QATestLab and an anonymised fashion and apparel retailer: Magento mobile testing case analysed
Verdict: what is checkable
The evidence grade (this site's label for how a case is sourced: primary with client or press confirmation, secondary when vendor-hosted only.) is secondary: the only source is the vendor's own page; the case publishes no metric, so nothing in it can be checked as a figure. [ev-1200]
Client profile as published
- Client
Mobile version of Israeli brand clothes online store (on Magento platform).
(the vendor's description; the vendor does not name the client)- Segment
- Fashion and apparel
- Region
- Israel
- Channels
- ecommerce and mobile
- Size indicators
- none given
The client description and size indicators are quoted from the source; segment, region and channels are this site's classification. [ev-1200]
Systems in scope
- Ecommerce platform (Magento): named in the store description at the top of the body text
- Mobile commerce: named in the title and the store description ("Mobile version")
Where the source names each system is quoted or summarised from the case page. [ev-1200]
Problem as stated
The page lists the agency ECommerce Partners as the customer and an unnamed Israeli clothing brand's Magento store as the site under test. Mobile shoppers have small screens and slow connections, and not every resource of the full site suits them. The task was to check that the mobile site displayed correctly on different screens and devices, with attention to graphics and animation that slow pages down. [ev-1200]
checking of correct website displaying on different screens and devices(quoted from the source)
Approach
- Testing types
- mobile and functional (main scope: mobile)
- Team shape
- 1 test engineer
- Duration
- 125 man-hours
- Engagement model
- not stated
- Tooling named in the source
- DeviceAnywhere, iExplorer, iPad Peek, iTunes, Jira
Metrics claimed
The case publishes no metric.
What the case does not say
- Baseline before the engagement.
- Measurement method.
- Cost.
- Whether the client is still a client.
- Date of the work.
Reading notes for a buyer
This case speaks to the scenario “First outsourced QA team for a mid-size retailer” and feeds dimension D2 (Retail system coverage) of the methodology. A question to put to QATestLab:
Which devices and screen sizes did the testing cover, and what measured page load times support the improved mobile performance claim? [ev-1200]
Source and verification
- Source
- Brand Clothes Online Store (Mobile Version)
- Published
- not dated by the vendor
- Verified
- 2026-10-30
- Evidence grade
- secondary
- Corroborating sources
- none found
| Id | Claim | Source | Class | Grade | Published | Verified |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ev-1200 | Brand Clothes Online Store (Mobile Version) | Brand Clothes Online Store (Mobile Version) | vendor-case-study | secondary | 2026-10-30 |
Vendor profile: QATestLab. System facet: Ecommerce platform testing vendors.
Positions on this page are computed from the methodology published at /methodology/ and from the evidence records linked on this page. Case study figures are the vendor's or the client's claims as published at the linked source; the "verifiable" column states what this site could check. The site does not recommend vendors, does not accept paid placement and does not publish rates. Last computed: 2026-11-03.
Published by the editor of retailqavendors.com. Last reviewed .