10 UserTesting alternatives to improve UX research in 2024

May 15, 2024

10 UserTesting alternatives to improve UX research in 2024

Window shopping and looking to switch away from UserTesting? Here are the market’s most qualified competitors.

User research is an essential step in the product development process, and there’s many ways to go about it. One UX research tool is UserTesting—but it’s by no means the only way. If you’re looking for a tool to uncover authentic user insights, but don’t have a large budget, you’re in the right place.

To help assess your options, we’ve compiled a list of seven alternatives to UserTesting. They have all the features you love, like running usability testing and collecting user feedback to inform product decisions. We’ll introduce you to each solution’s pros and cons, and see how each one compares in terms of pricing.

Every business has different needs, but you’re sure to find a solution that suits you here.

💡 Before we begin…

We’re not including UserZoom on this list as it was acquired by UserTesting in 2023. Although still distinct tools, the platforms now share the same executive management. If you’re not a fan of UserTesting, an alternative outside of the UT product sphere may be a better bet—read on for your options.

10 Best UserTesting alternatives

There’s a lot to consider when looking at UserTesting alternatives. To make the decision easier, we’ve broken each tool down into bitesized, comparable sections to help you make the right decision for your business. Here’s the shortlist:

  1. Maze
  2. Lookback
  3. Optimal Workshop
  4. Lyssna (formally UsabilityHub)
  5. Loop11
  6. Userfeel
  7. Dscout
  8. Userlytics
  9. Sprig
  10. Trymata (formerly TryMyUI)

UserTesting alternatives at a glance

Tool Type of tests (all remote) Research methods Price G2 reviews
UserTesting Moderated
Usability testing
Diary studies
Card sorting
Tree testing
First-click testing
A/B testing
Not disclosed, users online say it ranges from 30k to 180k per year. 4.5/5
Maze Moderated
User interviews
Prototype testing
Card sorting—open, closed, and hybrid
Tree testing
Usability testing
Five-second testing
Live website testing
In-product prompts
Feedback surveys
Automated reporting
Participant recruitment
Starting at $99/month/5 seats 4.5/5
Lookback Moderated
Usability testingUser interviews
Diary studies
Remote observations
Highlight reels and transcriptions
Starting at $25/month for 10 test sessions/year 4.3/5
Optimal Workshop Moderated
Card sorting
Tree testing
First-click testing
User interviews
Usability testing
Online surveys
Starting at $208/month/1 seat 4.5/5
Lyssna Unmoderated
Usability testing
Closed card sorting
A/B testing
User interviews
Diary studies
Focus groups
Starting at $75/month/3 seats 4.4/5
Loop11 Moderated
Usability testing
A/B testing
Prototype testing
Information architecture testingTrue intent studies
Heatmap analysis
Session recording & replay
Starting at $179/month 3.8/5
Userfeel Moderated
Tester panel
Task-based testing
Video clips & notes
Voice transcription & SUS rating
Pay per test. Starting at $30 per test. 4.4/5
Dscout Qualitative
Diary studies
Live interviews
Express missions
Mixed methods
Not disclosed, subscription model pay per seat 4.6/5
Userlytics Moderated
Prototype testing
Accessibility testing
Usability testing
X-second testing
Information architecture testing
Starts at $499, pay-as-you-go plan 4.4/5
Sprig Quantitative
User interviews
In-product surveys
Usability testing
Starts at $175 for 25k monthly tracked users (MTUs) 4.5/5
Trymata (formerly TryMyUI) Unmoderated Live website testing
Beta sites testing
First impression testing
Starts at $399/month 4.3/5

1. Maze

Walkthrough of how to create a Maze

Maze is the leading user research platform that integrates both qualitative and quantitative research methods. It supports moderated and unmoderated testing and enables mixed-method studies. Maze allows product teams to quickly test anything—from prototypes to copy—and collect actionable insights, enabling product teams to gain user insights at the speed of product development.


Maze is a versatile platform for running multiple types of moderated and unmoderated research, giving you one holisitic platform for all your UX research needs.

