The user research platform built for qualitative depth, verified panels and EU compliance, not just prototype clicks.
Both platforms help you learn from real users. Maze built its reputation on fast Figma prototype testing. inamo covers moderated interviews, AI synthesis and verified participant panels, so you get the full picture, not just the click data.
Both tools are solid. They just do different things well. Here is the straight version, minus the marketing polish.
Same yardstick for both. No cherry-picking, and Maze keeps the wins it earns.
| Capability | Maze | inamo |
|---|---|---|
| Research methods | Prototype tests, surveys, card sorts, tree tests | Moderated, unmoderated and hybrid |
| Moderated live interviews | Interview Studies (added 2024) | inamo Meet, with observer room |
| Unmoderated testing | Prototype, live site, mobile app | inamo Solo, task based |
| Prototype testing with Figma | Deep native integration, heatmaps | Available, standard integration |
| AI transcription and synthesis | AI transcription and themes | Auto transcribe, AI synthesis and report |
| AI moderator | Automated with follow-up questions | Not available |
| Automated theme detection | Smart tags | Across all study types |
| Participant panel | 6 million+ broad consumer, 150+ countries | 16,000+ verified and partners in 130+ countries |
| Niche and B2B coverage | Limited for specialist roles | Verified and accessibility panels |
| Data residency | US only (AWS us-east-1) | Data stored only in the EU |
| Nordic language analysis | Not available | Swedish, Danish, Norwegian, Finnish |
| Starting price | Free tier, Starter from ~$99/mo | Custom, demo led |
| Best fit team | Designers validating prototypes in Figma | Teams needing depth, compliance and scale |
Maze is genuinely impressive at what it was built to do. If you work in Figma, you can drop a prototype into Maze and have real people clicking through it before your next standup. Click heatmaps, task completion rates, misclick tracking, all of it lands in a polished report you can hand to a stakeholder without cleaning up a thing.
It has also grown a lot since its early days. Maze now offers interview studies, surveys, card sorts, tree tests and an AI moderator that can run conversations without a human facilitator. The panel is large at over 6 million participants. Where it gets thin is niche recruitment, specialist B2B roles and data residency. All data lives in the US, and pricing above the free tier is not published.
inamo starts where quick prototype tests leave questions on the table. It runs moderated and unmoderated research side by side, then puts AI to work on the messy part. inamo Meet handles live remote interviews with a hidden observation room and instant transcription. inamo Solo covers unmoderated tasks at scale. The AI transcribes, spots themes and pulls the findings together, so a session becomes something you can actually share.
Where Maze gives you a broad consumer panel, inamo focuses on quality. Its 16,000 plus verified participants include niche B2B roles and a dedicated accessibility panel across 130 plus countries. All data stays in the EU, which makes procurement conversations much shorter for regulated industries.
Maze leads with Figma prototypes. inamo covers the full research lifecycle.
Maze was built to answer did they tap the right button? and it does that brilliantly. The Figma integration is best-in-class, and the speed from design to live test is hard to match. But plenty of research questions live downstream of a prototype: why did users abandon that flow, what unmet needs are shaping churn, how does this feature land with compliance officers? inamo covers those questions through moderated interviews and unmoderated tasks in a single platform, so your team does not have to switch tools mid-study.
Maze automates the interview. inamo automates the analysis.
Both platforms lean into AI, but in very different places. Maze stands out with an AI moderator that can run entire interview sessions by itself, asking follow-up questions based on participant answers. That is useful when you need volume without scheduling headaches. inamo takes a different angle. It assumes a human runs the conversation and then applies AI to the heavy lifting afterwards: transcription across languages, thematic analysis across sessions, and synthesis that practically writes the findings deck. If your bottleneck is running enough sessions, Maze helps. If your bottleneck is making sense of the sessions you already have, inamo helps more.
Maze has more participants. inamo verifies the ones that matter.
