Is Fieldbase an Alchemer alternative?

Yes — Fieldbase targets the same programmable-survey niche Alchemer sits in. Both let you go beyond drag-and-drop with scripting, APIs, and custom logic. Fieldbase adds a modern DSL (YAML + Python-like scripts) in a browser editor, AI that drafts the survey from a Word/PDF spec, and pre-fielding Design Test for CBC/MaxDiff.

How does Fieldbase scripting compare to Alchemer scripting?

Alchemer uses Lua + JavaScript-based custom scripting plus a web action builder. Fieldbase uses Python-like syntax in dedicated - script: blocks that sit alongside question blocks in YAML. Same accessors (QAge.value, quota().isFull(), hIndex.set()) work in scripts, if: conditions, and piped display text.

Can Fieldbase export to the same analysis formats as Alchemer?

Yes — SPSS (.sav binary or .dat + .sps syntax pair), CSV with camelCase + BOM, Excel with proper type hints, fixed-width ASCII. Companion long CSVs for CBC/MaxDiff ship in the same download pack. The Datamap Designer lets you lock column layouts into templates so trackers ship column-identical wave after wave.

← Back to Compare Compare · Alchemer alternative

A modern alternative
to Alchemer.

Alchemer (formerly SurveyGizmo) covers the programmable-survey middle ground. Fieldbase covers it with a modern DSL, AI that drafts the survey from a spec, pre-fielding Design Test for CBC/MaxDiff, and transparent pricing.

Talk to us See the platform →

What Alchemer does well

A deep, flexible platform that bridges simple form-building and full enterprise research. Strong custom-script surface (Lua + JavaScript), extensive API, mature workflow actions, and a loyal base of market research users who’ve been there since the SurveyGizmo days. For teams who need deep customization without the Qualtrics price tag, Alchemer is a real option.

Where Fieldbase differs

Modern DSL in a browser editor. YAML + Python-like - script blocks. Reads cleaner than Lua in form actions, easier for AI to work with. See scripting →
AI drafts the survey from a spec document. Upload a Word/PDF questionnaire; AI writes the YAML; you review and ship.
AI chat for live edits. Plain English edits in any language. "Make Q7 required if S2 is Male" → AI proposes the diff, you accept.
Pre-field Design Test for CBC/MaxDiff. Design Health and Precision scorecards (D-efficiency, implied-N) sit next to the design in the editor. See choice modeling →
Real-respondent survey simulator. Not a preview — fires parallel completes through the production path, verifies quota cells hit target exactly. See simulator →
Transparent pricing. Free in early access; no per-response enterprise contract model.

Side-by-side

	Fieldbase	Alchemer
Authoring + scripting
Authoring surface	In-platform YAML editor + Python-like scripts	Drag-and-drop + Lua/JS custom scripts
AI drafts the survey from a spec document	Yes	No
AI chat for live edits	Yes — any language	Limited rule-based assistant
Scripting language	Python-like, concise	Lua + JavaScript action-based
Research methods
CBC (choice/rating/ranking)	First-class, three response modes	Available via custom scripting or add-on
MaxDiff + TURF	First-class; TURF in-app	Available via custom scripting or add-on
Pre-field Design Test (D-efficiency, implied-N)	Yes — in-editor scorecards	No native workflow
In-app CBC utilities + share simulator	Aggregate MNL + live share-of-preference	Export-only to external tools
Card sort	Open/closed/hybrid first-class	Via scripting
Qualitative annotation (heatmap, text intensity, video dial)	First-class with in-app viewer	Image heatmap; others limited
Fieldwork
Quota precision under concurrent load	Row-level locks per completion — exact	Standard quota logic
Real-respondent survey simulator	Fires parallel completes through the production path	Preview / test respondents (limited concurrency)
Per-language fielding	Launch one language at a time	Multilingual via project settings
Data + export
SPSS export	.sav + .dat/.sps, PSPP-verified	.sav
Fixed-width ASCII export	Yes — datamap-driven	Via custom report
CBC / MaxDiff long-form companion CSVs	Yes — in-pack	Via custom scripting
Partial exports (date / row / variable filter stackable)	Yes — filters run at export time	Via filter + report workflow
Datamap Designer with templates	Grid + text editor, templates per tracker	Report-level variable management
Mid-field data import	Yes — by `respondentId`	Supported with limitations
Pricing + vendor
Pricing model	Free in early access	Per-seat tiered subscriptions + enterprise
Procurement	Lightweight — direct contact	Sales-led
Best fit	Teams who want modern DSL + AI drafting + CBC/MaxDiff Design Test	Teams on existing Alchemer workflows with deep Lua/JS customizations

When Alchemer is still the right call

You have significant Lua/JS custom-script investment and no appetite to port.
You rely on specific Alchemer workflow actions or integrations that haven’t been built yet in Fieldbase.
Your team is highly fluent in Alchemer’s builder and the learning curve for a new DSL isn’t worth the gain.

FAQ

Can we migrate an Alchemer survey to Fieldbase?

Yes — the standard research question types port cleanly, and the scripting intent translates (quota gates, computed values, conditional routing all map to Fieldbase - script blocks). Email [email protected] with a sample survey and we’ll walk you through it.

Does Fieldbase have the API surface Alchemer does?

Fieldbase exposes the same operational surface — survey state, quota state, respondent data, exports — via ?env=-switchable endpoints. The API footprint is smaller today than Alchemer’s two decades of surface area; if there’s a specific endpoint your workflow needs, tell us.