Maze for Designers: Rapid Testing for Prototypes and Live Products

Maze turns prototypes and live products into usability tests without writing code. Connect your Figma file, define tasks, and get quantitative data on completion rates, misclick locations, and time on task. Unlike video-based tools, Maze gives you numbers first, making it faster to spot patterns across dozens of participants.

Key Specs

How Designers Use Maze

Maze adapts to different research needs. Here’s when designers turn to rapid usability testing.

For Prototype Testing

Connect a Figma prototype, define tasks like “Sign up for a free account,” and specify the success screen (e.g., the confirmation page). Launch to Maze’s panel or share with your users. Watch as data rolls in: 68% completion rate, average 2:14 to complete, 23% misclicked the secondary button. Heatmaps show where participants tapped. Use this data to identify bottlenecks before development starts.

For Usability Studies

Test existing websites or apps by adding Maze’s tracking to live URLs. Create unmoderated tests that ask participants to complete real tasks. Maze captures their path, time per screen, and drop-off points. This reveals navigation issues analytics miss: users might reach the checkout page (analytics shows success), but Maze shows they took 4 wrong turns first.

For Design Validation

Run preference tests to choose between design directions. Upload 2-3 concepts and ask participants “Which layout makes it easiest to find product details?” Maze collects votes and optional written feedback. Use this to kill weak directions early rather than building full prototypes for everything.

For Remote Research

Maze works entirely remotely with no moderator needed. Tests run asynchronously, participants complete them whenever convenient. This makes Maze useful for international studies across time zones or when you need 50+ responses quickly without scheduling 50 interviews.

Maze vs. Alternatives

How does Maze compare to other research platforms?

Choose Maze if: You test prototypes frequently, want fast quantitative insights, work primarily in Figma, or need affordable testing ($99/month vs $20k/year).

Choose UserTesting if: You need video of participants’ faces and voices, want to understand emotional reactions, or require moderated interviews for complex products.

Choose Lookback if: You want video feedback with better participant management and more flexible testing than UserTesting, but can recruit your own users.

Choose Hotjar if: You only test live websites, not prototypes, and want heatmaps and session recordings of real visitors rather than recruited testers.

Getting Started with Maze

A quick start to running your first prototype test:

Step 1: Connect your prototype

Click “New Maze” and select your source. For Figma, authenticate and choose a file. Maze imports all frames. Select the starting screen and mark interactive elements. For websites, paste a URL. Maze can inject tracking code or test public URLs without modification.

Step 2: Define tasks and success

Add tasks like “Find and purchase a blue sweater in size large.” Specify which screen indicates success (the order confirmation). Set optional follow-up questions: “How difficult was this task?” Maze tracks completion rate (did they reach the success screen?), misclicks (did they tap wrong elements?), and time on task.

Step 3: Launch and analyze

Choose “Maze Panel” to recruit from 3 million+ testers, or “Share Link” to send to your users. Set participant criteria (age, location, device, custom screening). Results arrive in 1-2 hours. Review the dashboard: completion rates, heatmaps showing tap clusters, and path analysis revealing unexpected navigation patterns. Export reports or share live links with stakeholders.

Maze in Your Design Workflow

Maze rarely works in isolation. Here’s where it fits in the design process.

• Before Maze: Build prototypes in Figma, define research questions in Notion, create test plans
• During testing: Maze for quantitative metrics, potentially pair with Lookback for video of edge cases
• After Maze: Synthesize findings in Dovetail or Miro, iterate designs in Figma based on data

Common tool pairings:

• Maze + Figma for tight integration: test prototypes without exporting, sync updates automatically
• Maze + Dovetail for combining quantitative Maze data with qualitative research from interviews
• Maze + Lookback for mixed methods: Maze shows how many failed, Lookback video shows why
• Maze + FullStory for continuous validation: Maze tests prototypes, FullStory monitors live product behavior

Common Problems (and How to Fix Them)

These issues come up regularly with Maze. Here’s how to solve them.

“Participants aren’t completing tasks”

Low completion rates often mean tasks are too vague or prototypes are broken. Bad: “Explore the app.” Better: “Find the cheapest flight from SF to NYC on March 15.” Give participants a specific goal with enough detail to know when they’ve succeeded. Test your prototype manually first to confirm all interactive elements work. A 40% completion rate might indicate real usability problems or broken prototype links.

“Heatmaps show random clicks everywhere”

This happens when participants don’t understand what to do. Add context before tasks: “Imagine you’re planning a weekend trip…” helps participants understand the scenario. Make sure your prototype has enough visual cues. If users click non-interactive elements, they expect those elements to do something. Either make them interactive or redesign to look less clickable.

“Results contradict our assumptions”

Good. That’s the point. When data shows users prefer the design you liked least, resist the urge to dismiss it as “they don’t get it.” Run a follow-up test with written questions asking why they chose that option. Or pair with video research to understand their reasoning. Sometimes you’re right and need to educate users; often they’re right and revealing actual usability issues.

“We’re testing too many things at once”

Maze tests should focus on one question: “Can users complete checkout?” not “Can users complete checkout AND do they understand our value prop AND which button color performs better?” Split these into separate tests. More focused tests give clearer answers and faster insights. If you must test multiple flows, use separate mazes rather than packing everything into one 15-minute marathon.

“Free tier isn’t enough but $99/month feels expensive”

The free tier limits you to 10 responses per test, which isn’t enough for statistical confidence. If you’re testing infrequently (once a month or less), consider alternatives like UsabilityHub ($89/month with better free tier) or Lyssna ($75/month). If you test weekly, $99/month for unlimited tests is cheaper than alternatives. Calculate cost per test, not monthly price, to compare accurately.