Best 12 UserTesting alternatives

Are there alternatives to UserTesting that won't break the bank? And is there a platform besides UserTesting that offers the flexibility your team needs?

These are just some of the questions we'll explore in this in-depth guide to UserTesting alternatives.

Whether you've been using UserTesting for a while and are looking to switch to other options or you’re just starting out with user research tools, this in-depth guide is for you.

We start by looking at UserTesting's limitations and why you might want to consider using other alternatives to uncover user insights. Then, we'll examine each UserTesting alternative, including its key features, pros and cons, pricing, and user reviews (both the good and the bad!).

After reading this guide, you'll feel more confident exploring UserTesting alternatives to unlock powerful user research insights and create user experiences that truly resonate. 

Note: All prices displayed in this article are in USD.

UserTesting's limitations: Why make the switch and look for alternatives?

UserTesting is a popular UX research platform that facilitates real-world testing and feedback collection. Businesses and teams use it to gain valuable information about their customers' experiences.

However, it's not the best fit for everyone and has limitations that you should be aware of.

Lack of transparent pricing

One of UserTesting's downsides is that users have expressed frustration with its unclear pricing structure. The move to hidden pricing makes it harder for customers to compare prices and adds uncertainty to the buying experience.

This lack of transparency is a significant limitation for several reasons:

• Hidden costs: Users report encountering unexpected charges, making it difficult to budget for their research needs. As one Redditor noted, "Their pricing model is # of seats + credits for using their platform/panel." With additional fees for features like moderated tests and BYO (Bring Your Own) participants, this complex pricing system can lead to unexpected costs.

• Sales pressure: Contacting sales for pricing information can be a time-consuming and unpleasant experience. One Redditor expressed a reluctance to "go through the sales thing with them," highlighting many customers' aversion to this process.

• High costs and limited flexibility: Even with estimates, the cost of UserTesting can be high, especially for smaller teams or individual researchers. The credit system can also feel restrictive, with varying costs per credit depending on the type of test and the need to purchase credits even when using your own panel.

Panelist quality and representativeness

Another limitation of UserTesting that’s often discussed is the quality and representativeness of its panel.

Redditors observed that the platform attracts a group of seasoned testers who are interested in providing design critiques and feedback rather than representing users who reflect real-world user behavior. These results can skew feedback, and generalizing the results to the broader user population can be challenging.

Lucas L., a UserTesting Enterprise user, has the same sentiment: "One downside is the quality of participants at times. There are professional test takers and bots trying to simply make money."

Other limitations

G2 reviews also highlight the following UserTesting limitations:

• Difficulties managing and communicating with participants during testing.

• Challenges in setting up and running tests smoothly, including technical glitches and navigation issues.

• Dissatisfaction with the quality and depth of testing options.

• Users report the lack of certain desired features and functionalities.

• Some reviewers find the provided data and insights lacking in detail or clarity. 

With these limitations in mind, it's high time to consider other UserTesting alternatives. The following user research platforms are excellent places to start.

1. Lyssna

2. Maze

3. Userlytics

4. Optimal Workshop

5. dscout

6. Hotjar

7. Useberry

8. Lookback

9. UserZoom

10. Sprig

11. Helio

12. Mouseflow

For more in-depth competitor reviews of UserTesting, read the following guides:

1. UserZoom Vs UserTesting

2. Userlytics Vs UserTesting

Best 12 UserTesting alternatives at a glance

Here’s a quick rundown of the top eight alternatives to UserTesting.

1. Lyssna

Best for: Teams looking for an all-in-one user research platform and value for money.

Lyssna is a strong competitor to UserTesting, especially for those on a budget. Its extensive participant pool and diverse testing options, combined with its competitive pricing, make it an attractive alternative for conducting usability testing and research at any stage of the design process.

If you prioritize ease of use, a wide range of user testing capabilities, and cost-effectiveness, pick Lyssna for your user research needs.

