TL;DR: Both Maze and Lyssna (formerly UsabilityHub) are fast, unmoderated UX research tools — prototype tests, surveys, card sorts, and preference tests with built-in panels. Maze wins on panel size and integrations: a 3M+ participant pool, 400+ targeting attributes, and deep Figma/Sketch/Adobe XD connections, with a Starter plan at $99/month. Lyssna wins on value and breadth per plan: its full research suite (including unlimited tests) is available on every tier including free, with paid plans from $75/month, though its panel is smaller (530K+). Both are excellent at what users do — but neither can ask an adaptive follow-up to learn why. Koji adds that missing layer: AI-moderated voice and text interviews that probe every answer in real time, starting free, then €29/month.
Maze vs Lyssna at a glance
| Maze | Lyssna | Koji | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Category | Unmoderated testing + analytics | Unmoderated testing + panel | AI-moderated interviews |
| Free plan | Yes (limited) | Yes — full suite | Yes — 10 credits |
| Entry paid | $99/mo (Starter) | $75/mo (Basic) | €29/mo |
| Panel size | 3M+ participants | 530K+ participants | Bring your own or recruit |
| Targeting attributes | 400+ | 35 | Custom screeners |
| Design integrations | Figma, Sketch, Adobe XD | Figma | Context upload |
| Adaptive follow-ups | No | No | Yes — AI probes every answer |
| Auto thematic analysis | Limited | Limited | Yes — one-click report |
Maze: best for panel reach and design integrations
Maze is the design-team favorite. It plugs directly into Figma, Sketch, and Adobe XD, so you can validate a prototype before a line of code is written. Its panel is large — 3M+ participants — and its targeting is granular, with 400+ attributes to refine who you test. Maze's Starter plan is $99/month (unlimited blocks, advanced features, 5 seats); full access to every tool requires the Organization plan (quote-based).
Where it shines: prototype testing, first-click testing, five-second tests, and quantitative usability metrics at speed.
Where it falls short: some testing tools are gated behind the $99 Starter tier, and — like all unmoderated tools — Maze captures what happened, not why.
Lyssna: best for value and an all-in-one suite
Lyssna (the rebrand of UsabilityHub) bundles five-second tests, first-click tests, preference tests, card sorts, tree tests, and surveys — and crucially, gives you unlimited access to the full suite on every plan, including free. Paid plans start at $75/month with more seats. Reviewers praise its fast feedback and clean UX, and it offers stronger moderated-testing support than Maze. The trade-off: a smaller panel (530K+) and fewer targeting attributes (35).
Where it shines: affordable, broad method coverage for lean teams; quick design decisions.
Where it falls short: smaller recruitment reach, and — again — no way to ask a participant "why?" in the moment.
Pricing: Maze vs Lyssna
| Plan | Maze | Lyssna |
|---|---|---|
| Free | Yes (limited blocks) | Yes — full suite |
| Entry paid | $99/mo (Starter, 5 seats) | $75/mo (Basic) |
| Top tier | Organization (custom) | Pro / custom |
| Pricing model | Tiered + some tools gated | Full suite on every tier |
Lyssna is generally the better value per plan; Maze is the better reach and integration play. But both price by seats and tiers, not by depth of insight — because depth of insight is exactly what unmoderated tools don't produce.
What both miss: the adaptive follow-up
Maze and Lyssna are unmoderated by design. That makes them fast and scalable — and structurally unable to probe. As the research literature puts it: "Without a moderator, you can't ask participants follow-up questions in the moment... you often have to infer the why from screen recordings or written comments."
The 2026 best-practice pattern is telling: teams increasingly pair an unmoderated test with a short conversational follow-up to recover the reasoning a recording can't capture. That follow-up is the gap Koji fills.
The missing layer: Koji's AI-moderated interviews
Koji isn't a replacement for a click-path test — it's the depth layer unmoderated tools can't provide:
- AI-moderated voice & text interviews that probe every answer in real time — the adaptive "why" Maze and Lyssna can't ask. (Voice interview experience.)
- Six structured question types (
open_ended,scale,single_choice,multiple_choice,ranking,yes_no) so one study captures both the metric and the motivation. (Structured questions.) - Automatic thematic analysis into a one-click report with quotes — no manual tagging across hundreds of sessions. (Thematic analysis.)
- Fair, transparent pricing. Voice costs 3 credits, text 1, and a quality gate means you're only charged for conversations that score 3+ — you don't pay for junk responses. Starts free, then €29/month.
The combined workflow that wins in 2026: run your prototype test in Maze or Lyssna to see what users do, then run a Koji AI interview to learn why they did it — 10x faster than scheduling moderated sessions, with no moderator bias.
When to use which
- Maze — design-led prototype validation, large panel reach, deep Figma/Sketch/XD integration, quantitative usability metrics.
- Lyssna — best value, full method suite on every plan, quick design tests for lean teams.
- Koji — whenever you need the reasoning behind the behavior: churn, discovery, concept and message testing, pricing, and the qualitative follow-up to any unmoderated test. For the bigger picture, see moderated vs unmoderated research.
Method coverage: what each tool can test
| Method | Maze | Lyssna | Koji |
|---|---|---|---|
| Prototype / usability test | Yes | Yes | Pair with interview |
| Five-second test | Yes | Yes | — |
| First-click test | Yes | Yes | — |
| Card sorting | Yes | Yes | — |
| Tree testing | Yes | Yes | — |
| Preference test | Yes | Yes | — |
| Surveys | Yes | Yes | Structured questions |
| Moderated interviews | Limited | Limited | AI-moderated, at scale |
| Adaptive follow-up probing | No | No | Yes |
On paper, Maze and Lyssna cover nearly the same unmoderated methods. The real dividing lines are panel reach (Maze 3M+ vs Lyssna 530K+), targeting depth (400+ vs 35 attributes), design integrations (Maze's Figma/Sketch/Adobe XD vs Lyssna's Figma), and value (Lyssna's full suite on every plan). What neither line covers is the interview column — the conversation that explains the numbers behind a heatmap or a task-success score.
Recruitment and panel quality
Panel size isn't everything, but it shapes who you can reach. Maze's 3M+ pool with 400+ targeting attributes is a genuine advantage for niche B2B or specific demographic targeting; Lyssna's 530K+ pool with 35 attributes is ample for consumer and general design tests but tighter for hard-to-reach segments. With Koji you typically bring your own audience — your churned users, trial signups, or a recruited list — and use screener questions to qualify them, so you interview the exact people who matter rather than a generic panel. The result is sharper, more relevant insight per conversation, which is why teams increasingly run unmoderated tests for breadth and AI interviews for depth.
Speed without losing the why
The reason unmoderated tools exploded is speed: you launch a test and have results in hours instead of scheduling a week of moderated sessions. The historical catch was that speed cost you depth — fast data, shallow understanding. AI-moderated interviews remove that trade-off. Koji fields voice and text conversations around the clock and generates thematic reports automatically as responses land, so you get interview-grade depth at unmoderated-test speed. For teams practicing continuous discovery, that means you can run a Maze or Lyssna prototype test on Monday and have the "why" from a Koji interview round by Wednesday — inside a single sprint, with no moderator calendar to manage.
The bottom line
Maze and Lyssna are both strong unmoderated UX tools — pick Maze for reach and integrations, Lyssna for value and suite breadth. But neither answers why. Koji adds the AI-moderated interview layer that turns "what happened" into "why it happened" — at survey scale, starting free.
Want the why behind your usability data? Start free with Koji and pair your next prototype test with an AI-moderated interview.