  • Prototype testing: Test user interfaces, sign-up flows, and prototypes, ensuring products are user-friendly and meet customer expectations. Plus, Maze integrates with your favorite design tools like Adobe, Sketch and Figma.
  • Tree testing: Assess your information architecture and test terminology and groupings to improve findability on your site.
  • Card sorting: Quickly uncover user mental models and optimize your site's navigation and information architecture.
  • Moderated interview studies: Quickly transform your moderated user interviews into actionable insights and shareable reports with AI-powered transcription, summaries, and sentiment analysis.
  • Live website testing: Run real-time research on live websites and get insights into how features perform with actual users in their actual environment.
  • Get quantitative results fast: Most mazes are completed within three hours, which means testing won’t delay your product development process.
  • Automated Reporting: Your insights are automatically analyzed and put together on a downloadable, customizable presentation for easy stakeholder buy-in.
  • Gather qualitative insights: Create and launch feedback surveys or invite participants to record their video and audio as they go through usability tests to catch the sentiment and thought process of your participants with Clips.
  • Concept and idea validation: Get quick and actionable insights through methods like five-second tests, opinion scales, and open questions to validate early-stage concepts effectively.
  • Maze AI: Let AI highlight critical learnings, automate project naming, and help you craft the perfect bias-free questions.
  • Keep track of your test participant pool: Use the Reach database to collect, store, and segment participant data. Access pre-screened participants via Panel to get fast answers on your mazes and gather high-quality insights from your target demographic.
  • In-Product Prompts: Capture user responses in-the-moment, measure product sentiment over time, and recruit participants directly from your platform with In-Product Prompts.
  • It’s easy to use: Maze comes with a simple and highly intuitive UX. It’s built to be used by anyone who does research, from a one-off survey to an expert researcher; empowering and enabling everyone on your team to make decisions based on real user insights.
  • Ample integration options: Maze integrates with your favorite design tools like Adobe, Sketch, and Figma and other tools like Notion and Slack to share ideas and reports across your workflow.
  • Use 50+ pre-built Templates: There’s a free ready-to-go maze for almost every research need. So, your team can use the templates for inspiration—or to start getting actionable user insights in a matter of minutes.


Maze doesn’t currently provide built-in capabilities for hosting live moderated testing sessions directly within its platform. However, Interview Studies provides a comprehensive moderated analysis tool, and Clips lets you have a deeper insight into your testers’ pain points, feelings, and processes, without needing the additional resources for a facilitator to be present. You can use Maze along with any video conferencing tools to moderate your sessions.

What do Maze user reviews say?

Many users praise Maze's seamless integration with popular design tools, like Figma and Sketch, which simplifies the testing process. Neha T. says: “The best thing I liked about Maze is the easy integration of Figma prototypes for prototyping testing, user testing."

Another user, Pedro U., commended Maze for its user-friendly design that allows easy remote usability testing and its compatibility with major design tools. Nora C., a Product Designer, says “Maze is always improving” and loves the usefulness of the filters in results, which improves the overall testing experience.


Maze offers three pricing options for organizations and product teams of all sizes:

Free Starter Organization
$0/month $99/month or $1,188/year Custom
1 study per month
5 seats
Pay-per use panel credits
Up to 7 blocks
1 study per month
5 seats

Everything in Free, plus:
- Unlimited blocks
- Clips
- AI question rephrasing
- Conditional logic
- PRO templates
- CSV export
Custom studies
Custom seats

Everything in Starter, plus:
- Open card sorting
- Tree testing
- Interview Studies
- AI follow-ups & analysis
- Advanced panel targeting criteria
- Dedicated CS Manager & priority support
- Private workspaces (RBAC)
- Custom branding options
- Custom legal terms
- Panel screener (coming soon)

Maze vs. UserTesting

If you’re comparing UserTesting to Maze, there are some key differences to consider between the two tools:

  • Price: UserTesting is out of reach for many small and medium-sized businesses, with pricing reportedly starting at ~$30k per seat/year. Maze is a lot more affordable for the majority of businesses. Offering multiple price points tailored to individuals, small organizations, and enterprises, Maze allows for flexibility in project users.
  • Test method: While UserTesting’s emphasis is on moderated testing, Maze offers unmoderated and moderated testing solutions. Where UserTesting is mostly focused on gathering insights coming from user videos, Maze gives you access to additional types of feedback—such as video recordings, survey responses, heatmaps, paths taken, click data, and more—as well as user interview analysis.
  • Integrations: Maze lets you run validation tests using Figma, Sketch, AdobeXD, Axure, and InVision designs, while UserTesting only connects to AdobeXD.
  • Time to insights: Since UserTesting is mostly based on video, you might need to invest more time listening to the conversations and analyzing the data. Maze, on the other hand, creates an automated report including the most relevant test information in one place—the report is then ready to download and share with key stakeholders in real-time.

The verdict: Choose Maze if you want both moderated and unmoderated testing and reporting capabilities. Maze is also a user-friendly alternative if you want to enable more people from your team to conduct continuous research at any time in the development lifecycle.

Deliver value to your customers continuously with Maze

No more time-consuming research workflows. Gather customer insights quickly and intuitively, and fuel better data-informed decisions for your product.

2. Lookback

Usability moderated test on Lookback

Lookback focuses on qualitative, moderated testing, allowing your team to host research calls and organize the data live. Lookback also helps product teams work collaboratively, with the ability to have multiple people from your team join the call, chat, and highlight comments—without interrupting the conversation with participants. This tool is mostly for moderated research interviews and usability testing, but does offer some unmoderated functionality.