G2 user rating: 4.5/5

Overview of key features

A high-quality, diverse participant panel

Lyssna gives you access to a research panel of 690,000+ participants, filterable by demographics, job roles, and behaviors. You can also recruit your own participants at no extra cost, ensuring high-quality feedback from the right users.

Versatile usability testing methods

With Lyssna, you can conduct first click tests, five second tests, preference tests, and prototype tests to evaluate designs at any stage. Whether you need quick validation or in-depth feedback, these methods provide actionable insights without the complex setup.

Seamless Figma integration

Testing your designs is easier than ever with Lyssna’s direct Figma integration. You can import prototypes, set up usability tests, and gather user feedback – without leaving your design workflow. This makes it ideal for teams who need fast iteration and real-time feedback.

Other key features

• Interviews: Plan, recruit, and manage remote interviews in multiple languages, including setting up screener questions and tracking sessions.

• Live website testing: Evaluate any live website by recording users’ screen, camera, and audio – without any downloads or code implementation required.

• Recordings: Capture users’ thoughts with audio, screen, and video recordings on unmoderated tests.

• Template library: Product-focused usability testing templates you can use and adapt. 

• Card sorting and tree testing: Understand how users organize information to improve your information architecture.

• Text and design surveys: Collect in-depth qualitative data through design and text-based surveys.

• Screeners: Include qualifying questions in surveys, usability tests, and interviews to recruit participants that meet specific criteria.

• Integrations: Integrate with Zoom, Microsoft Outlook and Teams, and Google Calendar for user interviews.

Where Lyssna shines 

• Panelists from 124 countries, with over 450 demographics or attributes to target.

• Multilingual support. For example, tests, surveys, and interviews are available in 55 languages.

• User-friendly interface. Lyssna is often praised for its intuitive and easy-to-use interface.

• Wide variety of testing options to gather both qualitative and quantitative data, catering to diverse research needs.  

• Offers a free plan and affordable paid plans.

• Excellent customer support who are responsive and helpful.

• Lyssna is GDPR compliant, ensuring data privacy for all users.

• Short learning curve, as reported by users.

Where Lyssna falls short

• Lyssna doesn't yet have native interview conferencing features (but you can integrate with Zoom and Microsoft Teams).

• While you can have unlimited tests on the free plan, each test has a two-minute limit. For tests longer than this, you'll need to upgrade to a paid plan.

Pricing

What users are saying about Lyssna

“Lyssna (formerly UsabilityHub) is the BEST place for quick, reliable user tests! Rather than spending a fortune in time and money to conduct user research (that we'd never get the boss to agree to), we can run fast user tests and get damn-near instant results to help with our important design decisions. It's truly revolutionary, and has already won over even the most skeptical designers! We use it all the time.” - Jack D. (via G2)

“What we need is something that allows us to get up and running very fast, have direct conversations over a trusted tool; a trusted interface that allows us to gain insights and take actions in the same week. Neither competitive product allowed us to do that as swiftly as Lyssna.” - Justin Nowlen, Senior Director of Product Design at TrueCar

Learn more: How TrueCar improve the car-buying journey using Interviews from Lyssna

Lyssna vs UserTesting

Find your perfect UserTesting alternative

Ready to explore better options? Start collecting generating valuable user insights today with Lyssna's free plan – no credit card required.

Sign up for free

Sign up for free

Sign up for free

2. Maze

Best for: Running unmoderated usability tests on autopilot.

Maze is another UserTesting alternative if you're looking for a platform that combines qualitative and quantitative research methods. This user research tool is suitable for streamlining unmoderated usability testing at scale.

G2 user rating: 4.5/5

Overview of key features

• Unmoderated usability testing: Test prototypes and live websites, integrating with popular prototyping tools.

• Interactive prototyping: Create realistic and immersive user testing experiences.

• Design integrations: Import designs from Figma, Sketch, InVision, and Adobe XD for collaborative testing.

