x

Save Time and Frustration

Say No to Poorly Designed Products!

Save Time and FrustrationRegister for free

Maze vs Optimal Workshop

Jana Filusova
•  13.02.2024
In the fast-moving world of product development and UX research, picking the right UX tool is essential. This article looks at popular tools Maze and Optimal Workshop and introduces another option that might change the way you do UX research.

Come along as we explore the features, benefits, and possibilities of these tools, helping you make the most informed decision for your design requirements.

Table of contents

Key insights

👉 Maze’s strength lies in its ease of implementation and control over survey creation.

👉 Despite its user-friendly nature and straightforward survey setup, Maze faces issues with prototype stability and report editing difficulties.

👉 Optimal Workshop shines in facilitating card sorting and tree testing, crucial for enhancing website navigation.

👉 Optimal Workshop offers an easy setup and excels in concept association tests but faces criticism over its pricing model.

👉 UXtweak simplifies finding study participants directly in the app, offers seamless data exports for website improvements, and boasts prompt customer support.

👉 Standing out against Maze and UserZoom, UXtweak provides a seamless, user-centric research platform free from participant reliability complaints. It features a broad range of advanced tools and delivers reliable respondents at a competitive price.

🐝 Discover UXtweak – sign up for your free account today!

Maze and Optimal Workshop alternative – UXtweak

UXtweak stands out as an attractive option compared to Maze and Optimal Workshop, establishing itself as a full-featured user research platform. It offers an extensive array of functionalities designed to enhance the usability of websites and apps at every stage, from early prototypes to completed products.

Stéphanie Walter

UXtweak distinguishes itself with a rare mix of features on one platform, such as tree testing, first-click testing, five-second tests, and mobile app testing. It also includes a full range of research and recruitment tools, as well as solutions for managing participants. This combination of diverse features, along with its flexible and affordable pricing, positions UXtweak as a thorough and accessible choice for UX experts.

Maze vs Optimal Workshop: Features and Capabilities

The table showcases a comparison of features across three research platforms: Maze, Optimal Workshop, and UXtweak.

Features

Maze

Optimal Workshop

UXtweak

Website Usability Testing

Mobile Apps Testing

Prototype Testing

(Compatible with Figma, InVision, Axure)

Card Sorting

(avaliable in Team and Organization plan)

(Open, Closed, Hybrid)

(available on all plans)

Tree Testing

(avaliable in Team and Organization plan)

Preference Testing

First Click Testing

(With click heatmaps)

5 Second Testing

A/B Testing

Moderated/User Interviews

(on Enterprise plans)

Session recording

Survey

✓ 

(only in the Starter plan and higher)

(With skip logic)

Onsite Recruiting/ Website recruiting widget

Branching logic (conditional logic)

The table shows that all three platforms offer a wide range of features. Specifically, UXtweak includes all the mentioned features, frequently adding improvements (like advanced targeting options) or offering them at a better price (such as password-protected studies) compared to the other two platforms.

🐝  Check out UXtweak’s demos to watch user interactions and real-time analytics ⬇

Try Tree Testing ✔️

Tree Testing
Try Tree Testing ✔️

Try Website Usability Testing🔥

Website Testing
Try Website Usability Testing🔥

Maze vs Optimal Workshop: Participant Recruitment and Management capabilities

The table compares how Maze, UserZoom, and UXtweak handle participant recruitment and management for usability studies.

Capabilities

Maze

Optimal Workshop

UXtweak

User Panel

Panel size 

130+ countries

50+ million participants

130+ countries

Advanced Targeting criteria

Only in Organization plan

Targeting on other plans only by basic demographics (Country, Age, Sex) 

(use of custom recruitment)

(2000+ attributes)

Expert audit

(included with each order from User Panel)

Ability to bring your own users

(for free)

Participant management solution 

(Reach Database)

✓ 

(available on all plans)

Automatic QA of responses

🐝 Want to boost conversion rates using key insights but lack access to real users? Check out UXtweak today!

Maze vs Optimal Workshop: Pricing and Plans Comparison

When choosing a user testing tool, keep an eye on the price. Look for a tool that meets your research needs without stretching your budget. Next, we’ll dive into the cost-effectiveness of these research platforms.

Maze’s Pricing Options

  • Free Plan: No cost, perfect for those new to usability testing. It comes with 1 study per month, 5 seats, and basic features.
  • Starter Plan: $99 per month or $1,188 annually, designed for small teams beginning their product research journey. This plan includes unlimited blocks, advanced features, and 5 seats.
  • Team Plan: $1,250 monthly or $15,000 annually, aimed at larger teams looking to expand their research capabilities. It offers more than 20 studies per year, enhanced features, and supports more than 5 seats.
  • Organization Plan: Custom pricing for very large organizations that require a broad range of research activities. This plan provides tailored studies and seats, a full set of features, and strong security options.

