Reynard vs Synthetic Users:interviews or a population read-out

    Both tools simulate people instead of recruiting them, so the usual 'real versus synthetic' argument does not separate them. What separates them is shape: one is research-interview shaped, the other is population shaped.

    Side by side

    Structural differences only. Where a figure would be a guess, it is left out.

    Research shape

    Synthetic Users
    Qualitative: interviews, discovery, UX conversations
    Reynard
    Quantitative-shaped read-out: a weighted cross-section reacting to one thing

    Unit of output

    Synthetic Users
    An interview transcript you read and code
    Reynard
    An acceptance score plus quotes per segment

    Who is represented

    Synthetic Users
    Personas you define for the study
    Reynard
    A market cross-section weighted on public population data

    Best moment in the process

    Synthetic Users
    Early discovery, when you are still forming the question
    Reynard
    Later, when there is a concrete idea, price or campaign to put to a market

    Depth per respondent

    Synthetic Users
    Deep, conversational, follow-up questions
    Reynard
    One reaction per agent, with the reasoning behind it

    Breadth across a market

    Synthetic Users
    As many personas as you script
    Reynard
    The full segment and region grid of the panel

    Commercial model

    Synthetic Users
    Subscription-style research platform
    Reynard
    Per run, free first check, no account

    When to pick Synthetic Users

    There are decisions where Synthetic Users is the right tool and Reynard is not. These are those decisions.

    You do not know the question yet

    Discovery work is conversational: you follow an answer somewhere you did not plan to go. An interview-shaped tool supports that; a population read-out does not.

    You need UX depth on a flow

    Walking a persona through a product experience and probing at each step is a different job from asking a market whether it accepts a price.

    Your team works in transcripts

    If your research practice is built on coding qualitative material, output shaped like an interview slots straight into how you already work.

    What Reynard gives you

    Every run returns the same shape of output, whichever market you point it at.

    • A weighted cross-section of the market rather than whoever happened to answer — the Dutch panel is built on CBS population data plus the eight Mentality value groups, the US panel on Census Bureau data plus eight value segments.
    • An acceptance score for the idea, price or campaign you submitted, broken down per segment instead of as one average.
    • Quotes per segment: the reasoning behind the score, in the words of that group, so you can see why a segment rejects something.
    • Region and segment breakdowns, so a national 'yes' does not hide a regional 'no'.
    • A downloadable report (PDF and Markdown) you can paste into a deck or a ticket.
    • A result in roughly the time it takes to read this page, at a per-run price, with a free first check and no account.

    The honest limit

    Reynard is a simulation. It is not fieldwork, it carries no statistical significance, and it cannot replace talking to a customer. Treat it as a fast, structured second opinion that tells you where to look — not as evidence.

    Keep reading

    Run the free check first

    One check costs nothing and needs no account. You see the format of the output before you decide whether it is worth paying for a full run.

    Start the free check