• Automated reporting: Generate reports with heatmaps, design metrics, and path analysis.

• Video recording: Capture user behavior and interactions during remote tests.

• Diverse testing methods: Conduct a wide range of tests, including live website testing, prototype tests, concept validation, and A/B testing.

Where Maze shines

• Drag-and-drop functionality makes it easy for anyone to collect user feedback.

• Streamlined testing process and automated reporting enable quick design iterations.

• Video recordings and detailed reports offer in-depth understanding of user behavior.

• Conduct various types of tests to gather comprehensive user insights.

Where Maze falls short

• Higher cost: compared to Lyssna and Maze, Maze has a higher cost, making Lyssna a more budget-friendly alternative for some users.

• Restricted features and responses in the free mid-range paid plans.

• Offers limited depth in analytics compared to some competitors.

• Surveying capabilities may not be as robust as dedicated survey tools.

• Some G2 reviewers have commented on uploading issues. 

Pricing

What users are saying about Maze 

“Maze helps me put my user research on autopilot. As a Product Manager at an early-stage startup, I don't have the time to talk to as many users as I would like, so a tool like Maze allows me to get data from my users as if I were observing them in person. The seamless integration with prototyping tools like Figma and Adobe XD makes the process of creating usability tests so easy and straightforward.” - Federico C. (via G2)

“I don't appreciate how prototypes frequently crash for users, especially mobile users. Sometimes a user will go through the test more than once, causing our final number of participants to be inaccurate. I wish Maze allowed for blocks of questions where conditions could take users to a new block. That would allow us to build out better, more detailed tests without overwhelming users. I also wish the reports were easier to edit (change content, order of slides) or if they even gave the option to combine multiple test reports! I tend to go into Adobe Acrobat and do it myself if I need to combine reports, which adds time.” -  Sophia S. (via G2)

Maze vs UserTesting

3. Userlytics

Best for: Teams seeking extensive customization options for user research.

Userlytics is another UserTesting alternative worth looking into because it provides a cost-effective approach to user research. It distinguishes itself through its unlimited team collaboration and diverse global panel. Its scalable pricing also makes it a flexible solution for organizations of all sizes seeking a comprehensive and budget-friendly user testing platform. However, its user interface isn’t as modern or intuitive as some other UserTesting alternatives.

G2 user rating: 4.4/5

Overview of key features

• Wide-ranging panel: Access a global panel of nearly 2 million testers across 150 countries, enabling you to map personas and target specific demographics for your research.

• Global appeal: Conduct studies in 79 countries with multilingual support for studies, transcriptions, and reports.

• VR testing: Test VR prototypes on Oculus to assess usability and purchase intent.

• Integrations: Connect with popular design tools like Adobe XD, Figma, InVision, and Sketch for prototype testing.

Where Userlytics shines

• Access a vast and diverse panel of testers worldwide.

• Conduct studies and generate reports in multiple languages.

• Advanced reporting capabilities and the ability to record users’ audio and video.

• Tailor tasks, questions, and user ratings to your exact specifications using a variety of pre-built templates.

Where Userlytics falls short

• Outdated interface.

• Limited multilingual transcriptions.

• Advanced features are only available on higher-priced plans.

• Some users have reported audio quality problems during testing.

• Limited demographic information. Targeting options may be limited due to less detailed participant demographics.

Pricing

What users are saying about Userlytics

“The platform keeps all tests very organized, which is great for a team or a company using the product at an enterprise level. My team runs a lot of repeat tests throughout the year (ex: website homepage every quarter), which is easy to duplicate within the platform and run against various audiences.” - Catherine Stockdale G. (via G2)

“The transcription has a lot of problems when the person has an accent, and since it's used in the IA analysis we can't trust the analysis and we can't use it. The videos given are very small when the test is on mobile in landscape mode, it's very hard to analyse. Also there are missing features compared to the conccurents (playtestcloud). I'm frustrated to not be able to do multi-session tests, which means tests with the same person multiple times, or longitudinal study, a test that lasts multiple days with the same person.” - Laila B. (via G2)

Userlytics vs UserTesting

4. Optimal Workshop

Best for: Teams looking for a beginners tool for UX research.

