Maze is a rapid user testing platform from Maze.design in Paris, designed to give users actionable user insights, in a matter of hours. The vendor states that with it, users can test remotely, autonomously, and collaboratively.
$75
per month
UserTesting
Score8.1 out of 10
N/A
UserTesting helps UX researchers, designers, product teams, and marketers gather actionable insights through research, testing, and feedback. With a network of real people ready to share their perspectives, UserTesting enables organizations to make customer-first decisions at scale.
N/A
Pricing
Maze
UserTesting
Editions & Modules
Professional
$75
per month 3+ seats
Organization
custom pricing
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Maze
UserTesting
Free Trial
No
Yes
Free/Freemium Version
Yes
No
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
No
No
Entry-level Setup Fee
No setup fee
No setup fee
Additional Details
—
—
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Maze
UserTesting
Considered Both Products
Maze
Verified User
Chose Maze
Maze User Testing is brilliant to test with a large volume of people and if you’re not after particular qualitative insights, like UserTesting would offer. The card sorting feature is basic and not as mature as Optimal Workshop would offer but it does the job and can be used in …
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info
Staff Product Designer in Information Technology at SenseHQ (Information Technology & Services, 201-500 employees)
Chose Maze
1. Ease of use - Maze's user experience is very much better than user testing.com 2. Testing Panel - Although Maze's testing panel is not as much quantity as User testing, QUality is quite good for the testers you hire 3. Analytics after testing - Maze gives detailed analytics …
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info
Lead Product Designer in Product Management at Lightspeed (Computer Software, 1001-5000 employees)
Chose Maze
When looking for tools that could help us understand our customers better, we needed something that would be easy to use, had the functionality and flexibility of running multiple types of tests and exercises, and allowed our team to be able to do these tests quickly. Only Maze …
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info
UserTesting
Verified User
Chose UserTesting
We evaluated a range of research tools within the UX team, including UserZoom, Lookback, Maze, Optimal Workshop, and UserTesting, and, in the end, concluded that UserTesting had the most comprehensive offer in the market. The only issue we found was that UserTesting appeared …
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info
Verified User
Chose UserTesting
Because Maze has more limited feature set and basic analytics.
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. TR verified that a representative sample of customers was invited. More Info
Brand and UX+UI Designer at WIRO Agency (Design, 11-50 employees)
Chose UserTesting
UserTesting is far more advanced than UserBob. It allows a lot more flexibility in the type of testing we run and specifically how we gather respondents to this.
Most tests are unmoderated, similar to Maze, which I would suggest is the most comparable in platform. I find …
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info
Verified User
Chose UserTesting
Platform simplicity first, good pricing packages, good testing type coverage for multi-purpose use, good audience/panel. dscout is still very specialized in diary studies and does not offer a good platform for usability testing and high-level visual concept evaluation. Usabilla …
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info
Verified User
Chose UserTesting
UserTesting's platform is the most comprehensive. While it may not have the best analytics features, survey features, recruitment features, etc, it has everything you need to run evaluative and generative research.
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info
Verified User
Chose UserTesting
UserTesting is superior because of their vast panel, speed, and intuitiveness.
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. TR verified that a representative sample of customers was invited. More Info
UX Researcher in Product Management at Macmillan Education Ltd (Education Management, 5001-10,000 employees)
Chose UserTesting
User Testing is so much easier to use than other user testing tools. It's also pretty good for transcription and now they do transcription in Spanish, which is also an important part of my work and that was one of the reasons I used Dovetail. Now I still use Dovetail as it's a …
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info
UX Research Sr. Manager in Research & Development at BFA Industries (Cosmetics, 1001-5000 employees)
Chose UserTesting
I wasn't the person who selected Usertesting, but I did use this in previous company so I was aware of their capabilities. I really enjoy how usertesting applies their research methods and have a greater support. The UserZoom was easy to handle but I don't remember how it was …
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. TR verified that a representative sample of customers was invited. More Info
Maze User Testing is great if you're interested in doing user research from the comfort of your own desk. You can easily setup usability tests, surveys, card sorting and tree tests among other things to get a better understanding of how customers use your product. The only limitation at the moment with Maze that I can identify is only being able to do unmoderated tests, so if you'd like to be able to ask follow up questions in the moment, Maze is not the tool for you.
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info
UserTesting has been great for moderated customer interviews/usability testing as well as for unmoderated testing of messaging, imagery, prototypes and live experiences. I would say that the scope of what you want needs to be limited, as the participants are only paid so much and tests are supposed to not exceed a certain amount of time. For customer interviews, I think it can be difficult to onboard customers to UserTesting if they have never used it before. If I set up interviews, I don't even have them use the UserTesting scheduling tool, I actually set up all the interviews with the customers myself through the tool (being mindful of time zones!). When we run the meeting, they really don't even know UserTesting is involved. Might be nice for UserTesting to allow the upload/connecting to of a Zoom interview and let it do the transcription/analysis from there.
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. TR verified that a representative sample of customers was invited. More Info
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info
Sometimes there are restrictions around types of research that can be used for moderated user-testing with our own users.
For tests on relatively small areas of a website or app, the AI analysis seems rather overblown, like it's trying too hard to come up with something insightful when the test is actually about something quite small (e.g. structure of a mobile app menu).
It's difficult to invite our own users to unmoderated user-testing because they wouldn't know how the UserTesting interface works - this is particularly an issue for mobile research.
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info
I'm very happy with my experience of the product and the level of service and learning resources they provide. If the service becomes more expensive than it currently is then we might not be able to justify additional cost - but this is theoretical. I would recommend UserTesting and would ideally renew our contract.
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info
Maze is easy to use most of the times. It is easy to integrate with Figma, It is easy to find testers worldwide with required filters. Maze gives recorded videos which are helpful in debugging and understanding the problem with flows. A/B testing is easy to add and test. Overall Maze is very easy to use
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info
It's very good, I have used other tools in the past and this is by far the most intuitive and user friendly. Testament to this is the ease with which other non researchers who have been onboarded to the tool with our additional seat have found it easy to use
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info
I have contacted UserTesting's customer service online, by email, or by phone a few times, and each time, I have encountered the same professionalism and expertise. Even in person during a work event, they were there, and it was the same experience.
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info
From a technical perspective, the implementation was extremely smooth. Most of the change management / implementation hurdles were clearing use of the tool through our various security, legal, and information privacy teams. Once these concerns were addressed (UserTesting.com was very helpful in providing all the needed documentation), the implementation process was very simple and we were able to get going right away.
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info
A Lookback is an alternative option if you think Maze User Testing is quite expensive for you, but look back has a different approach to Maze User Testing. Lookback focuses on qualitative usability testing instead of quantitative UserTesting. And also, Maze User Testing has a free option but Lookback doesn't have it, but Lookback has a cheaper option at $19/month than Maze.
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info
The quality of the participants: they usually have good feedback and act like "professional" users. Which is good when we want a few insights in a short amount of time. Also, the interface is good. I miss having more features, like a good transcription tool like we have in Condens
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info
