Usabilla (discontinued) vs. UserTesting

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
Usabilla (discontinued)
Score 5.6 out of 10
N/A
Usabilla was a web and app survey tool, developed by the Amsterdam company of the same name, and acquired by SurveyMonkey in March of 2019. The product is no longer available.N/A
UserTesting
Score 8.3 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
Usabilla (discontinued)UserTesting
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Usabilla (discontinued)UserTesting
Free Trial
YesYes
Free/Freemium Version
NoNo
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoNo
Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup fee
Additional Details
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Usabilla (discontinued)UserTesting
Considered Both Products
Usabilla (discontinued)
Chose Usabilla (discontinued)
I have Hotjar, Sprig, and Usabilla in my workplace. Usabilla unfortunately has the most limited feature set of the 3 options. The difficulty of administering a Usabilla survey on mobile is a big blocker for my projects. Sprig and Hotjar both allow mobile and allow video …
UserTesting
Chose UserTesting
I have not evaluated any other platforms. Since 2013 or so, I've been a dedicated user of the UserTesting platform, so unfortunately I can't speak on any other platforms... I don't have experience using any of the competitors.
Chose UserTesting
I've created tests myself and contacts people myself.. and utilized watching people through ms teams meetings.
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 …
Chose UserTesting
More participants in the area we are focusing on
Chose UserTesting
UserTesting is probably the most polished with the largest tester pool, fastest turnaround, and great tools for both moderated and unmoderated tests.
Userlytics is a solid alternative, especially for the budget-conscious. It supports usability testing on lots of devices, and …
Chose UserTesting
The business chose the platform, but I am not too sure.
Chose UserTesting
We use both UserTesting and Userlytics in conjunction with each other. Userlytics we find to be stronger with 1-2-1 moderated study set up due to it being really simple and intuitive for both the researcher and the participant to use. Userlytics also utilises AI analysis of …
Chose UserTesting
UserTesting has the best unmoderated interview set up and it's easy for participants to use as well.
Chose UserTesting
UserTesting is very much a usability testing tool. dscout has much more robust functionality and feels like a more complete user research tool, and I prefer the quality of the panel. However, the UserTesting panel is much larger, and works well when you have lower barriers to …
Chose UserTesting
Because Maze has more limited feature set and basic analytics.
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 …
Chose UserTesting
Content square is great for seeing customer insights, but UserTesting cuts straight to the point
Chose UserTesting
UserTesting is not a one-size-fits-all approach, but it excels in certain areas. Its user-friendly UI and speedy test launch make it excellent for companies that require immediate user feedback. Budget-conscious firms may find UserTesting's cost-effectiveness appealing, …
Chose UserTesting
Userlytics was evaluated before but coverage of services was less as compare to UserTesting.
Chose UserTesting
They all have different needs but we used the others to try and do what we wanted before we switched to UserTesting. we wanted to utilize as much of our audience as possible before but we noticed that people who had familiarity with our products would breeze through the testing.
Chose UserTesting
I used Lookback at a previous organization. Overall, UT is more usable for participants, and the built-in participant pool is a standout feature.
Chose UserTesting
UserTesting is better than Hotjar interviews; its tools for creating unmoderated tests and analyzing feedback are superior.
Chose UserTesting
UserTesting is easier to use, and the site's design is user-friendly. There are no glitches, and the site works without crashes or slow loading.
Chose UserTesting
This is the only comparable platform I've used.
Chose UserTesting
I prefer Maze as it is much more intuitive.
Chose UserTesting
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 …
Chose UserTesting
As we have a bigger UX team, it helps us make user research a team sport. It helps us scale and speed up learning without creating bottlenecks which might happen if we were to use smaller tools and platforms.
Chose UserTesting
In terms of overall cost and value, UserTesting stacks up well. While the platform's overall usability could be improved, and it lacks certain features that other platforms offer, we could not find a better platform for quick, reliable insights in a recent comparison.
Chose UserTesting
I've used dscout, and although I prefer UserTesting.com, I will say that dscout really excels at the diary study format. It would be great if UserTesting had a tool/tools that facilitated diary studies better.