Optimal Workshop is a user research platform designed to provide a suite of usability tools to improve website navigation, information architecture, and overall user experience.

If you're looking for a comprehensive user research platform that focuses on information architecture and diverse testing options, Optimal Workshop is a good choice. It's also generally considered a good beginner's tool for user research.

G2 user rating: 4.5/5

Overview of key features

• Card sorting: Understand how users categorize and organize information to improve your site's structure.

• Tree testing: Test the findability and organization of content within your website's information architecture.

• First-click testing: Assess the effectiveness of design elements by collecting click-based heatmaps.

• Qualitative research: Gather, organize, and analyze notes, observations, and interviews to gather feedback.

• Online surveys: Create and distribute surveys to collect user feedback and data.

Where Optimal Workshop shines

• Offers a variety of research methods.

• You can collect both qualitative and quantitative data for a comprehensive understanding of user behavior and preferences.

• Access a pool of prescreened participants or recruit your own.

Where Optimal Workshop falls short

• Lacks integration with design tools, limiting prototype testing capabilities.

• Some users report inconsistencies in participant quality and screening.

• Occasional difficulties with the UI for study participants.

Pricing

What users are saying about Optimal Workshop

“Optimal Workshop is a fantastic tool for organizing the information structure of your interface. It is extremely useful for the UX/UI pre-design research process.” - Validated user (via G2 reviews)

“Not all participants who take part in the survey take the survey seriously. A lot of time goes to waste on filtering this out” - Anand B. (via G2)

Optimal Workshop vs UserTesting

5. dscout 

Best for: User research focused on mobile experiences.

dscout is an ideal UserTesting alternative if you need a mobile-first qualitative research platform to gather rich, contextualized feedback about user behavior. Its unique features, like mobile ethnography and diary studies, enable you to understand how users interact with your products and services while on the go.  

G2 user rating: 4.5/5

Overview of key features

• Mobile ethnography: Assign missions or tasks to participants to complete using their smartphones, capturing photos, videos, and written responses.

• Diary studies: Track participants' experiences, behaviors, and thoughts through mobile journaling.

• Live video interviews: Conduct remote video interviews to observe facial expressions and gather in-depth qualitative data.

• Express missions: Get quick feedback within 24–48 hours through streamlined research projects.

• Integrations: Connect with tools like Slack and Miro for seamless collaboration and data sharing.

Where dscout shines

• The mobile-centric approach lets you capture real-time insights from participants in their natural settings.

• Get diverse research findings with mobile ethnography, diary studies, and live interviews.

• Streamline analysis with automated transcriptions and video editing tools.

• With Express missions, you get rapid feedback for quick decision-making.

Where dscout falls short

• Higher cost compared to some alternatives, with limited public pricing information.

• Challenging to recruit participants outside the US and Canada, which may limit your research participants.

• Extensive features may take time for new users to master.

• Managing participant incentives may incur extra costs.

• Some users report issues with the video clipping tool and interface navigation.

Pricing

dscout’s pricing isn't publicly available.

What users say about dscout

“Dscout has created an ecosystem of tools - moderated and unmoderated - around its high-quality participant panel. While I still like its diary study tool most, I've had positive experiences with live sessions and its nascent unmoderated usability "express missions". I love the ability to screen with video responses, and hand-select respondents for studies.”- Brett L. (via G2)

What puzzles me sometimes is the video quality dropping as we pass the 30min mark. It appears quite blurry. And in rare cases, the generation of video clips either takes too long or simply fails. I like when dScout chat support was quick and done by a real person, a feature that is no longer available.” - Bo W. (via G2)

You can also read our in-depth guide on dscout alternatives.

dscout vs UserTesting

6. Hotjar

Best for: Teams who want to delve into user behavior analytics.

