QA Tools
Try before you talk to anyone
Two interactive tools, no sign-up required: map your current QA workflow and its trade-offs, and put a number on what escaped bugs cost you each year.
Find your QA strategy
Which of these is your QA workflow?
Pick the workflow closest to yours. Every strategy is a valid trade-off - so here's the honest upside, the honest cost, and how to get more out of the one you've already chosen.
Select your workflow
Dev-owned testing
No dedicated QA - developers test their own work.
Estimated stage timingsCommit → release: ~1 day · High (DORA)
Code~2–4 days
Dev tests~0.5 day
PR review~1 day
Release~1 hr
Monitorongoing
Honest advantages
- Fast feedback - tests live right beside the code
- Low coordination overhead
- Cheap to run
- Developers own quality end-to-end
Honest disadvantages
- Devs test the happy path they just built - structural blind spots
- No independent perspective on the product
- Exploratory, accessibility and security routinely skipped
- Coverage is uneven and undocumented
How to strengthen it
- Add an independent critical-path smoke suite - devs keep owning unit & API
- Layer in the accessibility and security checks devs skip
- Make coverage visible so blind spots surface early
Cost-of-bugs calculator
What is poor QA quietly costing you?
Slow releases and escaped bugs are a tax you pay every month. Set your manual QA load, escaped-bug rate, and loaded hourly costs (defaults grounded in BLS wages and NIST defect-cost data), and see the annual figure - and how much of it is recoverable.
96 hrs
$64
4 /mo
15 hrs
$83
Your annual quality tax
$133,488
Manual QA effort
96 hrs × $64/hr × 12 mo
Escaped bugs
4/mo × 15 hrs × $83/hr × 12 mo
Recoverable with Digital Archer
~$99,418/yr
Projected residual tax: $34,070/yr - by automating manual effort and catching critical defects before release.
Delivered by senior nearshore engineers (Serbia) - roughly 54% below your in-house rate, in business hours that overlap yours.
Map my savings in a free workshop