Features
Usabilla (discontinued)UserTesting
Survey Format & Appearance
Comparison of Survey Format & Appearance features of Product A and Product B
Usabilla (discontinued)
8.0
Ratings
0% above category average
UserTesting
-
Ratings
Survey templates10.00 Ratings00 Ratings
Themes6.00 Ratings00 Ratings
Custom logo/branding7.90 Ratings00 Ratings
Survey Content
Comparison of Survey Content features of Product A and Product B
Usabilla (discontinued)
8.6
Ratings
1% above category average
UserTesting
-
Ratings
Changes to live survey7.90 Ratings00 Ratings
Question design help10.00 Ratings00 Ratings
Multiple question types7.90 Ratings00 Ratings
Survey Logic
Comparison of Survey Logic features of Product A and Product B
Usabilla (discontinued)
6.9
Ratings
19% below category average
UserTesting
-
Ratings
Survey logic flexibility6.90 Ratings00 Ratings
Survey Reporting & Analytics
Comparison of Survey Reporting & Analytics features of Product A and Product B
Usabilla (discontinued)
5.8
Ratings
33% below category average
UserTesting
-
Ratings
Response tracking7.00 Ratings00 Ratings
Data export5.50 Ratings00 Ratings
Standard reports5.50 Ratings00 Ratings
Custom reports5.50 Ratings00 Ratings
Analytics5.50 Ratings00 Ratings
Survey Administration & Security
Comparison of Survey Administration & Security features of Product A and Product B
Usabilla (discontinued)
7.4
Ratings
15% below category average
UserTesting
-
Ratings
Access controls7.40 Ratings00 Ratings
Compliance7.40 Ratings00 Ratings
Survey Distribution
Comparison of Survey Distribution features of Product A and Product B
Usabilla (discontinued)
8.4
Ratings
4% above category average
UserTesting
-
Ratings
Vendor-offered crowdsourcing10.00 Ratings00 Ratings
Respondent restrictions6.90 Ratings00 Ratings
Best Alternatives
Usabilla (discontinued)UserTesting
Small Businesses
Square 9 Softworks
Square 9 Softworks
Score 9.3 out of 10
Smartlook
Smartlook
Score 8.8 out of 10
Medium-sized Companies
Qualaroo
Qualaroo
Score 7.0 out of 10
Optimal
Optimal
Score 9.0 out of 10
Enterprises
Verint Voice of the Customer
Verint Voice of the Customer
Score 9.2 out of 10
Optimal
Optimal
Score 9.0 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
Usabilla (discontinued)UserTesting
Likelihood to Recommend
2.1
(0 ratings)
8.4
(0 ratings)
Likelihood to Renew
-
(0 ratings)
8.1
(0 ratings)
Usability
2.1
(0 ratings)
8.6
(0 ratings)
Availability
-
(0 ratings)
9.1
(0 ratings)
Performance
-
(0 ratings)
9.1
(0 ratings)
Support Rating
1.9
(0 ratings)
8.1
(0 ratings)
Implementation Rating
-
(0 ratings)
4.6
(0 ratings)
Configurability
-
(0 ratings)
7.3
(0 ratings)
Product Scalability
-
(0 ratings)
7.3
(0 ratings)
Vendor post-sale
-
(0 ratings)
9.1
(0 ratings)
Vendor pre-sale
-
(0 ratings)
9.1
(0 ratings)
User Testimonials
Usabilla (discontinued)UserTesting
Likelihood to Recommend
If we could select 0/10 we would... We would not recommend anyone using this product as it excludes a very important user group, disabled users. If you use this product you will be failing ADA and WCAG 2.1 (EU Directive for public sector websites and mobile apps). In my opinion, you will be vulnerable to lawsuits.
Read full review
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.
Read full review
Pros
  • Reporting - well designed, clear to all users regardless of level of knowledge.
  • Two options for feedback - passive and active (pop-ups).
  • Clean UI & easy to use platform.
Read full review
  • Product Manager who follows up on your UserTesting usage and gives advice/support when you need it.
  • UserTesting University is a great platform to learn how to use UT and general information about research.
  • UserTesting can find participants quickly, so you won't need to wait long before you can start the analysis.