Hotjar is worth investigating if your primary goal is to boost conversion rates for your digital product. Its user behavior analytics, particularly heatmaps and session recordings, provide valuable insights into how users interact with your product. These features let you and your team identify areas for improvement and optimize the user experience. 

G2 user rating: 4.3/5

Overview of key features

• Heatmaps: Visualize user interactions through click, move, and scroll heatmaps.

• Recordings: Watch session recordings to see how users navigate your product.

• Surveys and feedback polls: Collect targeted feedback from website visitors.

• AI surveys: Generate surveys quickly with AI assistance.

Where Hotjar shines

• Easy to install and start collecting data.

• In-depth data visualization helps you understand user behavior through visual representations and reports.

• Session recordings give you direct access to user interactions so you can identify pain points.

Where Hotjar falls short

• Data reports lack segmentation by trends or period.

• Hotjar doesn't offer traditional user research methods like prototype testing or card sorting.

• Restricted features and data collection on the free plan.

• Some users report difficulties organizing and analyzing research data.

Pricing

What users say about Hotjar

“The heatmaps are just fantastic! Imagine having the ability to see your website through your users' eyes, understanding their clicks, scrolls, and movements. This is what Hotjar's heatmaps offer. It's almost like being able to read minds.” - Nicole D. (via G2)“

The customer support is not that helpful, have contacted them several times for the same issue. Apart from that, the overall app is really good.” - Gunjan B (via G2)

Hotjar vs UserTesting

7. Useberry

Best for: Teams looking for a user research tool with a focus on prototype testing.

Useberry simplifies the prototype testing process by providing a user-friendly platform and a vast participant pool. Create tests, share them with your target audience, and analyze the results through intuitive reports, including heatmaps, session recordings, and user flows.

G2 user rating: 4.4/5

Overview of key features

• Comprehensive testing methods: Conduct screen activity tracking, heatmaps, user journey mapping, unmoderated testing, and prototype testing to gain an understanding of user behavior.

• Information architecture tools: Organize and structure your website or app through card sorting and tree testing.

• Streamlined user panel: Access a large pool of test participants easily filterable by various attributes for efficient recruitment.

• Easy collaboration: Share test URLs effortlessly and collaborate with your team for seamless project management.

Where Useberry shines

• Ease of use due to its user-friendly interface, which simplifies test creation and analysis.

• Seamless integrations. Useberry integrates with industry-leading prototyping tools like Figma, Adobe XD, ProtoPie, InVision, Marvel, and Sketch. 

• Allows for rapid prototype testing and analysis.

Where Useberry falls short

• Some users find the pricing to be on the higher side, especially for additional features and participants.

• Reported problems with integrations can be frustrating for users reliant on Figma.

• Response times for customer support can be slow, delaying issue resolution.

Pricing

Useberry offers several pricing plans based on response volume and team size:

What users say about Useberry

“I just love how accessible and easy use testing has become with Useberry. It's a very enlightening experience to watch how real users test our prototypes on their video recording. This has given us insights that we would not have otherwise had.” - Ashutosh J. (via G2 reviews)

“For smaller teams or individual designers, the cost of Useberry can be relatively high compared to other UX testing tools, especially if advanced features are needed.” - Leny N. (via G2 reviews)

Useberry vs UserTesting

8. Lookback

Best for: Collaborative user interviews.

Lookback is a good UserTesting alternative for facilitating collaborative, qualitative user interviews. Its live features, searchable recordings, and mixed testing functionalities make it a valuable tool for teams seeking a deep understanding of user experiences. 

G2 user rating: 4.3/5

Overview of key features

• Live collaboration: Invite team members to observe interviews in real-time, fostering communication through chat and timestamped note-taking.

• Enhanced organization: Organize data efficiently by recording all sessions in a player with searchable timestamps and comments.

