Overview Leaderboard Methodology
Industry Report

UX Research & Testing Tools

Software for conducting usability testing, surveys, session recording, and analytics to gather user insights and validate design decisions.

Brands tracked: 36
Brands analyzed: 36
Last updated: 2026-04-22
Model: OpenAI GPT-5
Prompts: 281
Total responses: 1,435
Top Brand Overall?
UserTesting
80/100

Highest overall AI Visibility Score in this industry.

LBA Leader?
Hotjar
85

Highest score on the LBA metric in this industry.

Authority Leader?
Maze
67

Highest score on the Authority metric in this industry.

TOM Leader?
UserTesting
100

Highest score on the TOM metric in this industry.

UserTesting leads the UX Research & Testing Tools category in AI responses

UserTesting is the most consistently-surfaced brand when users ask AI assistants about UX Research & Testing Tools, but not to the point of monopolising the conversation. Maze and a handful of others appear regularly, giving users a reasonable set of alternatives to compare. The top of this leaderboard is where most of the AI-driven traffic will go.

Brand Leaderboard All 36 UX Research & Testing Tools brands ranked

Ranked by overall AI Visibility Score (smoothed geometric mean of LBA, Authority, and TOM with an LBA-based floor on Authority and TOM, see methodology). Click any brand for the full report.

# Brand LBA Authority TOM Overall
1
UserTesting
usertesting.com
 81
63
100
80
2
Maze
maze.co
 74
67
91
77
3
Lookback
lookback.com
 68
42
86
63
4
Dovetail
dovetail.com
 74
23
71
50
5
Hotjar
hotjar.com
 85
23
62
50
6
FullStory
fullstory.com
 73
19
50
42
7
Lyssna
lyssna.com
 58
18
41
35
8
Qualtrics
qualtrics.com
 83
13
35
35
9
Optimal Workshop
optimalworkshop.com
 78
8
48
33
10
Typeform
typeform.com
 76
8
33
29
11
SurveyMonkey
surveymonkey.com
 80
8
27
28
12
Amplitude
amplitude.com
 71
12
12
23
13
Respondent
respondent.io
 61
6
22
22
14
dscout
dscout.com
 75
9
11
21
15
Sprig
sprig.com
 49
9
18
21
16
PlaybookUX
playbookux.com
 49
5
24
20
17
Useberry
useberry.com
 39
6
26
20
18
Zoom
zoom.us
 48
8
17
20
19
Crazy Egg
crazyegg.com
 75
8
8
18
20
User Interviews
userinterviews.com
 72
7
8
18
21
Mouseflow
mouseflow.com
 71
7
7
17
22
UserZoom
userzoom.com
 64
6
8
17
23
Condens
condens.io
 39
4
19
16
24
LogRocket
logrocket.com
 65
7
7
16
25
Lucky Orange
luckyorange.com
 63
6
6
16
26
Qualaroo
qualaroo.com
 64
6
6
16
27
Smartlook
smartlook.com
 65
6
6
16
28
Survicate
survicate.com
 63
6
6
16
29
Userlytics
userlytics.com
 64
6
6
16
30
UXCam
uxcam.com
 65
6
6
16
31
Ethnio
ethn.io
 59
6
6
15
32
Trymata
trymata.com
 51
5
7
14
33
Great Question
greatquestion.co
 48
5
5
12
34
Loop11
loop11.com
 45
5
5
12
35
UXtweak
uxtweak.com
 47
5
5
12
36
Ballpark
ballparkhq.com
 30
3
3
8

How is this calculated? Methodology

Every brand in this leaderboard is scored against the same set of 281 shared UX Research & Testing Tools prompts. The same prompts, same model, same iterations. So differences in scores reflect actual differences in AI visibility, not differences in measurement.

Overall AI Visibility Score
Smoothed geometric mean of LBA, Authority and TOM. Authority and TOM are floored at LBA × 0.1 before the geometric mean (the same floor used in the per-metric cards above, so brand cards and the composite tell the same story). Formula: composite = ((LBA + 5)(Authority + 5)(TOM + 5))^(1/3) - 5. The floor keeps brands the model clearly recognises but doesn't yet recommend from collapsing to zero, while a single genuinely weak metric still pulls the composite down. Full methodology.
Shared industry prompts
For Authority and TOM, all brands in the industry are scored against the same 281 category prompts (e.g. "best SEO tools for agencies"). This makes brand-to-brand comparisons valid - everyone faces identical inputs. LBA prompts are per-brand because they ask brand-specific questions.
Latent Brand Association (LBA)
5 brand probes + 1 control prompt, each run 5 times in recall mode (no web search). LBA = quality × meta × stability × share × recognition × 100. Read the full LBA methodology →
LLM Authority
50 organic category prompts (discovery, comparison, problem and transactional intents), each run once in recall mode and once in retrieval mode. Score = frequency × log-decayed prominence × intent weight, then 50/50 averaged across the two modes. Read the full Authority methodology →
Top of Mind (TOM)
15 high-volume discovery prompts (sourced from Keywords Everywhere search-volume data), each run 5 times in pure recall mode (no web). Score = frequency × (0.5 + 0.5 × log-prominence), volume-weighted. Read the full TOM methodology →