Best UserVoice Alternatives in 2026 (Compared)

Usero opens a GitHub pull request from user feedback. When reports cluster around the same fixable problem, it reads your repo and drafts the code, so the top request comes back as a reviewable diff instead of a five-figure backlog. Full disclosure, this is my product. It drafts the code, the merge is always your call.

The board, the voting, and the public roadmap are deliberately boring substrate. Where UserVoice is built to organize and report on feedback at enterprise scale and then communicate status back to requesters, Usero takes one piece of feedback and writes a first pass at the fix. That is the whole difference: feedback that ends in a diff, not a well-tagged backlog.

Honest limits, because they are real. Usero is a focused early-stage tool for one small team. It has nothing like UserVoice org-wide customer intelligence, the volume-handling for thousands of inbound requests, or the decade-long track record. If you are a large product org that needs to give hundreds of people access to a prioritized feedback dataset, Usero is the wrong shape and UserVoice is built for exactly that.

UserVoice predates most of this category and has settled into enterprise customer intelligence: capturing feedback from many channels, deduping it, prioritizing by segment, and reporting at a scale a feedback widget does not reach. 4.5 across 243 G2 reviews (checked 2026-08-20) reflects a durable, proven product among its enterprise base. The not-per-seat model is a real fit for big cross-functional teams that want everyone to see the insights.

The trade-offs are who it is for and where the work ends. There is no free tier and no self-serve signup; the trial workspace comes after you book a demo. The pricing page no longer prints a number at all (checked 2026-08-20), but it listed a 16,000-dollars-a-year floor on a June 2026 check and 2026 third-party roundups still put the floor there, with average contracts around 21,000 dollars, scaled by feedback volume. And like the rest of this set, UserVoice stops at organizing and reporting. The engineer still writes the code.

Fider is the default answer to "open-source UserVoice alternative": AGPL-3.0, 4.5k GitHub stars, actively maintained, a Go backend with a React frontend that deploys with Docker. Users submit ideas, discuss, and vote; you tag statuses like planned and completed. Self-hosted it costs you a server and nothing else, with no tracked-user meter, no seat count, and the data sits in your own Postgres. If you do not want to run it, the hosted version is free up to a 250-feedback-item fair-use limit with unlimited customers and team members, and Pro is 49 dollars a month (checked 2026-08-20).

The honest limits: statuses are as far as it goes, there is no dedicated roadmap view, no changelog, and no AI clustering, so deduping a busy board is manual. Self-hosting also means upgrades, backups, and email delivery are your job. But against a quote-only enterprise contract, a free board you control end to end is the sharpest possible counter, and it is the tool this page exists to name for the open-source searchers.

Astuto is the second name that comes up for open-source feedback boards: AGPL-3.0, 2.3k GitHub stars, Docker Compose deployment, and a wider surface than Fider, with a roadmap view, a moderation queue, anonymous posting, webhooks for Jira, Trello, and Slack, and a REST API.

The catch is a big one: the repository was archived on 2026-02-08 and is no longer maintained, so there will be no new features and, more importantly, no security patches (checked 2026-08-20). It still runs, and for an internal board behind your own auth that may be fine. For a public, internet-facing portal, start with Fider instead; it is the one of the two still shipping commits.

If UserVoice is more platform and more budget than you need, Featurebase is the obvious managed step down: a forever-free plan for one seat, then Growth at 29 dollars per seat a month billed yearly, with boards, AI clustering, roadmap, changelog, and a support inbox whose Fibi AI agent is metered at 49 cents per AI resolution (checked 2026-08-20). It is the tool people name most often when they leave Canny.

The per-seat model is the thing to price out: a five-admin team pays five times the sticker, where UserVoice deliberately never charges by seat. It also still ends at a synced GitHub issue rather than written code. But it gets you most of the organizing surface without a sales call.

Canny is the closest thing this category has to a default: polished boards, a deep integration catalog, and Autopilot AI that captures and deduplicates feedback, included on all plans. The free plan caps at 25 tracked users and Pro starts at 79 dollars a month billed yearly for 100 or more tracked users, with Business on custom pricing (checked on canny.io 2026-08-20).

The catch is the meter. A tracked user is anyone who posts, votes, or comments, so a public board burns through the allowance fast and the sticker price is the entry point, not the bill. That math is the most common complaint about Canny. It is still the safest managed pick for a funded team stepping down from UserVoice: same organizing job, a fraction of the contract, self-serve signup.

Sleekplan packs a feedback board, roadmap, changelog, and NPS and CSAT surveys behind a single floating widget. The Indie tier is free forever with the board, roadmap, and changelog for one admin; Starter is 13 dollars a month with 3 seats and Business 38 with 10, billed yearly, with AI metered as monthly credits, 1,000 on Starter and 5,000 on Business, and a 30-day trial on paid plans (checked 2026-08-20). Against a quote-only enterprise contract, this is the far end of the price spectrum.

The rough edges are operational: reviewers report there is no duplicate-post detection or bulk editing, so a busy board clutters, and the custom domain waits for the 38-dollar Business tier. At enterprise feedback volume it is the wrong shape; at startup volume it is the cheapest managed way to run the whole loop.

Frill charges flat, not per seat and not per tracked user: Startup is 25 dollars a month with unlimited teammates and tracked users, capped at 50 active ideas and 1 survey; Business at 49 lifts the cap to unlimited ideas; Growth is 149 and Enterprise 349. The vendor pricing page blocks bots on check, so those figures come from a third-party breakdown updated August 2026; confirm on frill.co (checked 2026-08-20).

Watch the add-ons: privacy is 25 dollars a month extra, surveys 25, and white-label 100 on the lower tiers, so the 25-dollar sticker can become 74 or more once you add what you came for. No AI clustering either. It is a clean, well-liked board for a team whose feedback volume fits inside 50 active ideas or who will pay 49 for unlimited.

Nolt is the deliberately narrow one: a public voting board, comments, and a roadmap, with SSO on every plan and unlimited users, posts, and admins. Reviewers rate it about 4.9 across roughly 45 Capterra reviews and describe setup in minutes.

It prices per board with no free plan: 29 dollars a month for one board on annual billing (39 monthly), 69 for up to five (89 monthly), and a 10-day Pro trial. The Nolt pricing page blocks bots, so those figures come from a third-party roundup updated August 2026; they have held steady across checks but are worth a glance at nolt.io (checked 2026-08-20). There is no changelog and integrations are few. As a UserVoice replacement it covers exactly one job, the public voting portal, and none of the customer-intelligence reporting.