• Mixed testing methods: Conduct interviews and usability tests within the same project for a holistic user understanding.

Where Lookback shines

• Lookback's pricing structure offers affordable options for smaller businesses compared to competitors.

• Supports both moderated and unmoderated testing within a single project.

• Provides various pricing plans to accommodate different team sizes and project needs.

Where Lookback falls short

• Limited feature set. Lookback lacks features like surveys, card sorting, and tree testing.

• No participant panel, but Lookback integrates with User Interviews for participant recruitment.

• Session-based pricing. It can be expensive for frequent or large-scale testing.

• Participants may face difficulties with the app or connectivity.

• Outdated reviews. You'll find limited recent user feedback available.

Pricing

What user say about Lookback

“My favorite feature was that a participant during a user interview has no idea how many other observers are there. It's so valuable for team members (designers, engineers, product, etc.) to hear things directly from users during a testing session; however, in some tools, they can see every person on the call. When they see all of those names, they sometimes clam up and aren't as open with their feedback during a research session. I also loved the ability to communicate directly with observers in the tool.” - Taylor J. (via G2)

Lookback vs UserTesting

9. UserZoom

Best for: Organizations that prioritize security compliance (SOC2 Type 2) and require global participant sourcing at scale.

Part of UserTesting, UserZoom combines moderated and unmoderated testing, diary studies, and advanced analytics, making it a flexible solution for teams looking to gather both qualitative and quantitative feedback. It also offers ML-powered participant recruitment, helping you connect with relevant users from a global network.

G2 user rating: UserZoom has no ratings on G2 but has 4.4/5 on GetApp.

Key features

• Flexible usability testing: Conduct both moderated and unmoderated tests remotely, allowing for a mix of real-time and scalable research.

• Diary studies: Capture long-term user experiences and behaviors with ongoing participant journaling, offering deeper qualitative insights.

• ML-powered recruitment: Access a global network of research panels to find participants that match specific demographics and behaviors.

• In-house UX consultancy: Access expert UX consultants for additional support in research design, analysis, and execution.

Where UserZoom shines

• Robust research toolkit: Supports a variety of UX research methods, including click tests, tree tests, card sorting, and video-based usability studies for both qualitative and quantitative analysis.

• Enterprise-level security: Meets SOC2 Type 2 compliance standards, ensuring secure handling of research data for enterprise teams.

• Efficient global recruitment: Offers AI-driven participant sourcing from 40+ research panels, helping teams quickly find high-quality users. ​

Where UserZoom falls short

• Clunky user interface: Users report that the platform feels outdated and unintuitive, making navigation and study setup less efficient.

• Limited flexibility in study design: Running tests across different devices requires separate studies, and modifications often require customer support assistance, adding friction to the process.

Pricing

UserZoom doesn’t provide pricing. 

What users say about UserZoom

“Really good for usertesting, recruiting participants and exporting the data into an easy to analyse format.” - Alex J., GetApp reviewer

“It can be trickier with international research, mostly when the participant's language is not English.” Beatriz R. - GetApp reviewer

UserZoom vs UserTesting

10. Sprig

Best for: Growing teams needing scalability.

Sprig enables unmoderated usability testing directly from a participant’s browser, making it easy to gather real-time insights. Its in-product survey feature allows teams to collect contextual feedback at key moments, helping them understand user behavior and decision-making as it happens.

G2 user rating: 4.5/5 

Key features

• In-product surveys: Capture feedback in real time by launching surveys at specific moments in the user journey, helping identify drop-off points and decision-making patterns.

• Concept and usability testing: Test multiple design variations within a single study to gauge user preferences and interaction trends.

• Design tool integrations: Easily connect Sprig with Figma, Webflow, and Adobe XD by pasting a prototype URL, simplifying the setup process.

Where Sprig shines

• Fast, frictionless setup: Sprig’s intuitive interface makes it easy to launch surveys and usability tests without a steep learning curve.

