User Interviews vs Maze

From $49 per session (pay-as-you-go; $41 and $36 on annual commitments)

Free tier available

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

Maze has withdrawn public pricing — its pricing page is now a feature-comparison table where every paid tier resolves to a form, so the Starter figures quoted by third-party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.

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

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

Widely used

User Interviews · since 2015

Widely used

Maze · since 2018

• 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.

• 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.

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

• 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.

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

Product and design teams validating flows early and often.