Userlytics vs UserTesting

When it comes to research with your users, choosing the right platform can make all the difference to your team. Userlytics and UserTesting are two popular platform choices for user research, but which is the better choice for your organization?

In this side-by-side comparison that includes pricing, features, and customer reviews, we’re also going to cover Maze, so you can clearly see how Userlytics and UserTesting not only compare to each other, but also to a leading platforms in the market.

The ratings above are from the popular review platform G2, where independent users provide their honest feedback about software. It's clear that Maze has the edge over UserTesting and Userlytics when it comes to providing a seamless onboarding and user experience, as well as overall vision to where the product is going.

When it comes to pricing, Maze is the only platform with a Free plan. The actual investment required for a paid plan will vary depending on the size of your organization and functionalities you want to see in your research platform.

Main takeaways from the above detailed feature comparison between Userlytics, UserTesting, and Maze:

→ All three platforms have a solid portfolio of research functionalities, so it comes down to how easy and effective are they in the context of your research.

→ While the recent acquisition of UserZoom allowed UserTesting to tap into the quantitative/unmoderated space, technically it can take years before it provides a seamless, "all-in-one" platform experience. Additionally, they currently restrict the types of study/blocks you can run concurrently, so it can quickly become a very expensive option to scale research across your company.

→ Userlytics and UserTesting may have the edge when it comes to traditional 1-on-1 moderated interviews,, since its been its focus for years. However, that comes with a high burden: relying on scheduling, scripting, and reviewing moderated interviews can make the extraction of insights extremely time-consuming. 

→ Maze boasts the most complete mix of native quantitative and quantitative research methods in a single, native platform, approaching moderated interviews with AI to make this type of research more efficient and precise.

→ When it comes to reporting, Maze offers the most robust set of reporting features, with options to filter and customize its automated, visual-rich reports and share it with stakeholders.

Main takeaways from the above participant recruitment and management comparison between Userlytics, UserTesting, and Maze:

→ All three platforms allow customers to find participants through a research panel but only UserTesting and Maze have the option to self-recruit from your own database. Prices vary greatly depending on the plan you're in.

→ After merging under the name UserTesting, its panel transitioned to IntelliZoom, which caused some significant customer upset. It allows participant recruitment from only 35 countries. Maze Panel is powered by Prolific and Cint and covers 150+ countries.

→ Both UserTesting and Maze have a participant management database solution available, but only Maze has the ability to actually send targeted product research campaigns to your very own participants.