For Growth-Stage SaaS

    You have 30 engineers, zero QA, and a Playwright folder collecting dust

    Growth-stage teams know they need tests. They don't have 6 months to set up Playwright or $96K/year for QA Wolf. Zerocheck generates tests from your PR changes in plain English. Setup in 2 minutes. Coverage from day one.

    Book a demo

    Who this is for

    Role
    CTO, founding engineer, or engineering lead
    Company
    Post-seed to Series B SaaS (20-100 engineers) shipping weekly with AI-generated code
    Trigger
    Production incident embarrasses the team. New engineering lead asks 'where are the tests?' Customer reports a bug a basic smoke test would catch.

    This is for you if:

    • Ship 5+ PRs per day
    • Fewer than 2 dedicated QA engineers
    • Using Playwright, Cypress, or no E2E framework at all
    • Had a production bug in the last 30 days that existing tests missed
    • Test suite run time over 15 minutes per PR (or no test suite at all)

    The pain is real

    “I inherited 10,000 lines of code with zero tests. No documentation. No comments. Just spaghetti code from a developer who quit 3 years ago.”

    Medium / Let's Code Futuresource

    “In the rush to get stuff out, time-consuming things get skipped like user testing, automation, analytics, monitoring, and manual testing.”

    The Pragmatic Engineersource

    42% of developers aren't comfortable writing automation scripts

    41% of committed code is now AI-generated, but test coverage is declining

    QA Wolf charges ~$96K/year. One buyer reported an 800% pricing increase at renewal.

    Why nobody else solves this

    Playwright is free but takes 2-6 months of infrastructure work before you get meaningful coverage. 55% of teams spend 20+ hours/week on maintenance once they do.

    QA Wolf solves the problem but costs $96K/year and their team owns your tests. One buyer reported an 800% pricing increase at renewal. Growth-stage companies cannot afford this.

    AI code generation means teams write 3x more code with less test coverage. 41% of committed code is AI-generated. The demand for 'AI writes the tests too' is accelerating.

    The workflow today vs. with Zerocheck

    Without Zerocheck

    New engineering lead joins a 25-person startup. 40K lines of code, zero E2E tests. Evaluates Playwright: Day 1 is npm install + config. Day 2 is a login test that breaks on OAuth. Week 2: selectors break on a CSS refactor. Week 4: 5 tests exist, 3 engineers are frustrated. The initiative dies.

    With Zerocheck

    Connect repo + staging URL. Zerocheck discovers critical flows, generates 20 tests in plain English. PR opened: 'Your first 20 E2E tests.' Engineer reviews, merges. CI green within the hour. Tests generate themselves from PR changes going forward. Coverage grows with every sprint.

    How it works

    1

    Paste staging URL, connect GitHub. Setup in 2 minutes.

    2

    Zerocheck discovers your critical flows and generates tests

    3

    Tests run on every PR, generating themselves from your changes

    4

    Results as PR comments with evidence artifacts

    Other use cases

    SOC 2 Evidence

    Every release produces an immutable evidence pack - no more death by screenshot.

    Zero to CI

    Connect your repo, get 20 tests in CI within the hour. No framework, no selectors, no QA hire.

    Checkout Guardian

    Guard the only code path where a bug is measured in lost dollars per minute.

    FAQ

    We have zero tests. Is that a problem?

    It is the ideal starting point. Zerocheck generates tests from your app automatically. Connect your repo, paste your staging URL, and get 20 tests in CI within the hour. No existing tests required.

    How is this different from QA Wolf?

    QA Wolf deploys a managed team to write and maintain your tests at roughly $96K per year. One buyer reported an 800% pricing increase at renewal. Zerocheck is self-serve: your team stays in control, tests generate from your PRs, at a fraction of the cost.

    We use Cursor/Copilot for code. Does Zerocheck work with AI-generated code?

    Yes. 41% of committed code is now AI-generated, but test coverage is declining. Cursor writes features, Zerocheck writes the tests. Both can merge in the same PR.

    What if we already have some Playwright or Cypress tests?

    Keep them. Zerocheck adds change-aware test generation and visual interaction on top. Your existing tests still run. Zerocheck fills coverage gaps and eliminates the maintenance burden.

    You have 30 engineers, zero QA, and a Playwright folder collecting dust

    E2E testing for teams that ship fast without a QA department.

    Book a demo