A concept test asks a simple question — does this idea land with anyone outside the room it was invented in? Agencies do it with recruited respondents over several weeks. This page is about doing it yourself in an afternoon, and being clear-eyed about what that version is worth.
Not to decide whether to build something. That decision has more inputs than any test can carry. A concept test is for finding the misunderstanding early: the part of the idea people read differently from how you meant it, and the group that hears something you did not intend to say.
The most valuable outcome is rarely a score. It is a sentence in a quote where someone has understood the concept as a completely different product, because that is the sentence that tells you the description is doing the wrong job.
That is why a concept test is worth running before the build rather than after: at the concept stage the cost of the change is a paragraph.
The most common way a concept test goes wrong is that the concept is written as an internal document. It names the category, explains the strategy, lists the differentiators and quietly tells the reader how to feel about all of it.
Nobody meets a product that way. They meet a shelf, an app store listing, a search result, a sentence from a friend. If you test the brief you learn how the panel reacts to a brief, which is a question nobody needed answered.
Write instead the two or three sentences a stranger would actually encounter, with the price if there is one, and with no argument attached. If the concept cannot survive being written that plainly, that is itself the finding.
Two or three sentences, the words a stranger would see, including the price and what it replaces. No positioning language, no 'unlike other tools', no adjectives you would not put on the packaging.
Choose the country the concept is for. The panel is weighted to that population, so the same concept run against two markets is genuinely two different reads. The first check costs nothing and needs no account.
Open the per-segment breakdown first and look for the widest gap, then read that segment's quotes. The average is the least informative number in the report; the disagreement is where the decision is.
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.
The first check is free and needs no account, so you can see the shape of the output before deciding whether it is worth paying for. After that a run is $12, $25 or $39 one-off in dollar markets, and €9, €19 or €29 in euro markets. There is no subscription.
The same run described as a job to be done, with the report contents step by step.
Read the comparisonPut a price to a weighted cross-section and read which segment stops accepting it first.
Read the comparisonA simulated cross-section of a population: how it is built, how it is weighted, and the limit it cannot cross.
Read the comparisonNo accuracy figure has been published. This page says why, and states the experiment intended to produce one.
Read the comparisonThe first check costs nothing and needs no account. Write the thing you are testing, pick the market, read the report.
Read the comparisonOne 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