Emily Dubois

Jul 4, 2025

I have been on uTest since 2014, and my honest view is that success depends a lot on your own effort and expectations. As a beginner, you need to learn the Academy material, join cycles, and apply for every project you qualify for. Having both an Android and an iPhone helps, though they don’t need to be the latest models. An Android that is a few years old is fine, but an iPhone should not be more than four years old. When you do get invited to a cycle, focus on quality. It is better to give your best to two or three cycles than to spread yourself too thin across fifteen. Location also plays a big role. Testers in the United States and Western Europe see far more cycles compared to those in South America, Africa, or Asia. Countries like Japan and China have very few projects available. In my case, being from South Asia, opportunities are limited. Even as a Silver Rated tester with over 100 reported bugs, an 80% approval rate, and more than 10 approved test cases in two months, I have only earned $100. Payments can be discouraging, especially when bugs are sometimes valued at less than $1. This is not fast money. If it were easy, everyone would be doing it. You need to invest time and effort, and real earnings mostly come when you reach roles like Dedicated Tester, Test Team Lead, or Test Engineer. Still, compared to other platforms that pay equally regardless of location, uTest feels unfair. I regret spending three months here for so little return, as it often feels like cheap labor rather than real opportunity.

Oscar Romano

Jul 17, 2025

It was easy to set up, and I could join without creating a company. Invitations came based on eligibility, which made the process simple. The problems started with the test cycles. There were often 5–10 TTLs in a single cycle, and they almost never replied in chat. Sometimes it took 5–10 hours to get a response even when the cycle had just started. Once I had to complain to the TE about this, and only then did the TTLs respond within an hour. I also noticed favoritism. In one project, slots were allotted by the TTL using an Excel sheet. A tester booked 6 slots even though the limit was 3, and all the extra slots went to the same tester instead of being shared fairly. I reported this twice to the TSM but got no reply. Only when I raised it in a public channel did the TTL resolve it. Another issue happened when I raised 40 bugs in one cycle. The TTL shouted at me in chat, saying I should not do that. I asked where this was written in the scope, and instead of answering, they changed the scope description afterward to cover up. Then they claimed all bugs of the same type, like “page not found,” counted as one bug even if on different links. I proved that another tester had done the same and got approval. In the end, all my bugs were approved, but the TTL marked 6 of them as “low integrity.” After that, I was not invited to the next cycle, even though I had the highest number of approved bugs. Later, I found out another tester reported the same bug I had already raised, and this time the TTL approved it. I filed a support case and showed this second violation. Before that, I had reported it to TSM with no response. Once the support team got involved, they had no choice but to invite me back to the next cycle. In the end, it feels like TTLs can create or change rules at any time, and those rules are applied to one tester but not others. If you report violations, they try to block you from future cycles. Even when you escalate to TE or TSM, most of the time they cover it up. Only when you involve the support team with clear proof do they act.