• Comprehensive research tools: Offers heatmaps, surveys, and user session replays, providing detailed behavioral insights.

• Scales with team needs: Designed to adapt to both small teams and large enterprises, making it a flexible choice for growing organizations.

Where Sprig falls short

• Limited time zone-based support: Users outside of North America, particularly in EMEA, report delays in customer support response times.

• Fewer third-party integrations: While it connects with major design tools, data export and third-party app integrations are more limited than some competitors.

Pricing

Sprig’s free plan allows for 25 surveys/ month, but its Starter and Enterprise plans are custom priced. 

What users say about Sprig

“Sprig makes it very easy to get in-app surveys set-up and deployed in super fast time. Im impressed with the bespoke dashboards that can be set up to view data and the look and feel of the UI is great - not to clunky and very smooth.” - Melanie D., via G2

“It's incredibly easy to forget that you have an event triggering once it's live. You have to not just end the study or survey but archive the event too. We've found ourselves in more than one instance where the event continues to trigger, despite not being tied to a live study and eating up all of our MTUs or incurring overages.” - verified G2 user.

Sprig vs UserTesting

11. Helio

Best for: Product designers who need quick, real-time feedback.

Helio provides a quick and cost-effective way to gather usability insights, making it ideal for teams looking to test concepts, conversions, and surveys without a lengthy setup. With targeted user testing, flexible survey panels, and real-time reporting, Helio supports continuous discovery and rapid iteration.

G2 rating: 4.1/5

Key features

• Versatile survey testing: Run preference tests, free-response surveys, card sorts, click tests, and more to capture targeted user insights.

• Custom audience selection: Source participants based on profession, industry, or other relevant attributes for more tailored feedback.

• Real-time reporting and filtering: Analyze results instantly with advanced filtering options, helping you categorize and interpret data efficiently.

Where Helio shines

• Fast and easy usability testing: Helio allows teams to send unlimited open-link tests, making it simple to gather quick feedback.

• Flexible survey panel options: Access pre-built survey panels with pay-per-use options to quickly reach targeted participants.

• Supports ongoing research: With unlimited test sends and user accounts, Helio is built for teams running continuous discovery and iterative testing. 

Where Helio falls short

• Limited advanced survey customization: While it supports various question types, survey logic and customization options are more limited than some dedicated survey tools.

• Higher-tier pricing: Plans like Scale and Enterprise can be expensive, making them less accessible for smaller teams or startups.

• Learning curve for advanced features: While basic tests are easy to set up, custom audience targeting and researcher-led tests may require additional time or support to master.

Pricing

What users say about Helio

“It is a great tool that is really missing some item types. Specifically rank order is missing. The other piece is that it is hard to customize to your own brand.” - Daniel E., via G2 

Helio vs UserTesting

12. Mouseflow

Best for: Marketers who need to optimize landing pages, funnels, and calls to action to increase conversions.

Mouseflow specializes in behavior analytics, helping teams identify usability bottlenecks, friction points, and drop-off areas. By tracking session replays, heatmaps, and conversion funnels, it provides insights into how users navigate a site and where they experience challenges.

G2 rating: 4.6/5 

Key features

• Session replay: Track user movements, clicks, and scrolling behavior, identifying friction points in real time.

• Conversion funnels: Map out user journeys and analyze where visitors drop off to improve conversion rates.

• Heatmaps: Gain visual insights with six different heatmap types, including click, scroll, and movement tracking.

Where Mouseflow shines

• Pinpointing usability issues: Session replays reveal exactly where users struggle, helping teams eliminate friction and improve UX.

• Optimizing page design: Heatmaps highlight user engagement, showing which elements attract attention and which are ignored.

• Improving user flows: Journey mapping uncovers navigation patterns and drop-off points, allowing for better funnel optimization. 

Where Mouseflow falls short

• Limited session filtering: Some users find it difficult to filter and analyze recordings for specific visitor segments.

