Companies that test LLM applications
61 published entries state testing of LLM applications on their AI pages. They are headquartered in 18 countries and state 12 testing services between them.
LLM applications: Products built on a large language model: chat assistants, copilots, summarisers, RAG search.
Showing 61 of 61. Default order: coverage score, then name. How the score works.
| Rank | Company type | AI products (as stated) | Services | Verified | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | DeviQA | Pure-play QA company | Poland, Warsaw | LLM applicationsAI agentsRecommender and ranking systemsPredictive ML modelsComputer visionVoice AI | 8 | 2010 | 16 | 2026-11-09 | |
| 2 | Abstracta | Pure-play QA company | United States, Jacksonville | LLM applicationsAI agentsPredictive ML models | 10 | 2008 | 15 | 2026-11-09 | |
| 2 | ImpactQA | Pure-play QA company | United States | LLM applicationsAI agentsComputer visionVoice AIRecommender and ranking systems | 9 | 15 | 2026-11-09 | ||
| 4 | BetterQA | Pure-play QA company | Romania, Cluj-Napoca | LLM applicationsAI agentsVoice AI | 9 | 2018 | 14 | 2026-11-09 | |
| 4 | QATestLab | Pure-play QA company | Cyprus | LLM applicationsAI agentsPredictive ML models | 10 | 14 | 2026-11-09 | ||
| 4 | TestDevLab | Pure-play QA company | Latvia, Riga | LLM applicationsAI agentsVoice AIComputer visionPredictive ML modelsRecommender and ranking systemsAutonomous and embedded AI | 5 | 2011 | 14 | 2026-11-09 | |
| 4 | TestingXperts | Pure-play QA company | United States | LLM applicationsAI agentsVoice AI | 10 | 14 | 2026-11-09 | ||
| 4 | Testlio | Crowdtesting platform | United States, Austin | LLM applicationsAI agentsPredictive ML modelsRecommender and ranking systems | 8 | 2012 | 14 | 2026-11-09 | |
| 4 | Testriq | Pure-play QA company | India, Mira-Bhayandar | LLM applicationsAI agentsPredictive ML models | 9 | 2010 | 14 | 2026-11-09 | |
| 10 | ITRex Group | IT services firm with a QA practice | United States, Sacramento | LLM applicationsAI agentsComputer visionPredictive ML modelsRecommender and ranking systems | 6 | 2009 | 13 | 2026-11-09 | |
| 11 | QualityAI (formerly Qualitest) | Pure-play QA company | United States, Santa Clara | LLM applicationsAI agentsPredictive ML modelsRecommender and ranking systems | 7 | 12 | 2026-11-09 | ||
| 11 | SunTec India | Data and evaluation vendor | India, New Delhi | LLM applicationsDocument AIPredictive ML models | 7 | 1999 | 12 | 2026-11-09 | |
| 14 | Lionbridge | Data and evaluation vendor | United States, Waltham | LLM applicationsVoice AIComputer visionRecommender and ranking systems | 5 | 1996 | 11 | 2026-11-09 | |
| 14 | QA Madness | Pure-play QA company | Poland, Warsaw | LLM applicationsAI agentsRecommender and ranking systems | 7 | 11 | 2026-11-09 | ||
| 14 | QAwerk | Pure-play QA company | Ukraine, Kyiv | LLM applicationsAI agents | 7 | 2015 | 11 | 2026-11-09 | |
| 18 | Indium Software | IT services firm with a QA practice | United States, Cupertino | AI agentsLLM applicationsRecommender and ranking systems | 6 | 10 | 2026-11-09 | ||
| 18 | KiwiQA | Pure-play QA company | Australia, Bella Vista | LLM applications | 7 | 2009 | 10 | 2026-11-09 | |
| 18 | Shaip | Data and evaluation vendor | United States, New York | LLM applicationsAI agentsVoice AI | 6 | 10 | 2026-11-09 | ||
| 23 | AppSierra | IT services firm with a QA practice | India, Noida | LLM applicationsAI agentsPredictive ML models | 5 | 9 | 2026-11-09 | ||
| 23 | Codoid | Pure-play QA company | India, Chennai | LLM applicationsAI agents | 5 | 2012 | 9 | 2026-11-09 | |
| 23 | QASource | Pure-play QA company | United States, Pleasanton | LLM applicationsAI agents | 5 | 2002 | 9 | 2026-11-09 | |