👀 Looking to Switch to UXtweak but Locked into Maze subscription?

If you’re currently subscribed to Maze but want to explore what UXtweak has to offer, we have a special deal for you! We will provide free access to UXtweak for the remaining duration of your Maze subscription.

No concerns about additional expenses or the need to initiate a new procurement procedure. Simply reach out to us at sales@uxtweak.com, and we’ll set you up.

Optimal Workshop Pricing Options

  • Free Plan: Comes with 1 active study and limited participant responses.
  • Pro Plan: Costs $208 monthly (annual billing), offering unlimited studies and responses.
  • Team Plan: Begins at $416 monthly for at least two users ($208 per user), suitable for larger teams with 2 or more admin users.
  • Enterprise Plan: Provides custom pricing for tailored solutions.

Pricing Examples

  • For Individual Researchers:
    • Pro Plan: $208 monthly or $2,496 annually, includes unlimited studies, custom branding, and more.
  • For Team Usage:
    • Team Plan for 5 users: $955 monthly or $11,460 annually, includes unlimited studies, tasks, responses, and extra features.

UXtweak Pricing Options

  • Starter Plan: Free, suitable for basic testing needs. It includes access to all tools, one active study, and up to 30 responses per month.
  • Plus Plan: $708 a year ($59 a month), aimed at individual researchers. It comes with 200 responses per month, unlimited studies, and one-year data retention.
  • Business Plan: $1,812 a year ($151 a month), best for small to medium businesses. This plan allows for unlimited studies, 1,000 monthly responses, and enhanced support.
  • Enterprise Plan: Starting at $5,000 a year, designed for extensive client requirements. It offers unlimited responses and personalized support, with pricing adjusted for specific needs.

Plans are mainly available on an annual basis, though monthly billing provides flexibility. Changing or canceling plans is easy. For detailed plan features, check the UXtweak pricing page.

Maze vs Optimal Workshop: Customer Reviews

To fairly evaluate the three platforms, we’ve added a table with information from capterra.com. This site collects user reviews of different platforms.

Maze

Optimal Workshop

UXtweak

Overall Score

4.5/5

4.5/5

4.8/5

Ease of Use

4.3/5

4.0/5

4.7/5

Customer Service

3.9/5

5.0/5

5.0/5

Value for money

4.1/5

4.3/5

4.8/5

🐝 Note from the author: Pros and cons on this page were formulated by aggregating user feedback from platforms like Capterra.com and G2.com.

Maze

  • Pros
    • User-Friendly Survey Creation: Maze’s intuitive interface makes survey construction easy, offering users both control and simplicity.
    • Simple Prototype Testing Setup: Setting up prototype testing is direct, with easy steps and the option to link a prototype from Figma.
    • Diverse Question Types: Supports complex questions through a wide variety of question formats.
  • Cons
    • Prototype Performance Issues: Users report frequent crashes with prototypes, especially on mobile, negatively affecting the user experience.
    • Report Customization Challenges: Difficulties arise when trying to edit reports, such as altering content or rearranging slides, and there’s no straightforward way to merge multiple test reports.
    • Ineffective Heat Maps: The heat mapping feature often fails to deliver clear, actionable insights.
    • Test Participant Reliability: There are instances of test participants not fully committing to tests, with a notable number dropping out or exiting the test prematurely, despite compensation.

Maze

Source: G2.com

Optimal Workshop

  • Pros
    • User-Friendly Setup: Setting up and launching Optimal Workshop is simple, though navigating it can be less intuitive during use.
    • Concept Association Clarity: OptimalSort excels at revealing how people link different concepts together.
    • Ideal for Card Sorting and Tree Testing: The platform stands out for card sorting and testing tree structures, essential for enhancing website navigation.
    • Insightful Analysis: Offers comprehensive analysis of results to improve usability.
  • Cons
    • Rigid Pricing: The lack of a more adaptable pricing model that allows purchasing only needed features is a drawback.
    • High Recruitment Costs: The pricing structure, especially for recruitment, can be prohibitive, with monthly plans adding further recruitment fees, which may feel like a money-grabbing practice.
    • Quick, Possibly Shallow Responses: Some responses are rushed, necessitating additional effort to sift through for genuine feedback.
    • Fixed Question Sequence: Survey questions must be completely remade for rearrangement, lacking a simple drag-and-drop functionality.
    • No Mixed Card Sorting: Unlike UXtweak, Optimal Workshop doesn’t support mixed card sorts that allow for both predefined and participant-generated cards.

