Research platform comparison
UserTesting vs UserZoom
See how UserTesting and UserZoom compare to each other (and to Maze) to help you decide which is the better fit for research with your users.
When it comes to research with your users, choosing the right platform can make all the difference to your team. UserZoom and UserTesting have been two popular platform choices for user research, but now that they're merging under the name UserTesting, are they 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 UserTesting and UserZoom not only compare to each other, but also to a leading platform in the market.
We're covering key points such as:
- User-friendliness - how easily will this platform be to onboard with my team or organization?
- Versatility - how does this platform facilitate both quantitative and qualitative research methods?
- Workflow - how well does this platform integrate with the design tools we use?
- Research insights - how straightforward is to analyze results and customize insight reports?
UserTesting and UserZoom vs Maze: Key insights
Research
→ UserTesting has been focused on getting deeper insights for video interviews (more time-consuming to digest and review).
→ In tools like UserTesting, you spend hours analyzing data manually to build reports. Maze's reports are automated, visually-rich, and fully customizable.
→ Having acquired UserZoom recently, UserTesting offers a more disjointed experience that can cause customer upset, Maze boasts a complete mix of native quantitative and AI-powered quantitative research methods in a single, native platform.
Workflow
→ All platforms will give you access to a research panel. In UserTesting and Maze you also have the option to self-recruit and manage a database of your own users.
→ Neither UserZoom or UserTesting have direct integrations with major design tools to seamless test prototypes; Maze does.
User-friendliness
→ Picking an easy-to-use platform is essential to provide a good experience for both your team and your test participants. Maze is known as a very intuitive platform and has superior scores on G2's Ease of Setup (9.6) and Ease of Use (9.0) parameters.
UserTesting+UserZoom: Deep feedback at a cost
UserTesting provides a way to collect feedback, analyze results, and share findings without sacrificing time or risking expensive rework. It's a platform designed for individual in-depth projects and for those focused on qualitative research. With UserTesting, you can:
Main focus is to collect responses through video recordings, which can be time-consuming to schedule, script, and review
Complex pricing structure doesn't favour the scaling of research across teams. It becomes unpredictable and expensive to add extra seats, run studies of different types/blocks, or enroll in extra support services
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
Maze: An alternative to UserTesting and UserZoom
Maze is a product discovery platform that helps organizations scale customer insights with AI-powered moderated and unmoderated studies, so you can build the right products faster.
All-in-one holistic platform
Maze boasts a breadth of research methods like card sorting, tree testing, or prototype testing, as well as AI-powered qualitative methods to distill moderated user interviews. Contrarily to UserZoom and UserTesting, this all achieved in a single, native platform.
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
UserTesting's reporting/analytics are perceived as lacking. Maze helps you arrive at precise, granular user insights faster, providing a full qualitative and quantitative picture to share with your team.
Platform comparison
UserTesting | UserZoom | Maze | |
|---|---|---|---|
Overall rating (G2) | 4.5/5 out of 600+ reviews | 4.2/5 out of 140+ reviews | 4.5/5 out of 90+ reviews |
Ease of use | 8.5 / 10 | 7.8 / 10 | 9.0 / 10 |
Ease of setup | 8.6 / 10 | 7.8 / 10 | 9.6 / 10 |
Product direction | 8.1 / 10 | 6.9 / 10 | 9.4 / 10 |
Pricing |
|
|
|
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 both UserTesting and UserZoom 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 on a paid plan required will vary depending on the size of your organization and functionalities you want to see.
UserTesting vs UserZoom: Features comparison
Features
UserTesting
UserZoom
UserTesting
Adobe XD
Adobe XD, Axure, Figma, Sketch
Adobe XD
2 variants
Up to 5 variants
2 variants
Google Meet, Microsoft Teams, Zoom
—
—
Insights from the above feature comparison between UserTesting, UserZoom, and Maze:
→ UserTesting's focus has always been moderated video interviews. That comes with a high burden: according to customer feedback, it can take up to 12 weeks for UserTesting's feedback to arrive (compared to Maze's 3 hours).
→ UserTesting and UserZoom gained access to features they didn’t have before the merger. The two together still lack some functionalities Maze has like 5-second testing or session recordings.
→ 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.
→ 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.
UserTesting vs UserZoom: Participant recruiting & management
Features
UserTesting
UserZoom
UserTesting
Unknown number of attributes
100+ targeting attributes
400+ targeting attributes
Unknown number of attributes
35 countries
150+ countries
35 countries
Participant recruitment and management at UserTesting, UserZoom, and Maze:
→ All three platforms allow customers to find participants that match their target audience more specifically through advanced demographic criteria. Prices vary greatly depending on each plan.
→ All platforms have a participant management database solution available, but UserTesting requires a charge for this service.
→ 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's Panel is powered by Prolific, Cint and Respondent, covering 150+ countries.
→ Only Maze has the ability to self-recruit users through an in-app widget and actually send targeted product research campaigns to your very own participants.
Conclusion
By now, you should have a clear sense of what these platforms can offer. At the end of the day, choosing between UserTesting and Maze comes down to which platform aligns better with your workflow and vision as a team.
UserTesting (who acquired UserZoom) is a platform driven by video-based human insight, and focused on traditional moderated research through in-depth interviews. The impact of UserTesting + UserZoom merger is still uncertain on the future pricing, but prices are perceived as prohibitive according to some G2 reviews and technically it can take years before they're able to provide a seamless 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.
UserTesting and UserZoom may have the historical edge when it comes to 1-on-1 moderated interviews, but 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. With AI-powered tools for both moderated and unmoderated studies integrated within the same platform, it's an intuitive, cost-effective choice for teams who need a blend of qualitative and quantitative research to inform everyday product decisions. Additionally, its rich, automated, and fully customizable reports outperform UserTesting's manual process, so findings are easy to come by and even easier to share.
![]()
By switching to Maze, we've consolidated four tools, including UserTesting, into one. Our workflow has been simplified, and we're saving on budget. We've even been able to extend more licenses across the team at the same cost.
Heidi Brown
Director of Product Design and User Research at Classy
Why product and design teams choose Maze over UserTesting and UserZoom
All-in-one holistic platform
Get the full picture faster with a breadth of native quantitative and AI-powered quantitative research methods that anyone in your team can quickly put live, and deliver value to customers more often.
Intuitive & user-friendly
Say goodbye to clunky platforms and steep learning curves. Maze is an easy-to-use platform with native functionalities whose tests can be carried out on any device, enabling quicker testing and easier adoption by your team.
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, 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.
![]()
Our team transitioned away from UserTesting to Maze at the start of the year, and it's been an invaluable tool for making us more customer-centric in a fast, actionable way. We've reduced the time it takes to run a study from an average of 12 weeks down to just 1 week.
Heidi Brown
Director of Product Design and User Research at Classy
Frequently asked questions
How can I start using Maze?
How can I start using Maze?
Feel free to signup for a free account at Maze to play around with the platform. If you still have questions about how Maze works or how it can help your organization, get in touch with our product experts.
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.
Can Maze do moderated interviews?
Can Maze do moderated interviews?
Yes. Interview Studies allow your to schedule, run, and analyze user interviews seamlessly with Maze.
Does Maze use AI?
Does Maze use AI?
Maze has a breadth of AI-powered functionalities designed to elevate your product research and enabling you to collect more insights, faster, and with more precision than ever before.
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.