Basic form tracking: While Mouseflow tracks form interactions, its functionality is more limited compared to dedicated form analytics tools.

Pricing

Mouseflow offers three plans to accommodate different team sizes and needs:

What users say about Mouseflow

“As a software it has great potential but if you use it you can tell it needs more thime to develop. They are doing great collecting feedback to improve in a market full of competitors.” - verified G2 user

Mouseflow vs UserTesting

Reasons to consider an alternative to UserTesting

UserTesting is a widely used UX research platform, but it isn’t the right fit for every team. Factors like pricing transparency, participant quality, and research flexibility often lead teams to explore alternative solutions. Here are a few key reasons why you might want to consider a UserTesting alternative.

1. Lack of pricing transparency makes budgeting difficult

UserTesting doesn’t publicly disclose its pricing, requiring potential users to contact sales for a custom quote. This lack of transparency can make it challenging for teams – especially smaller ones – to accurately compare costs and allocate research budgets. Additionally, users report unexpected add-on costs, such as extra fees for moderated testing, participant recruitment, or additional team members.

Why Lyssna? Lyssna offers clear, upfront pricing with a generous free plan, so teams can budget with confidence.

2. Panel quality and participant targeting limitations

UserTesting’s built-in panel is extensive, but some users report that it skews toward professional testers who may not represent real-world user behavior. This can impact research validity, especially for niche audiences where authenticity is crucial. Additionally, targeting filters may not be granular enough for some teams.

Why Lyssna? Lyssna’s research panel includes 690,000+ participants across 450+ demographic and psychographic attributes, with detailed screeners to ensure high-quality responses.

3. Limited flexibility in research methods

While UserTesting supports moderated and unmoderated testing, its focus on scripted usability tests means it may not offer as much flexibility for other research types, such as tree testing, card sorting, or preference testing. Additionally, some users find study setup and test iteration slower than they’d like.

Why Lyssna? Lyssna provides a wide range of research methods, including first click tests, five second tests, preference testing, and design surveys, giving teams more ways to collect insights at every stage of the design process.

4. Complexity and learning curve

UserTesting is a powerful platform, but some users find its interface complex and not as intuitive, especially for those new to UX research. Setting up tests, navigating reports, and adjusting research methods on the fly can be time-consuming, adding friction to fast-moving teams.

Why Lyssna? Lyssna’s intuitive interface and streamlined workflow make it easy for teams to launch and analyze tests quickly – without an extensive learning curve.

“Our UX design team has tried out a number of platforms for remote usability testing and after an extensive decision period we settled on Lyssna last year, and have absolutely zero regrets in our decisions. It is has supercharged our UX team. It is easy to use and has a wider set of features than most of the competitors, and makes remote Figma prototype testing SO easy. Lyssna's pool of testers are excellent, speedy, and provide very valuable clear feedback.”. Alice R, verified G2 user.

Lyssna is a standout UserTesting alternative

Lyssna distinguishes itself as a compelling UserTesting alternative with its comprehensive suite of user research tools, intuitive interface, budget-friendly pricing, transparent cost structure, and seamless Figma integration. It's an ideal choice for teams seeking an all-in-one, budget-friendly platform for effective user research.

Take it from Alan Dennis, Product Design Manager at YNAB (You Need a Budget):

"It wasn’t a big sell to move to Lyssna's paid account due to the speed at which you can put together a test, quickly get feedback, and recruit good participants. It just makes monetary sense. It's so cheap and the feedback is valuable.”

Start gathering user feedback now

Join thousands of teams who've switched to Lyssna. Sign up for free and see why it's the most recommended UserTesting alternative.

Sign up for free

Sign up for free

Sign up for free

Kai has been creating content for healthcare, design, and SaaS brands for over a decade. She also manages content (like a digital librarian of sorts). Hiking in nature, lap swimming, books, tea, and cats are some of her favorite things. Check out her digital nook or connect with her on LinkedIn.