  • Lookback makes collaboration among research teams easy, with a live share feature that allows researchers to invite team members to watch and take time-stamped notes
  • It records all sessions in the player, which allows researchers to access time stamps and comments from the live session to find information faster
  • Your team can also create projects and add mixed forms of testing. Test one of your app’s features in both a moderated and unmoderated way, and keep all answers stored in one place


  • Participants are required to download an app to take part and some users have trouble joining the calls due to connectivity or technical issues
  • Organizations are billed on the number of sessions they run, rather than number of seats. Teams that test continuously might find this expensive
  • Lookback doesn’t offer multiple-choice questions for participants, or provide quantitative metrics such as time on task or a system usability scale (SUS)

What do Lookback user reviews say?

While Lookback has been appreciated for its user research features, it's important to note that the most recent reviews available are from 2022, and therefore could be considered outdated.

Some reviews highlight technical challenges that affect user experience. For example, Demet E. points out issues related to the required plug-in, stating, "Users have a lot of difficulty with the plug-in, which sometimes causes no-shows." This suggests a barrier that could deter participants from successfully joining research sessions. Similarly, Taylor J. says "Some users had trouble getting into a session through the tool... it wasn't easy to troubleshoot."


Lookback’s plans are billed annually and come with a 60-day free trial:

Freelance Team Insights Hub Enterprise
Starting at $25/month Starting at $149/month Starting at $344/month Custom
- From 10 to 40 sessions/year
- Usability testing
- Virtual observation room
- Qualitative interviews
- From 100 to 150 sessions/year
- All Freelance features, plus:
Make projects private
Get unlimited storage
In-session collaboration
Mention teammates
Share with stakeholders
Granular team access
- From 300 to 500 sessions/year
- All Team features
- Unlimited sessions
- All Insights Hub features, plus:
Customization options
Customer success manager
Onboarding and professional services
Research expert and tailored training
SAML-based SSO

Lookback vs. UserTesting

Lookback and UserTesting are similar in terms of testing types. Both focus on remote moderated testing but offer some unmoderated capabilities. However, Lookback’s prices are much more affordable for small businesses.

Unlike UserTesting or Maze, Lookback doesn’t have a pool of testers available, meaning you’d need to recruit test participants separately or through an agency.

They both have good video capabilities, but Lookback’s live and time-stamped comments allow for easier navigation of video user research.

The verdict: Choose Lookback if you need to easily scan your customer interviews. If you need multiple team members to have access to the tool and conduct user research, Lookback might be a more cost-effective solution.

3. Optimal Workshop

Optimal Workshop card sorting feature

Optimal Workshop is a user research platform that uses multiple testing methods to collect qualitative and quantitative insights. The platform offers solutions for user research, UX design, and information architecture.


  • This tool lets you collect data like clicks and paths taken, as well as user expectations and the sentiment behind their actions
  • It offers multiple testing methods like card sorting, tree testing, moderated usability testing, first-click testing, and surveys
  • Optimal Workshop gives you access to tests using their pre-screened and ready-to-answer pool of participants. Or, find custom participants to answer your queries


  • Doesn’t integrate with design tools, meaning you can only test text or image prototypes
  • A common complaint among users is that the testers assigned by the platform don’t meet their specifications and that the integration options are limited

What do Optimal Workshop users say?

Optimal Workshop has received mixed reviews from users over the years. However, it's important to note that the most recent user reviews are from 2022, which may not fully reflect the current state of the platform.

Alicia C., a UX Researcher, appreciates the simplicity and variety of test types offered by Optimal Workshop, particularly valuing the first-click tests. However, Alicia also expresses concerns about the platform's limitations in screening questions, which impacts the precision in selecting desired audience groups. They also find it challenging to aggregate user answers post-test, which complicates the analysis process.


These prices are based on annual billing:

Free Pro Team Enterprise
$0 $208/month (free for 2 months)



- Limited testing tasks/cards for tree testing and card sorting 

- 3 qualitative research sessions

- Online surveys

- First-click testing

- Participant recruitment (up to 10 answers per test)

- 1 user

All Free features, plus:

- Unlimited studies, tree testing tasks, card sorting cards, participant responses, and storage

- Branded studies

- Post task questions

- Up to 5 users

All Pro features plus:

- Priority support

- Collaborate on studies

- Team usage reporting

- Custom Participant Agreement

- Single Sign-On (SSO)

- Multiple team accounts

- Administrator controls

- Custom usage reporting

- Legal assessment

Optimal Workshop vs. UserTesting

Optimal Workshop is fairly accessible for a range of users. The main difference between Optimal Workshop and UserTesting is that Optimal Workshop is more accessible for smaller teams and startups.

UserTesting and Optimal Workshop both support unmoderated and moderated tests, but UserTesting is more focused on moderated sessions.

