Maze vs Userlytics

Free tier available

From $30 per session (volume/annual rates; platform access from $699/month)

Maze has withdrawn public pricing — its pricing page is now a feature-comparison table where every paid tier resolves to a form, so the Starter figures quoted by third-party sites are not verifiable. Panel recruitment is billed separately from the platform subscription.

Two shapes. Buy sessions project-by-project with no subscription (5-session minimum), or take a self-recruitment subscription — Premium $699/month for 5 seats and 50 participants, Advanced from $999/month for 10 seats and unlimited self-recruited participants. Panel sessions go as low as $30 on the Enterprise plan. The per-session option suits intermittent research; the subscriptions only pay off with steady volume.

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

Free trial with a small number of sessions.

Widely used

Maze · since 2018

Established

Userlytics · since 2009

• 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.

• Pay-as-you-go avoids an annual commitment for occasional studies.
• Both moderated and unmoderated in one platform.
• Genuinely international panel including many non-English markets.

• 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.

• Interface is less polished than the market leaders.
• Analysis tooling is basic compared to UserTesting.
• Panel quality varies by market.

Product and design teams validating flows early and often.

Teams that research a few times a quarter and cannot justify an annual platform contract.