Optimal is one of our critical tools for conducting information architecture research, especially for methods like card sorting and tree testing. Compared with UserTesting, the tests are much easier to set up with modern usability patterns, and most importantly, the results options and visualizations are best in class. Optimal offers multiple ways to view the same data, which helps us spot patterns from different angles and make more nuanced decisions that UserTesting’s very limited outputs simply don’t support. Optimal also has more mature survey capabilities than what UserTesting allows, with stronger conditional-logic flows that let me route different responses into different lines of questioning, something UserTesting still hasn’t implemented well. I also appreciate that I've never run into the same types of slow performance and page-load bugs in Optimal that I encounter in UserTesting.

I use Optimal as a research repository across our UX team, and I really love the ease of use. I love the ability to create visual data and how you can tag comments, and Optimal groups them for you. It's seriously a game changer that you can now schedule interviews, upload videos, and use the AI insights. The survey tool is easy to use and great. It saves me so much time and can turn around a research project much faster. Scheduling interviews is easy and straightforward, and the insights AI does a great job finding key themes. The initial setup was easy too, which is great for our growing team who now uses it more broadly.

The AI Interviews feature is a truly one-of-a-kind system designed to support the synthesis of moderated interview analysis. Recently, it has been integrated with the usability testing feature, along with support for other unmoderated methods. The ease of use is incredible, and it operates much faster than I initially expected. Although it requires a special subscription, it is absolutely worth the investment.