TestingXperts and an anonymised fashion and apparel retailer: Integrations test automation 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; of 4 metrics, 0 are verifiable yes, 0 partial and 4 no. [ev-1657]

Client profile as published

Client
a leading technology-enabled apparel and accessory distributor serving the US and Canadian wholesale markets (the vendor's description; the vendor does not name the client)
Segment
Fashion and apparel
Region
USA
Channels
not stated
Size indicators
Revenue: $1B+

The client description and size indicators are quoted from the source; segment, region and channels are this site's classification. [ev-1657]

Systems in scope

  • Integrations: named in the Challenges and Solution sections (live dependencies, including databases and APIs, and inter-component flows)

Where the source names each system is quoted or summarised from the case page. [ev-1657]

Problem as stated

The distributor was moving code from VB.NET to C# and needed proof that every function behaved the same in both versions. Non-UI files needed exhaustive unit tests. The tests had to run first against the original VB.NET code to set a reference. Real flows with live databases and APIs had to be checked as well as isolated units. [ev-1657]

Even minor discrepancies could disrupt order processing or fulfillment accuracy. (quoted from the source)

Approach

Testing types
automation, functional, api and data-migration (main scope: automation)
Team shape
not stated
Duration
not stated
Engagement model
not stated
Tooling named in the source
xUnit

Metrics claimed

Metrics as published, with who claims each and what this site could check.
MetricValueUnitClaimed byVerifiableEvidence
line code coverage across migrated components98%+%vendornoev-1658
functional equivalence validated100%vendornoev-1659
manual regression testing time30-40%vendornoev-1660
effort for future enhancements and refactoring20-30%vendornoev-1661

What the case does not say

  • Measurement method.
  • Duration over which the metric held.
  • Team size on both sides.
  • Cost.
  • Whether the client is still a client.
  • Date of the work.

Reading notes for a buyer

This case speaks to the scenario “OMS (order management system: software that routes, splits and tracks customer orders across stores, warehouses and carriers.) or WMS (warehouse management system: software that runs receiving, storage, picking and shipping inside a distribution center.) replacement” and feeds dimension D4 (Test automation evidence) of the methodology. A question to put to TestingXperts:

Does the line coverage figure apply to the non-UI files only or to the whole migrated codebase, and which order processing functions were migrated? [ev-1657]

Source and verification

Source
A Leading US-Based Apparel Distributor Achieves 98% Code Coverage in Legacy-to-Modern Code Migration
Published
not dated by the vendor
Verified
2026-10-30
Evidence grade
secondary
Corroborating sources
none found
Evidence records for this case.
IdClaimSourceClassGradePublishedVerified
ev-1657A Leading US-Based Apparel Distributor Achieves 98% Code Coverage in Legacy-to-Modern Code MigrationA Leading US-Based Apparel Distributor Achieves 98% Code Coverage in Legacy-to-Modern Code Migrationvendor-case-studysecondary2026-10-30
ev-165898%+ Line Code Coverage AchievedA Leading US-Based Apparel Distributor Achieves 98% Code Coverage in Legacy-to-Modern Code Migrationvendor-case-studysecondary2026-10-30
ev-1659100% Functional Equivalence ValidatedA Leading US-Based Apparel Distributor Achieves 98% Code Coverage in Legacy-to-Modern Code Migrationvendor-case-studysecondary2026-10-30
ev-166030-40% Reduction in Manual Regression Testing TimeA Leading US-Based Apparel Distributor Achieves 98% Code Coverage in Legacy-to-Modern Code Migrationvendor-case-studysecondary2026-10-30
ev-166120-30% Less Effort for Future Enhancements & RefactoringA Leading US-Based Apparel Distributor Achieves 98% Code Coverage in Legacy-to-Modern Code Migrationvendor-case-studysecondary2026-10-30

Vendor profile: TestingXperts.

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 .