Platform comparison
UserTesting vs UserZoom: Which is right for research with your users?
See how UserTesting and UserZoom compare to each other (and to Maze) to help you decide which is the better fit for your research.
Quick summary
When it comes to research with your users, choosing the right platform can make all the difference. UserTesting and UserZoom are two of the leading platforms in the market, but which is the better choice for your organization? And are there other relevant choice for your team?
We’re also going to cover Maze, so you can clearly see how UserTesting and UserZoom not only compare to each other, but to other options in the market.
Let's take a closer look.
UserTesting vs UserZoom vs Maze: Overview
Name
Main focus
Price
G2 Rating
Available on
Main focus
UserTesting
Moderated interviews
Free to start Custom Enterprise plans
4.5/5 out of 600+ reviews
Browsers, app
Moderated interviews
UserZoom
Moderated interviews Usability testing Research repository
Free to start Custom Enterprise plans
4.2/5 out of 130+ reviews
Browsers
Moderated interviews Usability testing Research repository
Maze
Quantitative research Prototype testing Usability testing
Free to start Pro Plan from $75/month Custom Enterprise plans
4.5/5 out of 90+ reviews
Browsers
Quantitative research Prototype testing Usability testing
Feature comparison
Features
UserTesting
UserZoom
Maze
UserTesting
Tester panel
Prototype testing
Deep integrations with design tools
Adobe XD
Adobe XD, Figma, InVision, Sketch
Adobe XD
Video / screen session recording
Tree testing
Moderated video sessions
Heatmaps
Card sorting
5-Second testing
Surveys
In-product surveys
Conditional logic
Tester management database
UserTesting: Fast feedback at a cost
UserTesting provides a fast way to collect feedback on any experience, analyze results, and share findings without sacrificing time or risking expensive rework. It's a platform designed for larger individual in-depth projects and for those focused on qualitative research.
Collect responses through deep video interviewws, which can be time-consuming to schedule, script, and review
Schedule and speak to customers via Live Conversation, which requires more time investment than the remote, unmoderated testing that Maze offers
Leverage a large panel of 1 million testers (many unverified according to user reviews)
Integrate with project management tools like Optimal Workshop, Slack, Trello, Jira, Outlook, and Google Calendar
UserTesting Pros
UserTesting Cons
Designed to extract deep qualitative insights from in-depth, one-on-one interviews that span several weeks
Users have reported that the platform can be challenging to navigate, particularly for beginners
Fit for larger individual projects with a small group of specialized researchers
Dependent on allocated time for scheduling, scripting, and reviewing moderated interviews
Large panel of testers (although many unverified, according to user reviews)
Moderated interviews require a significant investment of time and resources to extract insights - it can take up to 12 weeks for results to arrive
Limited prototype testing functionalities and integrations with popular design tools
No option to source and manage your own database of test participants, having to exclusively rely on Panel (which means added costs)
Charges its services per seat - it can become very expensive to scale research across your company
UserZoom: Solid moderated testing for specialist researchers
UserZoom is a platform helping teams make user-centric decisions and create digital experiences customers will love. It was built for traditional moderated research through in-depth interviews, and still heavily relies on video interview scheduling and qualitative analysis to extract insights.
Mainly collects feedback through video recordings, which requires time and resources to schedule, script, and review
Additional research methods like card sorting, 5-second testing, and click testing
Despite integrating with quite a few productivity tools, it doesn't allow deep integrations with design tools to test prototypes in detail (like clicks, user paths).
Relies on creating your own tags, themes, and notes to build reports and extract actionable research insights
UserZoom Pros
UserZoom Cons
Solid platform for conducting traditional moderated research
Heavily reliant on video interview scheduling and qualitative analysis to extract insights
Aimed at extracting qualitative insights from in-depth, one-on-one interviews that span several weeks
Users have reported that the platform can be challenging to navigate, particularly for beginners
Good fit for larger projects involving a small group of specialized researchers
Limited prototype testing functionalities and integrations with popular design tools
Integrates with popular productivity tools like Zoom, Trello or Drift
No option to source and manage your own database of test participants, having to exclusively rely on Panel (which means added costs)
The platform can get quite expensive when scaling research across your team
Maze: The scaleable choice for product teams
Maze empowers everyone in product teams to continuously collect expert-level user insights. With the power to round up valuable feedback all in one place, Maze helps you deliver truly customer-centric products.
