Is Fieldbase a SurveyMonkey alternative?

Yes — if you’ve outgrown SurveyMonkey’s simple form-building and need serious research capabilities: real quotas that hold under concurrent traffic, CBC and MaxDiff with Design Test, SPSS/ASCII export, and programmable logic. If what you need is a form tool with templates and basic reports, SurveyMonkey still fits that job well.

Why would I switch from SurveyMonkey to Fieldbase?

Three common reasons: (1) you need research-grade methods SurveyMonkey doesn’t have (CBC, MaxDiff, interlocking quotas, SPSS-grade exports); (2) you need programmable logic beyond skip rules and quotas; (3) your per-response or per-seat costs have become significant and the use case is specialised enough to justify a research platform instead.

Does Fieldbase cost less than SurveyMonkey?

Fieldbase is free in early access. Going forward, pricing will be scoped to the research-platform market (comparable to platforms like Decipher or Qualtrics for serious use, but transparent and modular). SurveyMonkey is cheaper for low-volume generic surveys; Fieldbase is a better fit when the surveys are complex enough that SurveyMonkey’s limits start to bite.

← Back to Compare Compare · SurveyMonkey alternative

A research-grade
alternative to SurveyMonkey.

SurveyMonkey is a form tool that scaled. Fieldbase is a research platform — real quotas, CBC/MaxDiff with Design Test, SPSS-grade exports, programmable logic, AI that drafts surveys from a spec. For when you’ve outgrown the form.

Talk to us See the platform →

What SurveyMonkey does well

A broad, easy, cheap form-building tool. Great templates. Fast time-to-first-survey for simple questionnaires. Strong brand recognition — easy to get stakeholders to click a link. If what you need is a 10-question feedback form or an event registration with a chart at the end, SurveyMonkey covers that cleanly.

Where SurveyMonkey hits a ceiling

Quotas don’t hold under concurrent load. SurveyMonkey’s quota logic is designed for simple caps, not for rigorous market research cells. Over-quota under heavy traffic is routine.
No real CBC or MaxDiff. You can approximate with grids and ranking, but there’s no design file support, no Design Test, no in-app part-worths or share simulator.
SPSS export is basic. No .dat/.sps syntax pair, no fixed-width ASCII, no companion long CSVs for CBC/MaxDiff, no datamap designer, no templates for trackers.
Logic ceiling. Skip logic and pipe variables cover simple cases. Anything with cross-question validation, computed hidden values, or multi-step quota gates runs into the limits fast.
No code surface. Even power users can’t drop into script when the UI runs out.

Where Fieldbase fits

Real research methods. CBC (choice, rating, ranking), MaxDiff with TURF, card sort, interlocking quotas, qualitative annotation (image heatmaps, text intensity, video dial) — all first-class.
Quotas that hold. Row-level database locks on every completion. The Survey Simulator verifies this by firing parallel completes through the production path. The mechanism, explained.
Analysis-grade exports. SPSS .sav + .dat/.sps pair (PSPP-verified), fixed-width ASCII, CSV with camelCase + BOM, Excel with type hints. Companion long CSVs for CBC/MaxDiff/cardSort/annotation. See export →
Programmable logic. Python-like - script blocks for routing, quota gates, computed hidden values, cross-question validation.
AI drafts the survey from a spec. Upload a Word or PDF questionnaire; AI writes the YAML; you review and ship.

Side-by-side

	Fieldbase	SurveyMonkey
Research methods
CBC (choice/rating/ranking)	First-class, three response modes	No
MaxDiff + TURF	First-class	No
Pre-field Design Test	Design Health + Precision (D-efficiency, implied-N)	No
Interlocking quotas	Yes — multi-dimension with real locks	Simple caps, not interlocked
Card sort	Open/closed/hybrid	No
Qualitative annotation	Image heatmap + text intensity + video dial	No
Logic + authoring
Authoring surface	In-platform code editor (YAML + Python-like scripts)	Drag-and-drop form builder
Programmable scripts (routing, derived values, validation)	Yes — Python-like blocks	Skip logic + simple pipe only
AI drafts the survey from a spec	Yes	Limited AI question suggestions
Fieldwork
Quota precision under concurrent load	Row-level locks per completion — exact	Soft-count; over-quota under traffic is common
Survey simulator (real engine, concurrency testing)	Yes	Test respondent only
Per-language fielding	Launch one language at a time	Multilingual via collector settings
Data + export
SPSS export	.sav + .dat/.sps, PSPP-verified	.sav (basic)
Fixed-width ASCII export	Yes	No
CBC / MaxDiff long-form companion CSVs	Yes, in-pack	N/A
Datamap Designer (templates)	Yes — grid + text editor	No
Mid-field data import (update columns on existing respondents)	Yes — by `respondentId`	No
Pricing
Pricing model	Free in early access	Per-seat tiers + per-response limits
Best fit	Teams who need research-grade methods and reliable quotas	Teams running simple feedback forms, event signups, pulse surveys

When SurveyMonkey is still the right call

Your surveys are simple feedback forms, event registrations, or pulse surveys.
Quota precision doesn’t matter — you’re not reporting cell n’s against a plan.
You don’t need SPSS/ASCII exports; a CSV is enough.
Your team is non-technical and the current workflow suits them.

FAQ

Can my team migrate a SurveyMonkey survey to Fieldbase?

Yes — the standard question types port cleanly. Export the SurveyMonkey survey (or just send us a link), and we’ll show you what the Fieldbase version looks like. Email [email protected].

Is Fieldbase overkill for simple surveys?

Honestly, yes — if your surveys are genuinely simple (10 questions, no logic, no quotas, CSV export is fine), SurveyMonkey or a form tool is less friction. Fieldbase is the right fit when the surveys are complex enough that SurveyMonkey’s limits start to show.