Maze alternatives
✓ what pushed you to look decides the shortlist
If you use Maze and are weighing a switch, you are deciding two things: whether you need more studies or more methods than your current plan gives you, and whether you want your participant recruitment, interviews, and analysis to sit in the same tool as your prototype tests. This guide compares eight alternatives on those terms.
How we put this list together. We make Great Question, so it's on this list, and we've tried to be fair about where it isn't the right choice. Every price and plan detail below comes from the vendor's own pricing page as of October 2026. We didn't use review sites or other comparison posts. Where a vendor doesn't publish a price, we say so. We assessed each tool on the methods it supports, how you recruit participants, and what you get before you have to talk to sales.
If you've already narrowed it down to Great Question and Maze, our Great Question vs Maze comparison covers that head to head. This post looks at the wider field.
What Maze does well, and why teams look elsewhere
Maze is a good tool for product designers who want fast, unmoderated prototype tests on Figma files. Setup is quick, results come back as usability metrics, and design teams tend to pick it up without training.
The reasons teams start looking at alternatives usually come down to plan structure. Here is what Maze's pricing page shows as of October 2026:
- Free plan: 1 study per month, 5 seats, essential prototype testing and surveys.
- Starter: $99 per month, still 1 study per month and 5 seats, with the unmoderated research toolkit and recordings added.
- Enterprise: custom pricing. The plan card lists moderated interviews, AI-moderated interviews, and card sorting and tree testing under Enterprise.
- Panel: pay-per-use credits on Free and Starter. Maze doesn't publish the credit price on its pricing page. Its panel page says participants come from its providers Prolific and Respondent.
So a team that runs more than one study a month, or wants moderated interviews alongside prototype tests, is looking at an Enterprise conversation. That's the point where many teams compare options.
At a glance
Prices as of October 2026, read on each vendor's own site.
Tool | Best for | Starting price | Free plan? |
|---|---|---|---|
| Great Question | Best forResearch and ReOps teams that recruit their own customers and run interviews, surveys and tests | Starting price$129 per seat/month (self-serve, up to 5 seats) | Free plan?No (14-day free trial) |
| Lyssna | Best forQuick unmoderated tests and surveys with a built-in panel | Starting price$166/month billed annually (Growth) | Free plan?Yes |
| UXtweak | Best forSmall budgets that want card sorting, tree testing, and prototype tests in one tool | Starting price€92/month per license, billed annually (Business) | Free plan?Yes |
| Useberry | Best forFigma and ProtoPie prototype testing with response-based plans | Starting price€83/month, billed yearly (Growth) | Free plan?Yes |
| Optimal Workshop | Best forInformation architecture research | Starting price$199/month, billed annually (Starter) | Free plan?No free plan listed |
| UserTesting | Best forLarge companies that want a managed panel and video feedback | Starting priceCustom pricing | Free plan?No (one free test offered) |
| Lookback | Best forLive moderated sessions with observers | Starting price$299/year (Freelance) | Free plan?No (free trial) |
| Userlytics | Best forGlobal panel testing paid per session | Starting price$699/month, paid annually (Premium, self-recruitment) | Free plan?No |
The 8 best Maze alternatives
1. Great Question: Best for research teams that recruit their own customers (from $129 per seat/month)
Best for:
- Research and ReOps teams who need one place for participant management, scheduling, studies, and analysis, with governance controls the security team will sign off on.
- Product managers who want to talk to customers without building a recruiting process from scratch.
- Product designers who run prototype tests on Figma files and want the results stored next to interview findings.
Great Question is a UX research platform built around a Research CRM: your own panel of customers and prospects, with segments and automated incentives. From there you run interviews with round-robin scheduling, surveys, and unmoderated prototype tests. You can test Figma prototypes, prototypes built with AI tools such as Claude, and live websites. Sessions flow into an AI repository with highlights, AI tagging, reels, and project synthesis. Observer rooms and unlimited observer seats come on every plan.
The Enterprise plan is where governance sits: permissions that decide which roles can see candidate PII, interview rooms, reels, and highlights; eligibility rules that stop people being over-contacted; data retention policies; audit logs; SSO and SCIM; and external CRM sync with Salesforce and Snowflake. Enterprise also adds card sorting, tree testing, focus groups, Ask AI, cross-project synthesis, and the Great Question MCP. Great Question has completed a SOC 2 Type II exam, and a GDPR DPA is available on all plans. When you need people outside your own list, you can recruit from Respondent's 4.3M+ panel on self-serve, and Enterprise teams can also use User Interviews' 7.5M+ panel.
