UserTesting helps UX researchers, designers, product teams, and marketers gather actionable insights through research, testing, and feedback. With a network of real people ready to share their perspectives, UserTesting enables organizations to make customer-first decisions at scale.
Crazy Egg is great if you have static content and want to be able to easily set up heatmaps and scrollmaps to see how people interact with your webpages across different devices types. Straightforward and reliable. In circumstances when you want fast turnarounds, Crazy Egg isn't the right tool as the visualisations often take the better part of a day to generate. It also doesn't perform well if your site has dynamic content - either AJAX-driven or dynamically expanding.
When working with general market customers. For example, a person between the ages of 30 and 60 who has a checking account and a mortgage with their primary bank, as long as they don't get too specific about a particular bank.
Shows us exactly where users click on a page. Literally, the exact spot. This is useful in many different ways. You can see what links/buttons are clicked the most. You can see if a key CTA on the page IS NOT clicked - maybe you need a new design or the placement of that CTA is poor.
You can see if users are clicking a spot on the page that is not actually actionable. Maybe your treatment of some text or an image makes it appear that an item is linked, but it is not actually linked. You can see that people are clicking on that item, and either go ahead and link it, or else change the design to look less 'clickable'.
You can see what percentage of users actually view the different areas within your page. This is very useful when you run into a key stakeholder that demands certain content be above 'the fold'. Trying to explain to a non-technical person that 'the fold' is entirely dependent upon the user's screen size and resolution can be frustrating for both the stakeholder and yourself. Instead, using Crazy Egg's scrollmap feature, you can visually show that stakeholder that, for instance, 80% of users view the content that appears within the top 600 pixels of page height.
The design of both the heatmaps and scrollmaps is fantastic.
The 'page camera' software they offer works very well once you get the hang of it. This allows you to run tests on pages that include dynamic content (like a shopping cart product category page).
It's a great tool considering how inexpensive it is. If used correctly and you have a plan for tracking your websites, this tool can make a world of a difference. If you are not going to sit down and take the time to make a plan for how to use this tool, I would say it is not worth your time. Yes, you can look at items on your website that need to be changed, but without a consistent plan, other important items that need changing can be lost in the mix. Make sure you have enough time and energy to invest in this and it will be well worth it
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
It's not clear what features there are. The navigation icon is not labeled. It's hard to know where to start when you're first logging in as a first-time user. It's hard to know how to set up anything and there aren't many helpful tutorials in-product. I don't want to be kicked out of a help center or read the documentation.
It can be difficult to organize our tests and go back and find information. I think the AI tools are helping and will help with this, but for now it is time consuming to sort through all of the tests and information and then synthesize it and share it with others. It just takes a lot of time.
I think support is an area where Crazy Egg is lacking. I would love to have a quarterly check-in with a Crazy Egg rep to understand what kinds of changes have been made to the platform and what is on the horizon. I also think a quick consulting sessions with a rep could be extremely beneficial, as I'm sure there are ways to use the tool that we haven't even thought about yet that would be extremely insightful for our team.
I've used the "power hour," as I think it's called. This really helped me gain a greater understanding of my specific needs and wants from the platform. This excellent service points to the excellent relationship UserTesting provides its clients. I would recommend this service to any of my colleagues.
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.
There are a lot of tools with similar feature and closely equal pricing- This factor is the most confusing. As we need something for our website and not every tool has everything and it took time for us to understand this. We choose Crazy Egg for its ease of using and anyone can be trained to use it. The main reason to chose Crazy Egg is the ease of creating snapshots and downloadable features. For me personally -the "confetti" feature helped a lot and its the main feature which is like a ALL IN 1.
UserTesting is probably the most polished with the largest tester pool, fastest turnaround, and great tools for both moderated and unmoderated tests. Userlytics is a solid alternative, especially for the budget-conscious. It supports usability testing on lots of devices, and you can do both moderated and unmoderated sessions. The UI isn’t as seamless as UserTesting’s, but it gets the job done and it's pretty flexible in terms of study setup and participant targeting. Trymata is the most basic, but it’s relatively straightforward and affordable. You still get session recordings and written responses, but lacks dashboard polish or advanced features. It’s great for smaller teams or one-off tests.
Its reliability (not scaleability, as the question asks for, sorry) is pretty good but through our testing we know that some clicks do not get recorded. It doesn't bother us a lot because we look at the aggregate of thousands of visits, but we do know it misses things. As for scaleability, it's about right. You really don't want zillions of clicks per snapshot - the screen just turns to 100% dots and you lose the ability to differentiate different screen areas. We find that 25,000 clicks for a page gives us a really good view.
Positive Impact: Answering questions that analytics cannot. i.e. Are people seeing the PayPal button? We can measure how many people start the PayPal process on our site. However, its hard to know if low numbers are because of low interest or because our customers are missing the option.
Positive Impact: Measuring user engagement for page types to determine what elements on the page are most important to our customers.
Positive Impact: Lower cost than competitors to use helpful engagement tracking software. Currently, we're not consistently using Crazy Egg for user engagement so the $50 a month is perfect for our current needs.
We can build tests and gather the insights from those tests to validate our products at a breakneck pace.
By quickly validating our assumptions, we can adjust or refine our designs to ensure the final results are more user-focused.
Recently, by testing and comparing two different flows for a form, we were able to create the right solution that gave us better leads compared to the former form. This results in better leads, better data about the user, and better support at the end for this user.