The verdict: Pick Optimal Workshop if you’re a small team that’s just starting to incorporate user research and you’re working with a limited budget or don’t mind working without design integrations. If your product team has over 15-20 seats, or you’re looking for more nuanced prototype feedback, try a solution like Maze or UserTesting to increase the quality of reports and insights.

4. Lyssna

lyssna usability testing

Lyssna–formely UsabilityHub–is a research tool made for designers, product managers, and marketers looking for a fast way to run remote research. Solutions include usability testing, user interviews, surveys, market research, and research participant recruitment.


  • You get access to multiple unmoderated testing methods like five-second, first-clicks, prototype, or preference tests
  • Lyssna allows you to create surveys referencing parts of your UI
  • The cost per answer is low, making Lyssna a suitable solution for short tests run with multiple participants


  • You can’t access the screen recording of users who completed the tests
  • It can be hard to budget for this tool as you’ll need to pay for the monthly subscription and each participant panel
  • Risk of paying multiple times if initial insights aren’t useful

What do Lyssna users say?

Lyssna receives mixed reviews on popular review sites. While Sharon R. appreciates how easy it is to use Lyssna for testing Figma prototypes and adding various test sections, several reviewers note the lack of audio and video capabilities during prototype testing, which limits your ability to capture users' thought processes in-the-moment.


Prices based on annual subscriptions:

Free Basic Pro Enterprise
$0 $75/month $175/month Custom
- 3 Seats
- Unlimited tests, surveys, and interview studies
- Max 15 answers per link
-Length per test: 2 mins max
- Live chat support
- Panel access
- 3 seats included, 10 seats max
All Free features, plus:
- Unlimited responses
- Length per test: 5 mins max
- CSV export
- Variation sets for running the same test on design iterations
- Remove Lyssna branding
- 5 seats included, 15 seats max
All Basic features, plus:
- Conditional logic
- Hidden fields
- Auto set recruitment limits
- Custom branding
- Team management
All Pro features, plus:
- Custom password policy
- Security audits
- Priority support
- Custom terms

Lyssna vs. UserTesting

Lyssna and UserTesting are both highly-qualified user research tools that can provide answers quickly. However, users believe Lyssna is easier to adopt than UserTesting. Mostly because Lyssna was designed for non-researchers, giving the app a gentler learning curve.

UserTesting only connects to AdobeXD, whereas Lyssna connects to Figma, Sketch, Invision, and Balsamiq so if you’re looking to integrate with a variety of other tools, Lyssna offers more options. Both tools offer moderated and unmoderated user research tools so you’re able to run a variety of research projects.

The verdict: If you want both moderated and unmoderated research solutions and you use Figma, Sketch, Invision or Balsamiq for design, Lyssna is best for you. If you design in Adobe XD, stick to UserTesting or another alternative.

5. Loop11

Loop11 is a moderated and unmoderated research tool that aims to uncover insights with minimal hassle. Loop11 lets you test usability, benchmark, run A/B tests, evaluate your search engine findability, do architecture testing, and more.


  • You can create and deploy tests quickly to gather a mix of quantitative and qualitative data
  • Test on desktop, mobile and tablet
  • This tool lets you record the user's audio and video on unmoderated tests
  • Loop11 connects to design tools like Figma, AdobeXD, InVision, Axure, and JustInMind


  • While you don’t need to write any code, users claim Loop11 come with a steep learning curve
  • Once published, you’re unable to edit a test—instead, you’ll need to delete it and start again, which could lose valuable insights

What do Loop11 users say?

User reviews suggest that Loop11's feature set may not effectively support all testing requirements. Some users find the platform limited in scope and not fully equipped to handle their specific needs.

Judith E. shares concerns about Loop11's feature range, noting it as limited and not fully supportive of all testing needs. She suggests, "It would be better to have tools for automated testing and improvements in the API for regression testing," Anno C. says, "One aspect that needs to be improved is the inclusion of accessibility analysis and responsiveness testing for web applications."


Loop11 plans come with a 14-day free trial. These are based on annual billing:

Rapid Insights Pro Enterprise
$179/month $358/month $533/month

- Moderated and unmoderated tests

- Test on multiple devices

- Unlimited questions, tasks, and test duration

- Limited projects per month: 3

- Maximum project participants: 10 

- Maximum moderated tests viewers: 3

- Can bring your own users

- Create: highlight reels and timestamped notes 

- Available test methods: 5 seconds and first clicks

- AI summaries and transcriptions

All Rapid Insights features, plus: 

- 10 projects per month

- Maximum projects participants: 100

- Screeners

- Access heatmaps, clickstreams, and paths

- Export your data

- Download video and audio

- Priority chat support

All Enterprise Plan features, plus:

- Unlimited: projects, participants, and viewers

- Single Sign-On (SSO)

- Connect to Slack

- Report segments

- Enterprise security

Loop11 vs. UserTesting

Loop11 and UserTesting both allow for moderated and unmoderated testing. However, both tools also receive criticism from users for ease of use, though Loop11’s learning curve appears to be slightly less steep. Unlike UserTesting, Loop11 doesn’t let you export your data on its most basic plan, and the reporting capabilities of UserTesting are more detailed than Loop11’s.

