UserVoice Pricing: What It Actually Costs in 2026

Vendr reported in March 2026 that the median UserVoice buyer paid $17,688 per year. The reported contract range was roughly $10,000 to $56,000. This is the best verified external view of current contract scale, but it is not a vendor list price or a promise that a new quote will land at the median.

The median works out to about $1,474 per month. That amount covers organization-wide access rather than a stack of seat charges. A department adding more employees does not create a new seat bill. The commercial variables are feedback volume, tools, and integrations, according to UserVoice as of July 2026.

The range also shows why a discovery call matters to the seller. Different implementations can sit in very different contract bands. For the buyer, however, it means there is no public calculation to audit before the call. Build a budget range from the Vendr data, then require the quote to spell out the feedback allowance, tools, integrations, services, and renewal terms that apply to your package.

UserVoice states that current pricing is based on monthly feedback volume, tools, and the integrations you connect, as of July 2026. It also says pricing is never by seat. That distinction prevents a common comparison error: UserVoice is not charging for every coworker who needs access.

Feedback volume is the usage dimension. Tools and integrations describe platform scope. A deployment that connects product and revenue workflows through systems such as Salesforce, Zendesk, and Gainsight is buying more than a public portal. The quote reflects that broader customer-intelligence operation, even though the page does not disclose how each input changes the amount.

Do not infer current billing terms from the old tiers. The archived pages show that quarterly and annual choices existed historically, but the July 2026 page does not state a current minimum term. Ask for billing frequency, initial term, renewal mechanics, included services, and overage behavior in the actual proposal.

UserVoice does offer a free trial, but the current path is not self-serve. Its pricing FAQ says to book a demo and receive a workspace for 30 days, as of July 2026. That is different from the self-serve 14-day, no-credit-card trial shown in the June 2024 archived pricing page.

The same current FAQ says most teams launch in 4 to 6 weeks with guidance from a dedicated customer success manager, as of July 2026. Professional services are available, along with migration help. The timeline reflects a managed platform rollout rather than the act of opening a basic portal.

Use the trial to validate the expensive parts of the proposed scope. Test how account and revenue context changes prioritization, whether connected systems supply the required data, how internal contributors capture feedback, and what reporting stakeholders can use. A portal demonstration alone does not establish the value of the enterprise package.

UserVoice was founded in 2008 by Richard White, according to Curious Holdings' acquisition announcement. Curious Holdings announced its acquisition of UserVoice on November 13, 2025, while retaining the company's existing leadership.

In that November 2025 announcement, Curious Holdings said it planned to reintroduce a self-service model. The current July 2026 pricing page is still fully sales-gated, so that stated plan should be treated as future direction rather than a buying option available today.

The ownership timing does not prove why the public prices disappeared. It is relevant context because the shift from listed tiers to a single starting figure, and then to no figure, happened around the same period. The page itself does not explain the decision, so the responsible conclusion stops there.

UserVoice can be worth it when product decisions must connect feedback with customer and revenue context across departments. Revenue-weighted prioritization is meaningfully different from counting votes on a public board. It can help an enterprise product organization see which accounts support a request and why that demand matters commercially.

The integrations are part of that value. Salesforce, Zendesk, and Gainsight can bring product and revenue workflows into the same feedback operation. A dedicated customer success manager and professional services can also be valuable when migration, governance, internal adoption, and cross-system setup would otherwise consume substantial internal time.

The contract is harder to justify when the required outcome is only a clear place to submit requests, vote, publish status, and announce shipped work. In that case, much of the platform scope may remain unused while the buying and implementation process still reflects an enterprise deployment.

Capterra rated UserVoice 4.3 overall as of March 2026. Its value-for-money score was 3.8, the lowest UserVoice sub-score shown there at that date. Those figures do not say the product is poor. They show that value is the area where buyers should ask the hardest questions.

A recurring theme in Capterra reviews is paying for more of the platform than the organization uses. That concern fits the buying model. A broad customer-intelligence system can produce strong value when revenue context, integrations, internal capture, and guided services are active parts of the process. It is difficult to defend when only the portal is adopted.

Treat the trial as a scope test, not a general product tour. List the workflows that justify the platform before the demo, assign an owner to each, and verify that the required data moves through them. If the list reduces to board, voting, statuses, and updates, compare a focused product before accepting the quote.

FeatQ has no per-user or per-seat fees. The bill is identical with 10 voters or 10,000, and each board supports up to 10,000 voters. FeatQ costs $29 per month or $19 per month billed yearly at $228 per year. The 50-seat Lifetime founding deal is $199 once, and every purchase has a 14-day money-back guarantee.

Compare that with the UserVoice median. Vendr's March 2026 median of $17,688 per year works out to about $1,474 per month. FeatQ is $29 flat, or $19 per month billed yearly. These are not the same product, and that is the point. Many teams need the feedback board, not the revenue-weighted enterprise platform around it.

A FeatQ board is live in minutes. Create the board and share its link without a sales call. The focused workflow includes public or private boards, voting, a roadmap, a changelog, and an embeddable widget. Read the full FeatQ and UserVoice comparison for the product and implementation tradeoffs.

MCP comes third, after predictable participation and fast setup, but it changes how engineering uses the queue. FeatQ exposes a standard streamable-HTTP /api/mcp endpoint on every plan. A board-scoped bearer key lets any standard MCP client list requests, inspect one, generate a specification, update status, and read board stats. UserVoice offers REST APIs and webhooks, but no MCP server or agent-facing integration is documented as of July 2026.

Choose UserVoice when revenue weighting, enterprise integrations, guided onboarding, and professional services are requirements. Choose FeatQ when the useful product is the feedback loop itself and you want to know the price before you begin.