UserTesting vs Respondent

Quote on request

From $39 per participant (indicative fee, plus incentive)

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

B2B incentives are high — $100-$400 per professional participant is normal, on top of the platform fee.

No free tier; demo and trial on request.

No subscription required; pay per completed session.

Category standard

UserTesting (Thoma Bravo) · since 2007

Established

Respondent · since 2016

• 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.

• Reaches professional segments that general panels simply do not contain.
• Verification meaningfully reduces participants misrepresenting their role.
• No subscription commitment.

• 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.

• Expensive per participant once incentives are included.
• Recruitment only, no research tooling.
• Some fraudulent participation persists despite verification.

Enterprises running continuous research with dedicated researchers.

B2B product teams that need to talk to specific professional roles.