UserTesting vs Maze vs User Interviews

Quote on request

From $99 per month (indicative, Starter)

From $45 per participant (indicative, general population)

Annual contracts, historically in the tens of thousands. Priced by seats and study volume, not per session.

Panel recruitment is billed separately from the platform subscription.

Per-participant recruiting fee plus the incentive you choose. Specialist B2B professionals cost considerably more.

No free tier; demo and trial on request.

Free plan with a limited number of studies and responses per month.

Free to manage your own participants; recruitment is pay-per-participant.

Category standard

UserTesting (Thoma Bravo) · since 2007

Widely used

Maze · since 2018

Widely used

User Interviews · since 2015

• The deepest participant panel, including hard-to-reach professional segments.
• Sessions come back within hours, not days.
• Analysis tooling — transcripts, sentiment, clip creation — makes findings shareable.

• Test a Figma prototype with real users before building anything.
• Quantitative metrics make results defensible in a product review.
• Usable free tier for evaluation and small studies.

• Solves recruiting, which is the actual bottleneck in most research programmes.
• Handles incentive payment and scheduling logistics, saving substantial coordinator time.
• Works with whatever session tooling you already use.

• Expensive with a high minimum commitment; unaffordable for small teams.
• Panel participants are experienced testers, which can skew behaviour towards articulate narration.
• Annual contracts do not suit occasional research needs.

• Unmoderated only — you cannot ask a follow-up question.
• Prototype testing measures a happy path, not the messy reality of a live product.
• Bring-your-own-participants works well; the built-in panel is smaller than UserTesting's.

• No testing or analysis features — it is recruitment only.
• Panel is strongest in North America.
• Costs mount quickly for specialist B2B roles.

Enterprises running continuous research with dedicated researchers.

Product and design teams validating flows early and often.

Teams whose research is blocked on finding and paying the right participants.