UserTesting vs. UserZoom

Testing Figma prototypes, websites, mobile apps works well. Testing remotely or in person works well. If the product is not completely prototyped or give extensive instruction, then the user can get stuck and abandon the test. When in person, it is easy to fix the problem, however if a test is remotely conducted, then when something goes wrong it might crash the entire test and a new test is then needed.

Incentivized

UserZoom is well suited for usability testing, I found specifically around test websites and marketing materials. I was able to invite others to participate and watch as well as screen share so that it was an interactive session. Other tools I have used have been a little better with the video output and transcripts of each session so that we could capture notes quickly, but overall it was a good tool to use to test.

Incentivized

• 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.

Incentivized

• Quantitative testing can be done on the cheap compared to other quant tools or vendors... once you buy the license, you only pay for additional recruiting and you are managing the project, so there isn't the high cost of having other vendors doing the project management or running a survey etc.
• Farily robust means of tracking and recording data. I also relied heavily on the excel spreadsheet of all the raw data, which you can have UZ customize for you to get what you need.
• Great support system from the UserZoom team - they have researchers who can help with coding and also provide research support for a very good price.
• Also they have tree testing, card sorting, survey capabilities (in addition to usability testing)... and mobile testing. and they seem to be continously be developing the tool to support additional methods.

Incentivized

• A centralized platform to recommend products and use cases would be handy so that users can suggest what they could use more of.
• Integration with newer payment methods and gift card services could expand the user base.
• Some products are business-critical and thus require sophisticated testing. This service could be added.

Incentivized

• Compared with some other tools, because their video conferencing platform is web-based (vs. using Zoom, which has a desktop app), I find the connection buffers a lot and it's kind of annoying
• Their screening tool on the UserZoom side (not Go) is clunky. Just let me select May, Must, or Should not for criteria rather than the weird interface design they have now.
• Logic panel is a little confusing, sometimes I do a double-take, sometimes it's wonky and resets itself. It's just not as easy to use as it could be.
• They haven't integrated UserZoom and UserZoom Go (formerly Validately)
• It's expensive!
• We signed up for a high sample size license with unlimited tests, but we're finding their panel doesn't fill as fast as their biggest competitor, UserTesting. We've struggled to fill n=100 sample tests with fairly general criteria.
• A lot of their licenses only allow limited concurrent studies, whereas UserTesting had unlimited tests that you could launch at a time. It's slowed us down.

Incentivized

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.

Incentivized

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

Incentivized

Initially, I found the platform daunting, having never used a comparable site. However, I attended a series of workshops hosted by the UserTesting team, and thanks to their expert approach, I picked it up very quickly—so much so that I can now confidently teach my colleagues how to use the platform effectively.

Incentivized

Overall, it was fairly easy to use. Especially if you are familiar with this type of product. We were able to use it for testing pretty much right after we got it (same day) and didn't have many issues figuring out how to invite, test, and share which was great.

Incentivized

Never encountered any problems

Incentivized

Perfectly fine. Never had any problems.

Incentivized

The regular CSR check ins are appreciated. They want to help facilitate us using the product to its fullest capacity. We've had regular trainings and office hours that help our team use the product better. Power sessions are also always appreciated, even just to pulse check a test plan or a panel criteria. They're always available and very helpful.

Incentivized

From my experience, the UserZoom team has really done a great job answering the limited questions we have given them thus far. I think the platform is popular enough that many of my questions have been answered by their help pages - or other online content with helpful tips and tricks. I think the community has done a nice job of providing end-user tutorials for those who are new to the platform.

Incentivized

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.

Incentivized

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

Incentivized

Client selected it due to how they used it, pricing, and what it could do for them. It's about the same as these other tools but UsabilityHub let's you run multiple types of task in one test, and UserTesting still has a bigger panel I think

Incentivized

The package we have limits the number of people who can set up tests. This prevents us from scaling the use of the platform.

Incentivized

• Increase in conversion rate of checkout completion following a redesign influenced by UserTesting through design iterations
• Decrease in customer complaints regarding the checkout (-83%) following its redesign
• Faster time to completion for AB Testing programme, and higher ROI as a result as tests had a higher chance of winning

Incentivized

• Time-efficient: quick to gather insights
• Making informed decisions: repeat testing before launching the app/website to reduce errors in the future
• Guarantee customers' satisfaction: ensure the errors are reduced to the minimum so that the purchase process is smooth and there will be no need to reach out to our customer support team

Incentivized