Comparison
Looking for a Feedbucket alternative? Here is the honest version.
- Feedbucket
- Flat, per site tiers
- UserWants
- One plan, unlimited projects
What they are
Feedbucket in one sentence
Straight answer
Where each one wins
Pick Feedbucket for
Annotation for client review
Clients mark up the page directly. That is the entire product and UserWants has no drawing tools.
Project management integrations
Feedback flows into Jira, Trello, Asana and similar. UserWants keeps everything in its own inbox.
Built around the agency handoff
The whole workflow assumes a client reviewing a build, which is a job UserWants does not model at all.
Pick UserWants for
Evidence without a reviewer
Feedbucket assumes someone reviewing on purpose. UserWants collects the JavaScript error and the click trail from anyone, including a customer who just wanted to buy something.
Unlimited projects on one plan
No per-site tiers to climb as you take on more work.
MCP access for your editor
Your agent reads whole reports and updates statuses without anyone opening a browser.
Side by side
Feature comparison
| Feature | UserWants | Feedbucket |
|---|---|---|
| Install | One script tag | One script tag |
| Annotation tools | No | Yes |
| Reporter needs an account | No | No |
| JavaScript errors + stack traces | Up to 10, automatic | Basic |
| Steps before the report | Last 50, automatic | No |
| Integrations | None | Jira, Trello, Asana |
| MCP for coding agents | Yes, OAuth, 3 tools | No |
| Feature requests | Same inbox | No |
| Built for | Product teams | Agencies |
| Pricing | Flat, unlimited projects | Per site tiers |
Verdict
Which one to pick
These are aimed at different buyers and the overlap is thinner than the category listing suggests. Feedbucket is an agency tool: a client opens a staging link, circles what is wrong, and it becomes a ticket. If that is your business, it fits better than UserWants ever will. UserWants is for a live product where the reporters are users and the evidence has to be gathered without them.
UserWants is for
Live products collecting reports from real users
Feedbucket is for
Agencies running client review on staging builds
FAQ
Before you switch
- Can UserWants be used for client feedback on a staging site?
- It works — the domain allowlist covers staging hosts and localhost — but you would be giving up the annotation that makes client review workable. For a client circling layout problems, Feedbucket is the better tool and this is not a close call.
- What does UserWants collect that Feedbucket does not?
- Up to 10 uncaught JavaScript errors with their stack frames, and the last 50 clicks, form submits and page changes, all buffered from page load. That is the evidence a developer needs and a client would never think to write down.
- Is there a per-site charge?
- No. One plan covers unlimited projects and widgets with nothing metered, so running eight client sites costs the same as running one. There is no per-seat charge either.
Try it beside Feedbucket.
Paste the tag on the same site and run both for a sprint. The reports arrive in parallel and nothing about your current setup changes.