The verdict: If you want to run remote moderated and unmoderated tests at an accessible cost, then it’s worth considering Loop11 over UserTesting. However, if you need more in-depth moderated testing analytics and have the budget, UserTesting or another tool on this list might be a better choice.

6. Userfeel

Userfeel hero image for remote usability testing

Userfeel is a moderated and unmoderated user research platform designed by UX researchers. Instead of subscription-based pricing, with Userfeel you can pay on an as-needed basis. You can also run multiple types of tests to measure UX and conversion rates.


  • The biggest advantage of this platform is the pricing model—you don’t need to commit to a monthly or yearly subscription, you can simply pay for the tests you run, whenever you need
  • It has a participant pool of over 150k global people, but you’re also allowed to use your own testers’ pool
  • You get access to unlimited users and seats per paid-for test


  • According to reviews, users have issues filtering participants with limited screening options
  • Pay as you go pricing can be a double-edged sword, especially if you aim to perform tests continuously. It can end up being more expensive in the long term than paying a fixed price. If a project takes longer, or requires more research than initially planned, you can end up running out of budget before getting the insights you need
  • Participants report performance issues with Userfeel’s testing app

What do Userfeel users say?

While the platform has its strengths, user reviews suggest that there are some areas where Userfeel could improve to better serve its users' needs. Krezcely B. says that there can be delays in deploying tests that might affect users who require quicker turnaround times.

Another user Gerard G. highlights a need for improvement in Userfeel’s functionality, "The transcripts need some work.” They also said that the platform does not support tree testing, which could limit its utility for more research tasks.


Price per test varies accordingly:

Session Price
1-hour unmoderated session with your tester $30
1-hour moderated session with your tester $60
20-minute unmoderated session with Userfeel tester $60

40-minute moderated or unmoderated session with Userfeel tester


1-hour moderated or unmoderated session with Userfeel tester


Userfeel vs. UserTesting

UserTesting and Userfeel are very different platforms. UserTesting is aimed at big companies that perform regular testing, whereas Userfeel is useful for any business looking to run a quick test.

Userfeel appears to be more popular in terms of providing a seamless customer experience—unsurprising, considering it was designed by UX researchers. Its unique pricing plan also makes it an interesting alternative.

The verdict: Pick Userfeel if you’re not testing your platform frequently. If, however, you follow a more continuous approach to testing, it’s worth going with any of the other platforms in this list.

7. Dscout

dscout usability testing tool

Dscout is a remote qualitative research platform that supports research via mobile and desktop. It offers research tools like Diary, Live, and Express missions, with a global participant pool for rich, in-context user insights.


  • Integrates with tools like Slack and Miro for enhanced collaboration
  • Provides analytics features like automatic transcriptions and video playlist editing
  • Delivers insights quickly through Express missions that can be completed in 24-48 hours


  • Includes additional fees for managing participant incentives, adding to the project cost
  • Faces challenges in recruiting participants from outside the US and Canada, which can limit global studies
  • New users may find the platform's extensive features overwhelming to learn and integrate initially


Dscout offers three different subscription options: Researcher, Team, and Enterprise. While Dscout’s pricing is not readily available on the website a Reddit user says the Enterprise plan starts at $75K a year.

What do Dscout users say?

Some users, like Fynn M., raise concerns about the functionality of dscout's video clipping tool, stating, “It cuts off some words at the beginning and end of clips." Another user Sarah S. discusses interface challenges, explaining, "full tag names aren't visible unless they're short, which complicates the tagging process."

Dscout vs. UserTesting

While Dscout offers diverse research tools, users complain of challenges in recruiting participants from outside the US and Canada. UserTesting is a better choice if you want to run usability tests and access a large pool of participants.

The verdict:
Dscout is a solid option for enterprises and large teams that want to run remote qualitative testing. If you're on a tight budget, other tools give you access to more features like card sorting, design tool integrations, prototype testing, and live website testing for less upfront. (For example, Maze does all this for a starting price of $99 per month).

8. Userlytics

Userlytics lets researchers collect qualitative and quantitative insights by conducting moderated and unmoderated tests on various digital assets, including websites, mobile apps, and prototypes. With a panel of 2,000,000 users and features like card sorting, tree testing, and device-specific testing, Userlytics helps teams identify UX issues and improve customer engagement. The platform also provides advanced metrics and graphical reports for effective data analysis.


