Compare · checked September 2026
Uxerfy vs UXAudit.Now
One is a person; the other is software. That is the whole comparison, and everything below is that sentence in detail. If you already know you need volume, benchmarks and white-label PDFs, you need their tool, and this page says so.
The short version
- You have many pages or many sites and need them all scored, repeatedly.
- You are an agency and want to put audits under your own brand.
- You want a score history, benchmarks against a database, and integrations into Figma or Linear.
- You have never run a ruleset over your product — start with their free tier.
- You have one page where the money is, and you need to know what to fix first.
- You want the reasoning, in sentences, from someone who has shipped the kind of screen you are auditing.
- Your problem is intent — the page is technically correct and still not working.
- You want to forward one PDF to the person who ships the change, with no tool to log into.
Row by row
| Criterion | UXAudit.Now | Uxerfy |
|---|---|---|
| What it is | A software product: an AI agent that visits a URL, screenshots it and scores it against a rule library, plus a guided manual review tool. | A service: one senior product designer reads your page and writes the report. |
| Who does the reading | A model (Claude Vision) applying ~1,450 rules across five platform types. | Sergio Gualda, every time. No team, no subcontracting. |
| Time to report | Minutes. | 48 hours for a page, 3 working days for a flow. |
| Price | Free demo; $49, $199 or $499 a month on credits (a typical e-commerce audit is ~1,420 credits, so the Pro plan covers roughly one a month). | $149 per page, $349 per flow, or $129 a month for one page a month with re-scores. |
| What you get | A 0–100 score by category, findings by severity, benchmarks against their database, PDF export on paid plans, integrations (Figma, Slack, Linear, Notion). | A 1–10 score with the reasoning, 3 critical blockers ordered by cost to you, 5 quick wins, a line-by-line copy read, annotated screenshots. One PDF. |
| Coverage | Broad. Every rule, every time — contrast, tap targets, heading structure, security headers, performance, readability. | Narrow on purpose. One page or one flow, four lenses, and a decision about what to fix first. |
| Judgement | Consistent, and blind to intent: it cannot tell you that your four plans are correct and still nobody knows which one is theirs. | That finding is the job. Whether the page does what it is for, and why not. |
| Re-checking after fixes | Re-run any time within your credits; score history over time. | Re-audit as an extra, or the ongoing plan re-scores every earlier page monthly. |
| Volume | Unlimited pages, many sites, white-label reports for agencies. | 10 audits a week, total. That ceiling is what keeps the 48 hours true. |
| Guarantee | 14-day money-back on paid plans. | Redo or full refund if the report is not useful; a late report is refunded. |
Their own vs manual audits page says the same thing from the other side: a tool wins on time, cost and consistency; a person wins on synthesis and on recommendations specific to your product. I agree with them.
What a tool structurally cannot see
Take a pricing page with four plans. Every plan is legible, every button is large enough, every contrast ratio passes. A ruleset scores it well. The page is still failing, because none of the four plans says who it is for, and the visitor who arrived to be told which one is theirs leaves to think about it. That is not a rule violation. It is a judgement about what the page is for — and it is the single most common finding in the public teardowns.
The reverse is also true. I will miss a 4.4:1 contrast ratio that a ruleset catches every time. Run the tool for the mechanical layer. Order the audit for the layer above it.
Questions people ask before choosing
Is Uxerfy an AI UX audit tool?
No. Uxerfy is a service: a person reads your page and writes the report. I use the same automated checks anyone can run for the mechanical parts — contrast, tap targets, headings — and do the part a tool cannot: decide what is costing you the most and say so plainly.
Should I run UXAudit.Now before ordering a Uxerfy audit?
If you have never checked your product against a ruleset, yes — their free tier or any comparable tool will catch mechanical issues faster than I will, and the audit you then order from me can spend all of its attention on the things a ruleset cannot see. The two are not substitutes.
Which is cheaper?
For one page, once: Uxerfy at $149, against a month of their Pro plan at $199. For thirty pages a month, or an agency running audits for clients under its own brand: their tool, by a wide margin. The prices answer different questions.
How do you know what UXAudit.Now does?
From their public site, checked in September 2026: the home page, the pricing page, their platform pages and their own comparison with manual audits. If something here is out of date, email hello@uxerfy.com and I will correct it.
One page, one person, one PDF.
If the page that matters is one page, this is the faster way to find out what to change. Every price is on the pricing page.
Get my audit · $149 →