On paper, Maze wins the numbers game with 6 million plus panelists. For broad consumer studies, that is a real advantage. Median time to first match is about 15 minutes. The panel thins out when you need a compliance officer in financial services, a procurement lead in manufacturing, or a clinician who actually uses your software. inamo panel is smaller but verified, with dedicated accessibility participants and coverage across niche B2B roles in 130 plus countries. When the wrong participant means a wasted session, verification matters more than volume.
Maze stores data in the US. inamo stores everything in the EU.
Maze hosts all customer data on AWS in the us-east-1 region. It is GDPR compliant and holds SOC 2 Type II certification, so the security foundations are real. But there is no option to keep data in the EU. For finance, healthcare and public sector teams where data residency is a procurement gate, not a nice-to-have, that can stall a deal for months. inamo stores all data exclusively in the EU and was designed GDPR-first, which tends to make security and legal reviews substantially faster.
Maze has a free tier. inamo folds several tools into one platform.
Maze offers a free plan (one study per month, basic features) and paid tiers starting around $99 per month, though exact pricing is not published and requires a sales conversation for higher tiers. Panel credits are billed separately and expire after 12 months. inamo uses custom, demo-led pricing with no public tiers. Its value shows up when you realise you would otherwise pay separately for a testing tool, an interview platform, a transcription service and a participant recruiter. It puts all four under one roof, and for teams running regulated or large-scale research, the maths tend to work in its favour.
Maze does not publish exact pricing above its free tier. These are indicative figures for comparison. Check live pricing pages before you buy.
Panel recruitment credits are billed separately and expire after 12 months. Free plan is limited to 1 study per month.
Explore PricingEnterprise grade insight at a fraction of traditional research costs. No separate credit system or expiration.
Explore PricingYou do not have to choose one on day one. Maze is hard to beat for rapid Figma prototype validation during the design phase. inamo carries the heavier qualitative studies, the stakeholder-ready synthesis, and the regulated or B2B research that needs verified participants and EU data residency. If the budget allows it, that pairing covers the full research lifecycle, and it is a setup we see often in practice.
The questions teams ask most when weighing the two. Still stuck? Email hello@inamo.ai.
No. As of 2026, Maze stores all data on AWS in the US (us-east-1 region). It is GDPR compliant and holds SOC 2 Type II certification, but there is no option to host data in the EU. If EU data residency is a requirement for your organisation, inamo stores all data exclusively in the EU by default.
For teams that need more than prototype testing, yes. inamo covers the same unmoderated testing, then adds moderated interviews with a human facilitator, AI-powered synthesis across all study types, and verified panels for niche or B2B roles. If Figma prototype validation is your primary need and a broad consumer panel is enough, Maze remains a strong pick.
Three things stand out. First, AI synthesis that goes beyond transcription to produce stakeholder-ready findings across multiple sessions. Second, verified recruitment for specialist B2B roles and a dedicated accessibility panel. Third, EU-only data storage for regulated industries. Maze does offer moderated interviews since 2024, but its AI focus is on automating the moderator rather than the analysis.
Maze has a free tier (one study per month) and paid plans starting around $99 per month, though pricing above that is not published and requires a sales conversation. Panel credits cost extra and expire after 12 months. inamo uses custom, demo-led pricing with no public tiers, but it includes testing, interviews, AI analysis and panel access in a single package rather than billing each separately.
inamo. Maze has a large consumer panel of over 6 million participants, but recruitment thins out for specialist professional roles like compliance officers, clinicians or procurement leads. inamo focuses on verified participants across niche B2B roles and offers a dedicated accessibility panel in more than 130 countries.
Yes, and many teams do. Maze works well for fast prototype validation during the design phase. inamo carries the deeper moderated interviews, AI synthesis and regulated research. Together they cover the full lifecycle from early concept checks to stakeholder-ready qualitative findings.
Bring interviews, unmoderated testing, AI synthesis and a verified panel into one platform. We will show you how inamo fits the way your team already works.