If you're coming from a testing-first tool, our prototype testing guide walks through how to set up tests that hold up.
Pricing: As of October 2026, self-serve is $129 per seat per month, up to 5 seats, with a 14-day free trial. There is no free plan. Enterprise is custom pricing on annual plans. The Research CRM is an add-on, and AI moderation is an Enterprise add-on.
Not the best fit if: you only need a handful of quick prototype tests a year and no participant management. You'd be paying for a research operations platform you won't use. Teams that need card sorting or tree testing on a small budget will also find those methods sit on Enterprise.
2. Lyssna: Best for quick unmoderated tests with a built-in panel ($166/month)
Best for: designers and marketers who want fast first-click, five-second, preference, and prototype tests with panel access on any plan.
Lyssna covers a wide set of quick methods: prototype testing on Figma, card sorting, tree testing, first-click, five-second and preference tests, surveys, live website testing, and user interviews. Its research panel lists 690,000+ panelists. It's a close match to how many teams use Maze, with a more generous free tier for quick studies.
The gap for research teams is depth on the participant side. Lyssna has screeners and self-recruitment, but it isn't built around a CRM of your own customers with eligibility rules and incentive tracking.
Pricing: As of October 2026, Free is $0 with 3 seats, unlimited quick studies, and 15 self-recruited responses. Growth is $166 per month billed annually ($199 monthly) with 5 seats and 5 in-depth studies per month. Enterprise is custom pricing and adds SSO and a SOC 2 report. Panel responses are priced separately on all plans.
Not the best fit if: you need a managed participant database of your own customers, or moderated research is most of your work.
3. UXtweak: Best for card sorting, tree testing, and prototype tests on a small budget (€92/month per license)
Best for: small teams and solo researchers who want information architecture methods and prototype testing without an enterprise contract.
UXtweak offers card sorting, tree testing, prototype testing, and surveys on every plan, including free, with response limits. Live interviews and highlights, reels and transcripts are paid add-ons on Business. Session recording and SSO sit on the Custom plan.
The trade-off is that the paid plan is priced per license with a monthly response cap, so costs rise as more people on the team run studies.
Pricing: As of October 2026, Free is €0 with 1 license, 15 responses per month, and 14 days of access to results. Business is €92 per month per license, billed annually, with 50+ responses per license per month. Custom is individual pricing.
Not the best fit if: you run frequent studies with large sample sizes, or need participant management across a whole research team.
4. Useberry: Best for Figma and ProtoPie prototype testing (€83/month)
Best for: product designers who want a close Maze substitute for prototype testing, with interviews included on paid plans.
Useberry supports prototype testing with Figma and ProtoPie, website testing, card sorting, tree testing, first-click, five-second and preference tests, surveys, A/B tests, and interviews. Plans are built around monthly response allowances rather than study counts, which suits teams that run many small tests.
It's a design-team tool. Recruitment, repository, and governance features are lighter than in a research operations platform.
Pricing: As of October 2026, Free is €0 with 10 responses per month, 1 seat, and 1 project. Growth is €83 per month billed yearly, with 300 responses and 5 interviews per month. Business is €659 per month billed yearly. Enterprise is custom pricing.
Not the best fit if: you need a research repository or a managed panel of your own customers.
5. Optimal Workshop: Best for information architecture research ($199/month)
Best for: researchers and content designers working on navigation, labelling, and site structure.
Optimal Workshop is the long-standing specialist in card sorting and tree testing, and its pricing page lists first-click testing, prototype testing, surveys, interviews, and participant recruitment on all plans. Starter includes unlimited seats and unlimited responses per study.
The limit is study volume. Starter includes 5 launched studies per year, with more available in bundles.
Pricing: As of October 2026, Starter is $199 per month, billed annually, with 5 studies per year and unlimited seats. Enterprise is custom pricing. No free plan is listed.
Not the best fit if: you run frequent prototype tests or need moderated research as a core workflow.
6. UserTesting: Best for large teams that want a managed panel and video feedback (custom pricing)
Best for: enterprise teams that want recorded think-aloud feedback from a large external panel, with services support.
UserTesting offers three plans (Advanced, Ultimate, and Ultimate+) and two pricing models: test-based consumption or team-based unlimited testing. Its panel is powered by User Interviews, which is now part of UserTesting. It's a strong choice when the main need is fast video feedback from people outside your customer base.
