For E-commerce & Fintech

Revenue depends on flows that often lack E2E coverage

Checkout, login, onboarding, and billing are high-stakes flows. Zerocheck runs approved browser tests for those flows and records what happened, while payment and email-provider helpers remain customer-authored in V1.

Who this is for

Role
Head of Engineering, payments engineer, or product lead
Company
E-commerce or fintech processing online payments, PLG SaaS with magic link auth
Trigger
Stripe SDK update breaks 3DS. Magic link bug locks out 200 users. Customer emails 'I tried to buy your product three times.'

This is for you if:

  • Checkout, payment, or onboarding flows that directly generate revenue
  • A broken user flow has cost measurable revenue in the last quarter
  • Currently rely on manual QA or crowdtesting before releases
  • Deploy more than twice per week
  • Engineering team under 50 people (no dedicated QA infrastructure)

The pain is real

“I deployed a new checkout flow on Friday afternoon at 4:47 PM. After 6 minutes Slack exploded. Payment processing broke and customers couldn't complete purchases.”

DEV Communitysource

“I tried to buy your product three times. Your site kept failing. I went to your competitor instead.”

Optivem Journalsource

Average payment incident costs $12K+ in failed transactions

Stripe iframe testing is a universal pain point: Cypress can't handle cross-domain iframes

95%+ of companies skip magic link testing in CI entirely

Why this stays unsolved

Checkout flows often involve third-party services, redirects, and test-mode sandboxes. V1 should be framed around approved checkout and billing smoke tests, with deeper provider automation handled by customer-authored flows.

Email flows sit in a structural tooling gap. E2E tools can drive browsers but can't receive email. Email tools can receive email but can't drive browsers. Integration requires 2-4 hours of plumbing per project.

Checkout and email flows are high-stakes, but they are often covered by manual checks or skipped in CI.

The workflow today vs. with Zerocheck

Without Zerocheck

Stripe ships a new Elements SDK version. Developer updates the package. Unit tests pass because Stripe is mocked. No E2E checkout test exists. Deployed Friday evening. Monday morning: 3% of payments failing. 3DS modal renders but the callback is broken. $12K in failed transactions before rollback.

With Zerocheck

Same checkout update. Zerocheck runs approved checkout and billing smoke tests on the PR. A blocking approved failure stops the merge, with screenshots, recording, and step trace for the engineer reviewing the change.

How it works

1

Author and approve safe checkout and billing smoke tests

2

Use customer-authored login setup for authenticated flows

3

Safe customer-authored payment-adjacent flows supported

4

Revenue math in the PR comment: what this test protects

FAQ

Can Zerocheck test real Stripe checkout with 3DS?

V1 does not ship built-in Stripe or 3DS helpers, so you author the payment-field and 3DS steps yourself. Teams run approved tests for these flows against safe staging or test environments, and suggested tests stay in review until approved.

What about PCI compliance? Can we give a tool access to payment flows?

Do not give Zerocheck real payment data. Use safe staging/test environments and customer-authored flows for payment-adjacent coverage.

How do you test magic links in CI?

Built-in SMTP capture is not available in V1. Use customer-authored login setup, environment variables, or your own test inbox tooling for magic-link flows.

Our checkout has custom payment integrations beyond Stripe.

Zerocheck runs approved customer-authored browser tests for these flows against safe staging or test environments. You author the payment-specific steps, and suggested tests stay in review until you approve them.

Revenue depends on flows that often lack E2E coverage

Protect the flows that generate your revenue. Checkout, payments, onboarding, and email checked on every PR.

Get a demo