Maze pricing teardown
https://maze.co/pricingMaze's pricing page has collapsed to a stark two-tier structure — a limited Free plan and a fully opaque 'Custom pricing' Enterprise tier — with no mid-market self-serve paid plan visible. This is a strong enterprise-lead-gen play with a detailed feature comparison table, but it leaves a wide, unaddressed gap for growing teams who need more than 1 study/month but aren't ready for an enterprise sales conversation.
Tier structure
Free
$0/mo
Enterprise
Custom pricing
Value metric
hybrid: per-seat plus study-volume limits, with Enterprise on custom/negotiated pricing
How limits scale
Escalation logic
Free is a capped starter plan meant to get individuals or small teams into the product, while Enterprise removes all caps and adds panel access, AI moderation, security, and support — but there is no disclosed mid-tier to bridge the two, forcing any team that outgrows Free straight into a sales conversation.
Psychological anchors
- Free tier as entry anchor — 'Free' plan with 'Try Maze for free' CTA lowers the barrier to first touch and seeds the funnel.
- Enterprise as aspirational anchor — Enterprise's long feature list (7M+ participant panel, all AI features, SOC 2 security) makes Free look basic by contrast and primes prospects to expect a sales conversation for real value.
- Feature comparison table — A detailed Free vs Enterprise grid ('Basic' vs 'Advanced' labels) visually reinforces the value gap and nudges viewers toward contacting sales.
- Trust/security badge — SOC 2 Type II certification called out specifically under the Enterprise tier to reduce enterprise buyer risk.
What this page is optimizing for
The page is optimized for enterprise lead generation, not self-serve conversion — there's no visible paid self-serve plan, no public price for the tier most features live behind, and the CTA for anything beyond Free is 'Contact sales.'
Red flags
- No visible paid mid-tier plan — jumping from a 1-study/month Free plan directly to fully custom Enterprise pricing leaves a large unserved segment.
- Enterprise pricing is completely opaque with no starting price, range, or seat-based estimate to anchor expectations.
- Comparison table uses vague qualifiers like 'Basic' vs 'Advanced' without defining what those levels actually include.
- No annual/monthly toggle or discount is visible anywhere on the page.
- Only 2 tiers total is unusually thin for a hybrid usage/seat model and suggests plans were removed or hidden versus a prior pricing structure.
- Free plan's 1 study/month cap is extremely restrictive, which may frustrate rather than convert trial users before they see enough value.
Best-practices scorecard
What works · 1
- Clear CTAs per tier — Each tier has a distinct, clear CTA ('Try Maze for free' vs 'Contact sales').
Half measures · 4
- Visible prices — Free is $0 and clear, but Enterprise has no price, range, or estimator.
- Value metric matches usage — Seats and study volume scale sensibly, but the jump from 1 study/month to 'Custom' offers no intermediate anchor.
- Tier differences are scannable — A full feature comparison table exists, but many rows use vague 'Basic' vs 'Advanced' labels without specifics.
- Trust signals present — SOC 2 Type II certification and customer logos/case studies are referenced, but concentrated mainly under Enterprise.
What's missing · 3
- Clear recommended tier — No 'Most Popular' or highlighted plan is shown between only two tiers.
- Annual discount offered — No monthly/annual toggle or discount messaging appears on the page.
- FAQ or objection handling — No FAQ section or objection-handling copy is present on the page content provided.