Pricing isn't published, and the platform is centred on its own panel rather than on research with your own customers. Our UserTesting alternatives guide covers that trade-off in more detail.
Pricing: As of October 2026, all plans are custom pricing. The site offers one free test and a platform trial on request.
Not the best fit if: you want published pricing, or most of your research is with your own customers.
7. Lookback: Best for live moderated sessions with observers ($299/year)
Best for: researchers who mainly run live, moderated sessions and want stakeholders to watch.
Lookback is a session tool for moderated and unmoderated research, with panel participants available per plan. Plans are annual and sized by session count, which makes costs predictable for teams with steady volume.
Its plans are built around sessions rather than quick test types like surveys or card sorts, so teams moving from Maze usually pair it with a testing tool.
Pricing: As of October 2026, Freelance is $299 per year with 10 sessions. Team is $1,782 per year with 100 sessions. Insights Hub is $4,122 per year with 300 sessions. Enterprise is custom pricing. All plans offer a free trial of 5 sessions over 60 days. There is no monthly billing.
Not the best fit if: you need quantitative usability metrics from prototype tests.
8. Userlytics: Best for global panel testing paid per session (from $699/month)
Best for: teams that want moderated and unmoderated testing with access to a large global panel and per-session pricing.
Userlytics supports moderated and unmoderated sessions, website, app and prototype testing, card sorting, tree testing, and timed first-impression tests. Its pricing page cites a global panel of over 2 million participants. You can buy project by project or take an annual plan.
Entry pricing for the self-recruitment subscription is higher than most tools on this list, which suits teams with steady testing volume more than occasional use.
Pricing: As of October 2026, the self-recruitment Premium plan is $699 per month with 5 seats, paid annually, and includes 50 panel participants per month. Enterprise is listed as "as low as $30/session" on annual plans. Project-based and Limitless plans are custom pricing.
Not the best fit if: you run a few tests a year, or want a free plan to start.
How to choose a Maze alternative
Start with what pushed you to look. The right replacement depends on it.
- You need more studies per month on prototype tests. Look at Lyssna, Useberry, or UXtweak. All three have free plans and paid tiers that allow more testing volume than Maze's Free and Starter plans.
- You need card sorting and tree testing. Optimal Workshop is the specialist. UXtweak and Lyssna include both methods on lower-priced plans.
- You need moderated interviews alongside prototype tests. Great Question, Lookback, and Userlytics all support moderated sessions. Great Question adds scheduling, a participant CRM, and a repository in the same place.
- You want to research with your own customers. Choose a tool with a participant database, not only a panel. Great Question is built for this. Most testing-first tools are built around their own panel or self-recruitment links.
- Your security team needs to approve the tool. Check for SSO, SCIM, permissions, data retention controls, and audit documentation before you trial anything. On most tools in this list, these sit on the enterprise tier.
- You want the widest choice of vendors. Our Great Question alternatives page lists other platforms worth a look.
Most teams leaving Maze want interviews, their own participants and a shared repository alongside prototype tests. If that's you, a demo is the fastest way to see whether Great Question fits.
Frequently asked questions
What is the best alternative to Maze?
It depends on why you're switching. For prototype testing with more studies per month, Lyssna and Useberry are the closest substitutes. For research teams that also run interviews, manage their own participants, and need governance controls, Great Question covers more of the workflow.
Is there a free alternative to Maze?
Yes. As of October 2026, Lyssna, UXtweak, and Useberry all offer free plans with response limits. Maze also has its own free plan with 1 study per month.
Is Maze good for user interviews?
Maze lists moderated interviews and AI-moderated interviews on its Enterprise plan. Its Free and Starter plans focus on prototype testing and surveys. If interviews are a regular part of your research, compare a tool that includes scheduling and interviews on its entry plan.
Does Maze have its own participant panel?
Maze offers panel recruitment through pay-per-use credits on Free and Starter, with credits included on Enterprise. Its panel page names Prolific and Respondent as its panel providers. The credit price isn't shown on its pricing page.
What's the difference between Maze and Great Question?
Maze is focused on unmoderated testing for design teams. Great Question is a research platform built around a participant CRM, with interviews, surveys, prototype testing, and a repository.
Which Maze alternative is best for card sorting and tree testing?
Optimal Workshop is the specialist. UXtweak and Lyssna include both methods on their free and lower-priced plans. In Great Question, card sorting and tree testing are on the Enterprise plan.
