UserTesting vs Useberry

Quote on request

From $67 per month (indicative)

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

Cheaper than Maze at comparable functionality; participant recruitment is separate.

No free tier; demo and trial on request.

Free plan with limited tests and responses.

Category standard

UserTesting (Thoma Bravo) · since 2007

Emerging

Useberry · since 2018

• 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.

• Good value — most of Maze's capability at a lower price.
• Supports a wide range of prototype sources.
• Card sorting and tree testing included rather than sold separately.

• 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.

• Smaller company with a lighter integration ecosystem.
• No moderated research.
• Limited built-in panel.

Enterprises running continuous research with dedicated researchers.

Small teams that want prototype testing without enterprise pricing.