?

QA.tech has a month-over-month growth rate of -4.4%; Revyl has -21.1%.

How does pricing compare?

QA.tech: Paid, Contact for Pricing. Enterprise-style, contact-for-pricing model: the site offers a free getting-started path and a demo booking rather than public per-seat numbers, so exact costs depend on team size, coverage scope and mobile testing needs. Revyl: Freemium, Free Trial, Paid, Contact for Pricing. Revyl offers a Free tier with generous monthly usage, unlimited team members, Atlas access and 2 concurrent devices (4 with pay-as-you-go). Starter is $250/month, or $200/month billed annually with 20% off, and includes $250 in monthly compute credits plus 10 concurrent devices and a shared Slack channel. Enterprise is custom with unlimited concurrency, dedicated iOS runners and instances, SSO, RBAC, SCIM, enforced MFA, audit logs and custom SLAs. Overage, when enabled, is $0.15/min for iOS simulators and $0.12/min for Android emulators.

What are alternatives to QA.tech and Revyl?

Other tools in related categories include KaneAI, Qase, Katalon, Maxim AI, TestSprite.

QA.tech vs Revyl — Traffic (30.55K vs 11.59K), Pricing & Verdict

Open AI Tools

QA.tech vs Revyl — Traffic (30.55K vs 11.59K), Pricing & Verdict | Open AI Tools

Side-by-Side Traffic & Specification Matrix

Dimension / Metric	QA.tech	Revyl
Official Domain	qa.tech	revyl.com
Pricing Model	Paid, Contact for Pricing	Freemium, Free Trial, Paid, Contact for Pricing
Monthly Visits	30.55K (30,550)	11.59K (11,587)
MoM Traffic Delta	-1.42K (-4.4%)	-3.1K (-21.1%)
Primary Market & Share	🇸🇪 Sweden (24.4%)	🇺🇸 United States (60%)
Direct Visits / mo	21.23K	6.91K
User Rating	4.3	4.4
Supported Platforms	Website	Website

QA.tech

Autonomous AI QA agents that verify your web and mobile app on every pull request

Plain-language test authoring

Describe a journey or rule in chat and the agent turns it into durable test cases that survive refactors and redesigns.

PR-level verification

Every pull request gets a dynamic exploratory pass with preview environments, failure breakdowns, screenshots, console and network logs.

Web and native mobile

Agents target real browsers and native iOS and Android apps, so coverage reaches beyond the web front end.

CI, Git and issue-tracker integrations

Findings flow into Jira and Linear, and agents can be queried over MCP by other coding agents.

Strengths & Pros

+Agents test visually without selectors, so suites survive redesigns and framework migrations
+Runs automatically on every pull request with preview environments
+Plain-English test authoring is accessible to non-engineers
+Rich failure evidence — screenshots, logs, network data and agent reasoning