Lyssna vs UserTesting
Compare Lyssna vs UserTesting features, pricing, and research methods. Find the best user research platform with transparent pricing and accessible tools.
What rate Lyssna vs UserTesting
Here’s how customers review Lyssna and UserTesting on G2.com.
Rating | Lyssna | UserTesting |
Overall rating | 4.5/5 | 4.5/5 |
Meets requirements | 8.5/10 | 8.6/10 |
Ease of use | 9.2/10 🏅 | 8.4/10 |
Ease of setup | 9.3/10 🏅 | 8.6/10 |
Ease of admin | 9.0/10 🏅 | 8.7/10 |
Quality of support | 9.2/10 🏅 | 9.0/10 |
Partner in doing business | 9.1/10 🏅 | 8.8/10 |
Product direction | 9.3/10 🏅 | 8.1/10 |
Why companies choose Lyssna over UserTesting
Organizations switching from UserTesting to Lyssna frequently point to several key factors driving their decision.
Frustration with hidden costs. Many UserTesting customers express disappointment with the platform's shift to a hidden pricing model. Multiple reviewers mention that pricing changed from a straightforward credit-based system to requiring sales conversations and larger commitments than their research needs warranted. This lack of pricing transparency makes budgeting difficult and can lead to teams paying for more than they need. Lyssna's simple plans and pricing structure and pay-per-use panel credits ($1 per credit) provides predictable costs and easier budget planning.
Research democratization barriers. Teams consistently cite the inability to distribute research capabilities across their organization as a key reason for switching. With UserTesting's tiered feature approach, many companies found themselves in situations where only certain teams could access specific research methods.
Participant quality concerns. While UserTesting offers a large panel, several reviewers expressed concerns about participant quality and targeting limitations. Teams report needing more precise demographic targeting and better participant screening capabilities to reach specific user segments for their research. Lyssna's research panel of 690,000+ participants across 124 countries includes 395+ demographic targeting options available on all paid plans, along with automatic replacement for unsatisfactory responses, ensuring research quality without additional costs or delays.
These user experiences are reflected in G2 comparison ratings, where Lyssna outperforms UserTesting across key metrics:
Ease of use: 9.2/10 vs 8.2/10
Ease of setup: 9.3/10 vs 8.6/10
Product direction: 9.3/10 vs 8.9/10
Lyssna vs UserTesting: Key differences
Research method availability
UserTesting restricts essential UX research methods like card sorting and tree testing to their highest-tier Ultimate plan. Lyssna takes a different approach, providing nearly all research methodologies on every plan – even the free plan. This means teams can conduct comprehensive research with card sorting, tree testing, first click testing, preference testing, five second testing, prototype testing, and surveys regardless of their budget or plan level.
High-quality participant panel
Quality research depends on quality participants. Lyssna’s panel includes 690,000+ participants across 124 countries with detailed targeting across 395+ demographic attributes. UserTesting’s panel covers only 30+ countries and offers limited targeting options on basic plans. Additionally, Lyssna provides automatic replacement for unsatisfactory responses, ensuring research quality without additional costs or delays.
Transparent pricing structure
Unlike UserTesting, which requires contacting sales for pricing information and has no free option, Lyssna publishes clear pricing on their website (Starter: from $82/month, Growth: from $165/month). Lyssna offers a comprehensive free plan and a strategic mid-tier Growth plan to help teams scale gradually, along with consistent $1/credit panel recruitment pricing across all plans, regardless
Flexible workflows and integrations
Both platforms integrate with essential tools like Figma, Zoom, and calendars, but Lyssna offers greater flexibility in test creation and editing. While UserTesting provides native video conferencing, Lyssna's approach to test design allows teams to adapt their research more dynamically as needs evolve, creating a more responsive research process that adjusts to real-world testing scenarios.
Lyssna vs UserTesting: Feature comparison
Feature | Lyssna | UserTesting |
|---|---|---|
Free plan features | ||
Seats included |  |  |
Pay-per-use panel credits | | |
Research | ||
Card sorting | | Ultimate plan only |
Conditional logic | | |
First click testing | | |
Five second testing | | |
Live website testing | | |
Prototype testing with Figma | | |
Surveys | | |
Tree testing | | Ultimate plan only |
User interviews | | |
Participant recruitment | ||
Research panel access | | |
Advanced panel targeting criteria | | Limited on basic plans |
Panel credits | Pay-per-use | Subscription-based |
Panel credit cost | US$1 per credit | Unlisted |
Custom screening | | Limited on basic plans |
Self recruitment | |
|
AI-powered features | ||
AI generated summaries | | |
AI follow-up questions | | |
Analysis and reporting | ||
Heatmaps | | |
Video recordings | | |
CSV exports | | |
Interviews | ||
Microsoft integration | | |
Google Calendar integration | | |
Zoom integration | | |
Video transcription | | |
Support | ||
Email support | | |
Live chat | | |
Help center | | |
Pricing flexibility | ||
Free plan | | |
Entry-level plan | | |
Mid-level plan | | |
Enterprise plan | | |
Security | ||
SOC 2 compliant | | |
GDPR compliant | | |
SSO | | |
FAQs about Lyssna vs UserTesting