Gather both quantitative and qualitative feedback through methods like heatmaps, card sorting, and live website prompts
Integrate with leading product design tools like Figma, InVision, AdobeXD, Sketch, and Marvel, as well as other essentials in your toolkit like Slack, Amplitude, and CRM
Create team spaces, assign roles, and work together on mazes from the outset, with projects ranging from user surveys to usability tests
Choose recruitment options that fit your needs, from our Maze Panel powered by Prolific, to your own participant database with Reach, and specific Amplitude cohorts with in-product prompts
UserTesting and UserZoom vs Maze: Main differences
What really sets Maze apart for teams doing research?
Focus of research
Both UserTesting and UserZoom focuses on collecting insights from video interviews and recordings. Maze enables both quantitative and qualititative insights through methods like heatmaps, card sorting, or live website prompts.
Design integrations
Unlike UserTesting and UserZoom, Maze offers direct integrations with popular design tools, such as Figma, Sketch, and InVision to validate designs early on.
Time to insight
It's time-consuming to build reports and extract insights from UserTesting and UserZoom. Maze's visual-rich, automated reports means no precious research time wasted to and a faster arrival at product insights to empower your team.
Why product and design teams choose Maze
Intuitive experience
It’s hard enough to source test participants—you don’t want any more friction to get research campaigns completed. Maze is an easy-to-use platform whose tests can be carried out on any device.
No more time-consuming workflows
Say goodbye to scheduling, scripting, and reviewing moderated interviews. Maze also has no learning curve, scripts, or app installs that only create hurdles in your research.
Prototype testing, done right
Integrate with leading design tools and validate usability across your prototypes with real users, before investing valuable resources.
Works with:
Robust, customizable reporting
In tools like UserTesting or UserZoom, you spend hours analyzing data manually to build reports. Maze's reports are automated, visually-rich, and fully customizable. Filter and categorize information in detail to uncover patterns and share valuable insights with stakeholders.
Conclusion: Why choose Maze over UserTesting and UserZoom?
By now, you should have a clear sense of all three platforms, from the features they offer to the pros and cons of each. UserTesting, UserZoom, and Maze are great options to conduct research and improve your product by learning with your users. At the end of the day, it comes down to which platform aligns better with your workflow and vision as a team.
Both UserTesting and UserZoom are platforms driven by video-based human insight, and focused on traditional moderated research through in-depth interviews. They still heavily rely on video interview scheduling and manual qualitative analysis to extract insights.
UserTesting and UserZoom may have the edge when it comes to 1-on-1 moderated interviews, but as noted through this page, Maze is the only of these three platforms to have a truly “all-in-one” research solution offering qualitative research methods in pair with a solid quantitative breadth of functionalities. Thus, Maze is a better fit for teams who want to inform everyday product decisions, integrate customer feedback across the entire product development cycle, and empower everyone to learn and deliver value to customers continuously.
Frequently asked questions
Who is Maze for?
Who is Maze for?
Anyone working in a product team should be empowered to do research—whether you’re a designer, researcher, product manager, or other.
Maze is used by teams that want to empower everyone to collect actionable user insights to make informed decisions, and share learnings across their whole organization.
What’s continuous discovery and why does it benefit my company?
What’s continuous discovery and why does it benefit my company?
Continuous product research fuels high adoption, activation, and retention—simply put, it enables you to ship more value to your users, and more frequently. Maze empowers anyone who does research to autonomously run expert-level, unmoderated research—facilitating a discovery mindset in product teams so you can build the right product, with your users, for your users.
Can I request a demo?
Can I request a demo?
Absolutely! Tell us a little about your company here and we’ll connect you with someone in our team.
Do you have comparisons with other platforms?
Do you have comparisons with other platforms?
Yes. Read on to discover all comparisons of Maze with other platforms.