  • Offers a large panel of 2M+ participants for diverse user feedback
  • Provides AI-based insights for efficient data analysis
  • Allows session flagging and recordings for easy review and sharing of key moments
  • Integrates with popular design tools like Adobe XD, Figma, InVision, and Sketch for seamless prototype testing


Lacks multilingual transcription options in subscription packages
Pay-as-you-go plan may not be cost-effective for continuous research
Advanced research methods like prototype testing, card sorting, and tree testing are only available in expensive plans

What do Userlytics users say?

While Userlytics gets high praise for its extensive toolkit and responsive customer support, users share challenges while running usability and session management. For example, Laila B. shares, "The transcription has a lot of problems when the person has an accent.." which impacts data reliability. Another user, Tamar M., voices concern about Userlytics' credit system, explaining, “I have all these leftover credits for bringing my own users that I would rather use from the Userlytics testers”, showing the limited flexibility in how users can allocate their resources for testing.


Since Userlytics has a pay-as-you-go plan. We experimented with the sliders on their pricing options and found:

DIY Enterprise Custom plans
$499—$999/year $34,000—$500,000/year Not disclosed
- 2—5 seats
- Unlimited unmoderated participants from 3rd party
- 60 mins session duration
- 20—100 AI transcriptions per month
- 50 moderated participants from 3rd party
- Moderated participants from Userlystics panel at $138 per participant
- Unlimited Admin & User Accounts
- Website, App, & Prototype Testing
- QA Review of Panel
- Picture-in-Picture Recording
- Screener Questions
- Moderated Testing
- Card Sorting
- Tree Testing
- AI Transcriptions
- 30-min Session Increments
- Highlight Reels
- Advanced Demographic
- Advanced Metrics
- Sentiment Analysis
Same as Enterprise plan

Userlytics vs. UserTesting

Userlytics offers both moderated and unmoderated testing, while UserTesting focuses on a moderated and qualitative approach. In terms of pricing, Userlytics and UserTesting are both less accessible for smaller businesses or teams with limited budgets.

The verdict: Choose Userlytics if you want to run both unmoderated and moderated testing from one platform. If you already have a pool of testers, opt for UserTesting and combine it with other tools in your workflow to get deeper insights into user experience. If pricing is a big consideration for you, Maze is the best value solution on our list.

9. Sprig

Sprig empowers organizations to gather real-time insights through targeted microsurveys, concept tests, and in-product experiments, directly within their digital products like websites and apps. The platform supports event-triggered surveys and A/B tests, enabling companies to make data-driven decisions rapidly. Sprig's analytics dashboard offers reporting tools that visualize user feedback to pinpoint usability issues and improve user engagement efficiently.


  • Offers a free forever plan for individuals
  • Provides CSV download of reports
  • Supports quantitative and unmoderated user testing through rapid in-product surveys and user feedback collection


  • Lacks customizable and detailed reporting options
  • Paid plans are expensive, starting at $175/month with limited features
  • Interface can be clunky when creating multiple surveys, moving questions, or adding audience tags
  • Primarily focuses on surveys, lacking variety in research methods like card sorting, prototype testing, and live website testing
  • Integrations with popular tools like Amplitude, Figma, InVision, AdobeXD, Notion, and Google Drive are not available in the free plan

What do Sprig users say?

While many users appreciate Sprig's capabilities, some have faced challenges or identified areas where the platform could improve to better meet their needs.
Christine K. expresses some difficulties in adjusting settings to improve visibility for survey participants, impacting the effectiveness of the tasks. They mention technical glitches, explaining, "I had a couple of survey participants state that the task came up with a black screen and that the prototype did not show." Another user Zach F., while generally positive about Sprig, points out areas needing integration improvements, saying, "I wish they integrated with Dovetail in an easier way."


Free Starter Enterprise
$0 Starts at $175 for 25k MTUs Custom pricing
- 1 in-product Study per month
- 5k MTUs per month
- 1 Link Survey per month
- Unlimited account seats
- 2 in-product Studies per month
- 25k MTUs per month
- Mobile delivery (+$200/month)
- Unlimited Link Surveys
- Unlimited account seats
- Custom Studies per month
- Custom MTUs per month
- Unlimited Link Surveys
- Advanced security
-Study design customization
- Dedicated support
- Unlimited account seats

Sprig vs. UserTesting

Compared to UserTesting, Sprig has a larger template gallery and more integrations with tools like Zendesk, Intercom, and Shopify. Its A/B testing capabilities are more useful for teams that prioritize speed and efficiency. However, UserTesting is a better choice if you want to run usability tests and access a large pool of participants.

The verdict: UserTesting’s pricing is aimed at enterprises and larger teams able to invest more. Sprig is more affordable, but offers less value than other tools. Maze is the best of both worlds. It’s more cost-effective than both tools, while also offering a large range of user research methods.

10. Trymata (formerly TryMyUI)

Trymata, formerly TryMyUI, offers unmoderated testing capabilities to capture a wide range of user interactions. It also supports quantitative and qualitative analysis. Trymata's tools make it easy to identify usability issues, optimize user journeys, and ensure that your products meet user expectations.