| 29 | AIDX Tech | AI assurance and audit specialist | Singapore, Singapore | LLM applicationsAI agentsVoice AIComputer vision | 4 | 8 | 2026-11-09 | ||
| 29 | Applause | Crowdtesting platform | United States | LLM applicationsAI agentsVoice AI | 4 | 8 | 2026-11-09 | ||
| 29 | SG Analytics | IT services firm with a QA practice | India, Pune | LLM applications | 5 | 2007 | 8 | 2026-11-09 | |
| 40 | Appen | Data and evaluation vendor | Australia | LLM applications | 5 | 6 | 2026-11-09 | ||
| 40 | Fairly AI | AI assurance and audit specialist | Canada, Kitchener | LLM applicationsPredictive ML modelsAI agents | 3 | 6 | 2026-11-09 | ||
| 40 | Innodata | Data and evaluation vendor | United States, Ridgefield Park | LLM applicationsGenerative media | 4 | 6 | 2026-11-09 | ||
| 40 | Kainos | IT services firm with a QA practice | United Kingdom, Belfast | LLM applications | 3 | 1001-5000 | 6 | 2026-11-09 | |
| 40 | Pen Test Partners | Security firm with AI testing | United Kingdom, Buckingham | LLM applicationsAI agents | 1 | 2010 | 6 | 2026-11-09 | |
| 40 | Qualysec | Security firm with AI testing | India, Bhubaneswar | LLM applicationsAI agents | 3 | 6 | 2026-11-09 | ||
| 40 | ScienceSoft | IT services firm with a QA practice | United States, McKinney | LLM applicationsAI agents | 2 | 1989 | 6 | 2026-11-09 | |
| 40 | Software Secured | Security firm with AI testing | Canada, Ottawa | LLM applicationsAI agents | 3 | 6 | 2026-11-09 | ||
| 50 | Artifice Security | Security firm with AI testing | United States, Denver | LLM applicationsAI agents | 2 | 2019 | 5 | 2026-11-09 | |
| 50 | Bishop Fox | Security firm with AI testing | United States, Tempe | LLM applicationsAI agents | 2 | 5 | 2026-11-09 | ||
| 50 | Bridewell | Security firm with AI testing | United Kingdom, Reading | LLM applications | 2 | 2013 | 5 | 2026-11-09 | |
| 50 | DeepStrike | Security firm with AI testing | United States | LLM applications | 2 | 2016 | 5 | 2026-11-09 | |
| 50 | Digital Divide Data | Data and evaluation vendor | United States, New York | LLM applicationsVoice AI | 3 | 5 | 2026-11-09 | ||
| 50 | HackerOne | Security firm with AI testing | United States, San Francisco | LLM applicationsAI agents | 3 | 5 | 2026-11-09 | ||
| 50 | Knovel Engineering | IT services firm with a QA practice | Singapore, Singapore | LLM applications | 4 | 5 | 2026-11-09 | ||
| 50 | Praetorian | Security firm with AI testing | United States, Austin | LLM applicationsAI agents | 3 | 5 | 2026-11-09 | ||
| 50 | QAlified | Pure-play QA company | Uruguay, Montevideo | LLM applications | 3 | 5 | 2026-11-09 | ||
| 50 | Redbot Security | Security firm with AI testing | United States, Denver | LLM applicationsAI agents | 2 | 5 | 2026-11-09 | ||
| 61 | 7ASecurity | Security firm with AI testing | Ireland, Dublin | LLM applicationsAI agents | 2 | 4 | 2026-11-09 | ||
| 61 | DataArt | IT services firm with a QA practice | United States, New York | LLM applications | 1 | 1997 | 4 | 2026-11-09 | |
| 61 | IBA Group | IT services firm with a QA practice | Czech Republic, Prague | LLM applicationsAI agents | 1 | 4 | 2026-11-09 | ||
| 61 | IBM | IT services firm with a QA practice | United States, Armonk | LLM applications | 2 | 1911 | 4 | 2026-11-09 | |
| 61 | Nexigen | IT services firm with a QA practice | United States, Newport | LLM applicationsAI agents | 2 | 4 | 2026-11-09 | ||
| 61 | Toloka | Data and evaluation vendor | Netherlands | LLM applicationsAI agents | 2 | 4 | 2026-11-09 | ||
| 61 | Vaadata | Security firm with AI testing | France, Lyon | LLM applicationsAI agents | 2 | 4 | 2026-11-09 | ||
| 61 | Welo Data | Data and evaluation vendor | United States | LLM applications | 3 | 4 | 2026-11-09 | ||
