UserJot pricing

UserJot costs $29 a month, with 2 boards free and 5 boards at the $29 entry tier. It's priced flat, per workspace, not per tracked user and not per seat. That single choice avoids the two traps this category is full of, and it's worth saying plainly: this is the fairest pricing model we've checked, and it deserves the fairest teardown we can write.

What does UserJot actually cost?

Checked 20 August 2026, against UserJot's own pricing page.

$29 a month is $348 a year, and $1,044 over three years. That's not the cheapest number in the category (Frill.co's $22-a-month, $264-a-year plan undercuts it, and Docket's $99 once undercuts everyone), but it's a number that stays put. Whatever UserJot costs you in month one is what it costs you in month thirty-six, provided you don't need more than five feature request boards or more workspaces.

Why does flat per-workspace pricing matter?

Because the other two ways this category prices itself both grow while you use the product, and neither growth is something you control.

Canny.io prices by tracked user: anyone who posts, votes or comments. That count only rises, since nobody untracks themselves by losing interest. Canny.io's entry tier is $79 a month billed yearly, and at 5,000 tracked users, on that same yearly billing, it's $1,079 a month. Featurebase prices by seat, at $29 a seat a month billed yearly: $348 for one person, $696 for two, $1,044 for three, before any usage-based add-ons.

UserJot does neither. Adding a customer who votes on something doesn't move the bill. Adding a colleague who needs to answer requests doesn't move the bill. The only thing that changes UserJot's price is the number of workspaces and boards you run, which is a decision you make rather than a number your customers or your headcount produce on your behalf. That's a genuinely different design choice from the rest of the category, and it's the reason this is the fairest post in this series to write.

What does UserJot do better?

UserJot's AI runs duplicate detection as the customer is typing, catching a repeat request before it's even submitted rather than after someone has to notice and merge it later. When a request is marked complete, UserJot's AI drafts the changelog entry from the original post, then emails every voter and commenter on that request directly, closing a loop that most tools leave you to close by hand. Its Canny.io importer moves boards, posts, votes, comments, statuses and users across in about two minutes, which matters if the reason you're reading this page is that you're already paying Canny.io and comparing what leaving would cost. And it ships a remote MCP server, which is worth checking if you or your team already work with AI tooling that talks over MCP.

What does UserJot say self-hosting actually costs?

This is the part of UserJot's own site worth reading even if you never buy from them. On /compare/fider-alternative, UserJot published a costed breakdown of running Fider, the open-source feature request tool, yourself: Postgres at about $20 a month, a host at $20 to $40, transactional email at $10 to $35, and monitoring and TLS at $20 to $30. Add it up and their own figure is $70 to $125 a month in infrastructure, before any engineering time, plus five to ten hours a month of ongoing effort once traffic is real once it's deployed. Annualised, that's $840 to $1,500 a year in hosting alone.

That's the single most useful number anyone in this category has published, and UserJot published it while arguing against self-hosting. It's honest enough to concede the real question directly. Their framing is that free is the licence, not the operation, and that's a fair point against a database-backed tool like Fider, which genuinely does need Postgres, a host and a mail server running somewhere.

Is Fider ever the better choice? Yes.

UserJot, Fider alternative

It's a weaker point against a tool that doesn't have a database to run. Docket is static files plus two small endpoints, so the $70-to-$125-a-month cost UserJot costed out for Fider doesn't apply to it. That's an architectural difference in what's being hosted, not a rebuttal of UserJot's arithmetic, which holds up.

How does UserJot compare over three years?

$348 in year one, $1,044 over three years, flat, because nothing about UserJot's price moves with how many people show up to use your feature request board. Against Docket's $99 once, that's still real money by year three, and against Frill.co's $792 over the same period, UserJot isn't the cheapest subscription in the category either. What it buys instead is a bill you can actually predict twelve months out, which the tracked-user and per-seat models in this category can't offer at any price. The full multi-year table, with a calculator, is in what feedback tools actually cost.

If predictability is worth more to you than the lowest possible number, UserJot's flat rate is the honest reason to pick it over Canny.io or Featurebase, and its AI tooling and Canny.io importer are real reasons to pick it over the rest of the category too.

Frequently asked questions