  • Versatility in moderated and unmoderated usability testing
  • Intuitive and easy to navigate
  • Provides immediate and actionable insights from user feedback
  • Rich data collection through features like screen and voice recordings


  • Cost can be a barrier for smaller companies or teams with limited budgets
  • Inability to access data from previous tests once an account is terminated
  • Limited user testing templates library
  • Limited re-test opportunities as once a test is completed, any errors cannot be corrected. This is a challenge if initial test results are not satisfactory.

What do Trymata users say?

Many users mention limited tests and the unavailability of slots, which suggests a need for better management of test availability and user engagement. Roszaimy Y. says, "The prototypes often encounter errors such as unresponsive buttons and dead links." Other users comment on the platform's customer support, describing it as less than satisfactory.


Trymata offers different plans tailored to various needs:

Team Enterprise Unlimited Agency
$399/mo $1,667/mo
(billed annually)
(billed annually)
- Team-level license to Trymata usability testing suite10
- Trymata panel testers/mo
- 10 invites/mo to test with your own users
- UX Diagnostics metrics
- 36 highlight reels/yr
- 2 total seats
- Enterprise-level license to Trymata usability testing suite
- 360 Trymata panel testers/yr
- Unlimited testing with your own users
- Up to 16 multi-choice screeners
- Video transcripts
- Unlimited highlight reels
- 5 total seats
- Unlimited-level license to Trymata usability testing suite
- All Enterprise-level features & benefits
- Unlimited Trymata panel testers
- Unlimited seats
- Early access to new features
- Manage unique testing licenses for all your clients
- Keep each client's test data & billing separate
- Seamlessly switch between client dashboards
- Gate access to each client's data for different users
- Unlimited seats

Trymata vs. UserTesting

Both Trymata and UserTesting offer similar usability testing capabilities with test recruitment panel, screener, session videos and survey response data. However, TrymyUI does not offer card sorting or tree testing. While UserTesting boasts a rich feature suite including A/B testing, concept and prototype testing, and mobile app testing and validation.

In terms of pricing, with Trymata, you can buy additional credits at $45 each if you need more testers, which is a decent option as compared to UserTesting. It’s important to note that unlike Maze, neither TrymyUI or UserTesting have direct integrations with major design tools to test prototypes.

The verdict: Trymata is more transparent in its pricing and less expensive (based on user reviews) than UserTesting, but it offers limited user testing features for researchers. If you need a larger participant panel, and moderated and unmoderated testing with a variety of research methods, consider another tool on our list.

Why look for an alternative to UserTesting?

UserTesting's human insight platform to improve customer experience

The ten tools listed above are great alternatives to UserTesting, and provide a wide variation of research methods. Some tools are catered to enterprise teams, some are better suited to smaller teams, and others—like Maze—provide solutions for organizations of all sizes.

But, why might you want to try a UserTesting alternative? What pushes users to look for a substitute tool?

Typically, it’s the enterprise-level price point. UserTesting pricing often excludes smaller and medium-sized businesses, leaving them looking for a more accessibly priced tool. Enterprise businesses that prioritize value may also be looking for an alternative—just because you can afford the price point, doesn’t mean it’s the best value tool.

Generally speaking, businesses are probably looking for a similar tool with comparable abilities, but one that:

  • Is less expensive or better value
  • Is more suited for both moderated and unmoderated tests
  • Has better quantitative reporting
  • Has a more intuitive user experience (UX)
  • Integrates with multiple design tools
  • Suits your team’s needs

Consider an alternative UX research tool that:

Is less expensive or better value

UserTesting’s platform comes at a high cost. UserTesting doesn’t publish prices on its website, but in 2023, users reported prices starting at $30,000 per seat/year, making it out of reach in terms of price for many businesses.

Is more suited for both moderated and unmoderated tests

While UserTesting offers unmoderated and quantitative tests, it’s more tailored to a moderated and qualitative approach. If you’re looking for a tool that lets you test anything from an idea to a live website in an unmoderated way, there are other better options available.

Offers better quantitative reporting

Since UserTesting is mostly focused on hosting moderated tests, you need to factor in additional time to extract and organize data for reporting. Meanwhile, other tools automatically process insights and produce a downloadable PDF with a summary of all your relevant quantitative results.

Has a more intuitive UX

Users also complain about UserTesting’s UX, saying it’s not intuitive enough. This might be a problem you’ve experienced yourself. Either way, you need a tool that everyone on your team can use—regardless of technical skills, who’s doing the research, and how often.

Integrates with multiple design tools

UserTesting only integrates with AdobeXD, so testing features or prototypes gets a bit more complicated. Other tools like Maze can directly integrate with Figma, the industry's biggest design tool, and other tools like Invision, Marvel, and Sketch.