OW

Source: G2.com

UXtweak

  • Pros
    • Wide Range of Test Options: Users appreciate the variety of test options available at fair pricing, making UXtweak a cost-effective choice for user research and analytics.
    • Clear Exports: It provides straightforward exports, aiding in advocating for necessary website structure changes.
    • Responsive Customer Support: The support team consists of experts who promptly address issues and offer effective solutions to users’ problems.
    • Seamless Integration with Figma Prototypes: The platform seamlessly integrates with Figma prototypes, making testing quick and efficient.
    • Easy Audience Sourcing: UXtweak lets you quickly find study participants within the app, without needing extra tools.
    • Interactive Demos: The ability to interact with demos of each tool allows users to gain a real view of how data is presented, enhancing understanding and usability.
  • Cons
    • Confusing Layout: Some parts of the app aren’t easy to figure out, like the left menu.
    • Complex Setup: Setting up studies can be hard because there are so many options.
    • Learning Curve: It takes time to get used to the dashboard, but it gets easier with practice.
      • UXtweak note: To address this, new tutorial videos are being produced.

UXtweak

Source: G2.com

Maze vs Optimal Workshop: Support options

Maze

Maze offers a range of informative articles on topics like security, privacy, integrations, and setting up tests. For more personalized assistance, customers can click the ‘Submit a request’ button for support. Maze strives for quick responses to inquiries, although response times may vary with the complexity of the issue.

Optimal Workshop

Optimal Workshop’s help center is equipped with articles to help solve common problems, and for further assistance, users are encouraged to reach out via email to support@optimalworkshop.com.

UXtweak

UXtweak goes above and beyond standard support by offering consulting services and audits from our expert in-house UX research team. Our dedication to quality service is reflected in our perfect 5/5 Capterra rating. To discover more, visit our UX research consulting services page.

Try UXtweak for free!

Test your assumptions quickly, access qualified audiences worldwide, and receive clear reports - all with competitive pricing.

Register for the free plan

Maze vs Optimal Workshop: Conclusion

Maze provides an intuitive interface for creating surveys, allowing users easy control and a straightforward experience. Yet, there have been reports of prototype reliability concerns, particularly on mobile devices, which could affect the user experience. Editing reports can also pose difficulties, and the heat mapping feature might not consistently deliver clear insights. Nevertheless, Maze remains a reliable option for fundamental UX research tasks, especially for researchers valuing quick setup and simple implementation.

Optimal Workshop offers a straightforward setup for initiating projects, though it may be somewhat complex to navigate. It shines with its OptimalSort feature for card sorting and tree testing, improving website navigation, and provides thorough result analyses. However, its fixed pricing and high recruitment costs could be limiting, with added fees for participant recruitment. The platform also lacks flexibility in rearranging survey questions and doesn’t support mixed card sorting, posing challenges for those needing adaptable and cost-efficient research tools, especially solo researchers or small teams.

For teams seeking alternatives to Maze and Optimal Workshop, UXtweak stands out as a prime choice. It differentiates itself with easy-to-use features such as simple audience sourcing, straightforward data exports, and responsive customer support. Beyond the absence of test participant reliability issues found in competitors, UXtweak is known for its transparent pricing, ensuring no unexpected changes, a clear advantage over Optimal Workshop. With its suite of advanced features and cost-effective approach, UXtweak affirms its position as the best alternative for comprehensive research needs.

People also ask (FAQ)

I want to try UXtweak. What should I do?

Register for a free account at UXtweak, choose a plan that works for you, subscribe, and start your UX research, or get in touch with our product experts to discuss your needs.

What is Maze?

Maze is a remote user testing platform with features for prototype testing, website testing, card sorting and tree testing, and a survey tool. They also provide help with participant recruitment with their user panel and a participant management system called Reach.

If you are not quite sure that Maze is the right choice for you, make sure to have a look at the article about the best usability testing tools.

What is Optimal Workshop?

Optimal Workshop is an online usability testing tool designed for evaluating your website’s information architecture and enhancing its usability. It specializes in website architecture assessment, making it particularly useful during the initial stages of web development. While its feature set may not be as extensive, Optimal Workshop offers several tools that facilitate understanding your users. These tools include card sorting, tree testing, surveys, and first-click testing.

If you like Optimal Workshop’s features, yet you are still not entirely convinced, check out our selection of the Best Optimal Workshop Alternatives.

Share on socials |

Read More