Read full review
Cons
  • It doesn't gather users from all user groups, it's exclusive to non-disabled users - users with disabilities using assistive technology are not able to access or use the platform
  • There are extensive colour contrast issues with the platform, making it difficult to use by users with low vision
  • Usabilla is not accessible to keyboard users (as well as users on other assistive technology) - when the modal is expanded, the background is still focusable
  • The touch target sizes of the links and buttons are not accessible - it's very difficult to close out of the modal when on mobile, or if a user had a mobility disability and was using a mouse
Read full review
  • Quality of participant pool - many are career testers, and many are untruthful. Since sessions are auto-scheduled if the screener is past, you often don't know until they've completed the test. Allow double screening or be more stringent in removing users from the platform.
  • Unfinished products - focus on making one product the best it can be before moving on to a new one. Unmoderated testing is still missing features (randomization of 3 or more prototypes, etc.)
Read full review
Likelihood to Renew
No answers on this topic
I'm actually trying to get a license for my current job at my current company (recently moved to a new company). I gave it this rating because I am about to go to our executive to ask that we purchase it! I know that there will be value because we are forecasting a high volume of research next year
Read full review
Usability
The interface to configure the questionary is quite easy to use. It helps to give autonomy to marketing teams. Once the initial setup is made (integrating a basic javascript code on your website), you can easily deploy any questionary on any page of your website. Usabilla is a very flexible tool overall.
Read full review
It can be difficult to organize our tests and go back and find information. I think the AI tools are helping and will help with this, but for now it is time consuming to sort through all of the tests and information and then synthesize it and share it with others. It just takes a lot of time.
Read full review
Reliability and Availability
No answers on this topic
Never encountered any problems
Read full review
Performance
No answers on this topic
Perfectly fine. Never had any problems.
Read full review
Support Rating
I haven't contacted support yet to solve a particular issue. I do have an account manager at Usabilla that I talk to in order to introduce the software to my team but this is just to run over the basic functionality in a live demo setting. The ability to talk to a real person over video call is a benefit though.
Read full review
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.
Read full review
Implementation Rating
No answers on this topic
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.
Read full review
Alternatives Considered
I have Hotjar, Sprig, and Usabilla in my workplace. Usabilla unfortunately has the most limited feature set of the 3 options. The difficulty of administering a Usabilla survey on mobile is a big blocker for my projects. Sprig and Hotjar both allow mobile and allow video recordings (either of a user's screen or a user's webcam for impromptu interviews).
Read full review
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 to be prohibitively expensive at first glance. In the end, however, the deal struck to get UserTesting for the UX team proved to be sufficiently competitive for us to proceed.
Read full review
Scalability
No answers on this topic
The package we have limits the number of people who can set up tests. This prevents us from scaling the use of the platform.
Read full review
Return on Investment
  • The positive impact of Usabilla has been being able to measure and respond quickly to our customers' feedback so that we can resolve issues quicker or make enhancements faster.
  • We have also been able to manage and track our NPS scores and correlate these scores to our overall business performance to make sure that our customers' views of our products and processes and in line with our internal understanding and success of the business.
  • Additionally, the Usabilla team has been willing to provide us with training and ideas on how to use the tool better which has helped our team think more strategically and be more connected to the experiences our customers are having on our web properties.
Read full review
  • It provides critical insights that increase our subscriptions, time spent and in a commerce frame, conversion
  • It helps frame the need to pivot on products yet to launch to ensure the meet user expectations so reduces risk.
  • It is integral to highlights areas of opportunity we can captialise on
Read full review
ScreenShots

UserTesting Screenshots

Screenshot of UserTesting's several solutions for gathering rich customer experience narratives.Screenshot of Interactive Path Flows
Built on recent research in data mining, the Interactive Path Flow aggregates interaction data across multiple participant sessions to visualize the customer journey, surface unexpected behaviors, and locate key moments in the customer journey.Screenshot of Keyword Mapping
Similar keywords are automatically grouped based on overall sentiment (positive, negative, or neutral) to identify themes. Highlight reels associated with each keyword are grouped together, to discover the why behind each sentiment.Screenshot of Video capture and live streaming
Digital and real-world customer experiences are recorded on desktop and mobile devices or live streamed for in-platform viewing.Screenshot of Audience targeting
Audiences are specified by screening contributors from UserTesting’s global network of contributors or connecting to any preferred network.