| 61 | WorkNest | United Kingdom, London | LLM applicationsAI agents | 2 | 4 | 2026-11-09 | |||
| 74 | Anvil Secure | Security firm with AI testing | United States, Seattle | LLM applications | 2 | 3 | 2026-11-09 | ||
| 74 | BreachLock | Security firm with AI testing | United States, New York | LLM applications | 1 | 3 | 2026-11-09 | ||
| 74 | Bugcrowd | Security firm with AI testing | United States, San Francisco | LLM applications | 1 | 2012 | 3 | 2026-11-09 | |
| 74 | CrowdStrike | Security firm with AI testing | United States, Austin | LLM applications | 2 | 3 | 2026-11-09 | ||
| 74 | Dionach | Security firm with AI testing | United Kingdom, Oxford | LLM applications | 2 | 3 | 2026-11-09 | ||
| 74 | NetSPI | Security firm with AI testing | United States, Minneapolis | LLM applications | 2 | 3 | 2026-11-09 | ||
| 74 | Sama | Data and evaluation vendor | United States, San Francisco | LLM applicationsGenerative media | 1 | 3 | 2026-11-09 | ||
| 74 | Tesvan | Pure-play QA company | Armenia, Sevan | LLM applications | 1 | 3 | 2026-11-09 | ||
| 74 | VeriServe | Pure-play QA company | Japan, Tokyo | LLM applications | 2 | 3 | 2026-11-09 | ||
| 86 | Synack | Security firm with AI testing | United States, Redwood City | LLM applications | 1 | 2 | 2026-11-09 |
Which services listed vendors state for LLM applications
Count of entries on this page that also state each service. Built from the data at build time.
| Product type | LLM output evaluation | RAG pipeline validation | Prompt and model regression testing | Red teaming and adversarial testing | AI security penetration testing | Bias and fairness audit | Compliance and conformity assessment support | ML model validation | Training data and labeling QA | Performance and latency testing | Conversational flow testing | Production monitoring and drift testing |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| LLM applications | 34 | 14 | 14 | 45 | 39 | 25 | 12 | 14 | 10 | 12 | 9 | 18 |
Related
By country
Other product types
Questions
What is tested in an AI chatbot?
Intent recognition, multi-turn context, factual accuracy, tone, refusals, escalation to humans, and behaviour on each channel. Security checks look for prompt injection and leakage of private data.
What does LLM testing cover?
LLM testing covers answer quality and factual accuracy, hallucination, retrieval quality for RAG systems, regression across prompt and model versions, adversarial robustness, latency and cost. 36 published entries state LLM output evaluation.
How is an LLM application tested before release?
Teams build an evaluation set from real use cases, score answers against a rubric, run adversarial tests and load tests, and set acceptance thresholds. The same set is rerun after every prompt, model or data change.
How do testers handle non-deterministic LLM output?
They assert on meaning instead of exact text, run each case several times and use score thresholds. Settings such as temperature are fixed during tests, and results are tracked as rates across runs.
How is a RAG pipeline tested?
Retrieval and generation are tested separately: first whether the right passages are retrieved, then whether the answer stays grounded in them and cites them correctly. Changes to chunking or the index are followed by a regression run. 14 published entries state RAG pipeline validation.
Which AI systems should be red teamed: models, applications or agents?
All three, at different depths. Model red teaming tests behaviour; application red teaming adds the system prompt, retrieval and user interface; agent red teaming adds tools and permissions, where a successful attack can cause actions.