Suits your team’s needs

UserTesting is a powerful user testing platform but are you its intended audience? This platform is most suited to enterprises or businesses with big product teams (20+) and designated researchers. But, while UserTesting can support large teams, it doesn’t let you have projects with shared ownership. This means that the owner is the only one able to conduct the studies on the tool, making it difficult to collaborate. The team for this tool needs to have a sizable budget to cover the cost of multiple licenses and resources to teach the tool to team members.

What to consider in a UserTesting alternative

Now we’ve covered seven different alternatives to UserTesting, you can go forward and make an informed decision about which tool best suits your research needs. If you’re still unsure, here are four things to consider before committing to your next user testing tool.

1. Testing methodology

Determine the type of insights you need from a user research tool before you settle on a platform. While UserTesting can run unmoderated tests with quantitative metrics, it’s mostly focused on moderated, qualitative answers.

So, if you need to run usability, prototype, or five-second tests in an unbiased, data-driven environment, you should consider a tool like Maze. With the best product decisions being informed by a mix of both quantitative and qualitative insights, Maze enables you to use mixed methods like heatmaps, card sorting, surveys, and live website testing. You can also run moderated user interviews on Maze, with AI-powered analysis for faster insight collection.

2. Test setup and templates

When selecting your research tool, you want to consider how easy the set-up is, how intuitive the product is (for your product team and the participants), and how quickly it will get you results. Look for a tool that:

  • Makes it easy for your users to open the test and answer, by offering recruitment tools and integrated outreach campaigns
  • Has a pool of vetted testers that are ready to solve your tasks and can be segmented for future use
  • Is intuitive and comes with pre-built templates to set up tests in no time, whatever your experience level

Options that fit these criteria are: Maze, Optimal Workshop, and Trymata (formerly TryMyUI).

3. Scalability

One of UserTesting’s biggest downsides is that people find it too expensive, especially if they have a team of over 10 people doing research. You need a tool that’ll grow with you and enable your team to scale research, without becoming unaffordable. Consider the options that offer unlimited tests or seats per plan like Maze or Userfeel.

4. Design tools integrations

User research helps you improve your user experience, but it also allows you to reduce development costs, identify issues early on, and fuel product decisions with real user data. To do this, you need to be able to test real products with live testing, and access prototype integration. So it’s worth looking for an alternative to UserTesting that allows live website testing and the ability to test clickable prototypes from Figma, AdobeXD, InVision, or Sketch. Options that do this are Maze, Lyssna and Loop11.

Which is the best alternative to UserTesting?

All things considered, UserTesting could still be the solution for you. However, it’s important to note that UserTesting’s pricing can be complicated as it depends on the specific features and services you require. The plan starts at around $30k/year at its lowest price point. It depends on what you’re looking for, but if you’re interested in quality user testing at an affordable price—we’ve got some good news for you.

There are plenty of other tools with everything you need to get incredible feedback without breaking the bank. For example, if you’re looking for the most similar option to UserTesting at a lower price, you could consider Optimal Workshop. This platform allows you to run all types of tests and use their panel to answer your questions.

However, if you’re looking for a dedicated unmoderated platform with live website testing and multiple design tool integrations, then Maze is the right choice for you. Maze is a continuous product discovery platform that simplifies product research for people who do research and powers product decisions with user feedback. Plus, Maze comes with advanced reporting capabilities and the ability to record users’ audio and video. It’s one of the best value solutions in the market—enabling teams to conduct both moderated and unmoderated testing quickly and easily.

Start shaping a truly customer-centric product

No more time-consuming research workflows. Gather customer insights quickly and intuitively, and fuel better data-informed decisions for your product.

user testing data insights

Frequently asked questions about UserTesting alternatives

What is an alternative to UserTesting?

An alternative to UserTesting is any platform that allows you to run usability tests and collect insights from your users. For example, you could use Maze for running remote, unmoderated prototype tests using your Figma design.

Here are seven user research platforms that are similar to UserTesting:

  • Maze
  • Lookback
  • Optimal Workshop
  • Lyssna
  • UserZoom
  • Loop11
  • Userfeel

How much is UserTesting?

It’s not possible to say how much UserTesting costs as it doesn’t share pricing details on its website. However, based on user reviews and testimonials, their lowest price point is estimated to be around $15k a year.

What is similar to UserTesting.com?

There are plenty of tools that are similar to UserTesting.com, which can be used for various types of user testing. One stand-out tool that’s similar to UserTesting is Maze. It offers the quality tests, questions, and surveys you’re looking for without the premium price tag.

What is a good substitute for in-person usability testing?

Remote usability testing is a great option if you’re unable to run in-person usability tests. Plus, testing remotely makes user research more cost-efficient and accessible to a larger audience. It’s fast and simple to run impressive remote usability tests with Maze.

Start improving your product continuously, for free.