UserTesting vs Userlytics

Quote on request

From $49 per participant (indicative, pay-as-you-go)

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

Pay-per-session pricing is unusual in this category and suits intermittent research.

No free tier; demo and trial on request.

Free trial with a small number of sessions.

Category standard

UserTesting (Thoma Bravo) · since 2007

Established

Userlytics · since 2009

• 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.

• 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.

• 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.

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

Enterprises running continuous research with dedicated researchers.

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