Why Testifly | Not scripted. Not agentic. Discovered.
Not scripted. Not agentic. Discovered.
QA at your size isn't a product decision. It's usually not a decision at all.
Here's what actually covers your app right now.
Your customers find the bugs.
Not in a bug tracker - in an abandoned checkout, a churned signup, a support thread you see three days later. This is the real incumbent, and it's rarely said out loud.You click through it yourself.
Manually, undocumented, usually the night before a release - by the person who wrote the code and can't see it fresh anymore.“We'll set up Playwright.”
Not a decision. A repo with three tests in it from a Tuesday in March, and nobody's touched it since.You ask a coding agent.
Feels free. Isn't - the agent that wrote the feature is now grading its own homework.You hire.
$100k–200k a year, for a role a three-person company was never going to open.You look at a vendor.
Most are demo-gated, built for a team an order of magnitude bigger than yours, or both.
How Testifly compares
| Feature | Testifly discovers & runs itself | Playwright Agents agent-managed suite | AI tools Claude, Copilot - scripted, AI-assisted |
|---|---|---|---|
| Setup | 2 min - connect a URL | Moderate - seed tests per suite | High - SDK + config |
| Test creation | Finds flows on its own | Agent writes plans + code | You script the logic |
| Cost over time | Minimal - nothing to maintain | High - manual plan review | Very high - orchestration |
| On failure | Root cause + video, automatic | Manual triage by an engineer | Manual debugging |
| Where it runs | Hosted - we run every test | You manage the infrastructure | You manage the infrastructure |
| Ongoing upkeep | Zero - heals itself | Medium - human approves fixes | High - human prompts fixes |
| Who it's for | Anyone - no code needed | SDETs already on Playwright | Devs, a handful of tests |
Discovering flows is not the same as describing them
Every alternative above - Playwright, a coding agent, most vendors - still needs someone to say what to test: a YAML file, a plain-English brief, a prompt in a chat window. That's authoring with extra steps. It still decays the moment nobody's watching it, because a person is still the thing keeping it alive.
Testifly doesn't start from a description. It connects to your app, maps the flows and pages that actually exist, and builds QA for them without anyone writing a test case, a selector, or a framework config. When the UI changes, it heals. When the product changes, it adapts. There's nothing to abandon, because there was nothing anyone had to author in the first place.
The questions you're already asking
“I don't have time to QA a new tool.”
Fair - so don't. Enter your URL, discovery runs on its own, and you'll have results in about 15 minutes with nothing to configure along the way. Check it first on the readiness checker with no signup, or start free Discovery (30 days, no credit card) against a real app before deciding anything.“Self-healing tools have burned me before.”
Reasonable - those tools were healing tests a person wrote. Here, the suite that heals is one nobody authored in the first place, which is a different failure mode than the one that burned you.“What happens behind login?”
Testifly supports username/password, SSO, and magic-link auth. If discovery can't get past your login, it says so - it doesn't quietly skip it.“You want me to point an external service at production?”
Not required. Testifly runs on cloud, on-prem, or self-hosted behind your firewall or VPN.“What happens when discovery guesses wrong?”
It will, sometimes - a flow it maps incorrectly, an edge case it misses on day one. You can correct it directly, and the correction sticks. We'd rather say that plainly than pretend discovery is perfect.“I'll set it up and never touch it again.”
That's the point, not the risk. There's nothing to author, so there's nothing to abandon.“We were going to set up Playwright.”
How many tests are actually in that repo, and when was the last one written? That's usually the whole answer.“Can't we just have someone run Claude against the app?”
You can, and it will write good tests from a prompt. But someone still has to tell it what matters, run the tests, keep them working when the product changes, and investigate every failure. That is developer time, and it adds up. Testifly discovers your real pages and flows on its own, runs on every deploy and on a schedule, heals tests when the UI changes, and gives you a root cause and session video when something fails. It approaches the running app from the outside, so it does not depend on the developer who wrote the feature. Continuous QA at a fraction of developer-hour costs.
Don't take our word for it
Two things you can run right now, no signup:
- Check your own app
The readiness checker gives you an access, bot-protection, and login verdict in about 20 seconds. - Watch Testifly test Testifly
The product runs against its own live app, continuously, in public, at app.testifly.dev/guest.
Is your web app ready for Testifly?
Paste your URL. We'll check access, bot protection and login.
- No signup required
- Takes up to 20 seconds
Checking your web app...
- Access Not started
- Bot protection Not started
- Login Not started
- App type Not started
- Login button Not started
Check complete
Your web app is ready for Testifly!
30 days, no credit card needed.
Bot protection found. To let Testifly in, allowlist its IP address.
A QA hire runs $150,000 a year. Testifly runs $29 a month.