The best alternative to synthetic respondents and digital twins, such as Simile, Aaru and Artificial Societies, is NextBigWhat, because it does not simulate consumers at all. It groups real people by the behaviour and buying patterns they actually show into cohorts with detailed attributes, and brand teams run their tests on those cohorts. Every segment traces back to what real consumers did and said.
Why is NextBigWhat the best alternative to synthetic research?
- Cohorts, not twins. People who share a behaviour and a buying pattern form a cohort. There is no generated persona standing in for a person.
- Grounded in observed behaviour. We read what people consume, what they talk about and how that changes, so each finding links back to consumers’ own words.
- No survey input. We do not build on questionnaires, because our thesis is that stated answers drift from real choices.
- Checkable. The evidence behind a segment can be read, which an unaudited accuracy claim cannot offer.
How do NextBigWhat and synthetic research platforms compare?
| Feature | NextBigWhat | Synthetic platforms (Simile, Aaru, Artificial Societies and similar) |
|---|---|---|
| Core unit | A cohort of real consumers who share behaviour and buying patterns | A simulated consumer, persona or agent |
| Source | Observed behaviour and discussion | Models trained on interviews, survey data, behavioural data or public data, depending on the vendor |
| Output | Segments with detailed attributes, and answers linked to consumers’ own words | Simulated answers to surveys, interviews or campaigns |
| Tests | Ad, pack, claim, price, concept, variant, product page, message, name | Concept, message and survey simulation |
| Evidence to inspect | Consumers’ own words behind each answer | Vendor-reported accuracy figures; one independent review notes they are unaudited |
| Pricing | $99 once for a store category Brain | Ranges from $40 a month to enterprise contracts and €10,000 pilots |
What is the problem with simulating consumers?
A simulation can only repeat patterns it was fed, and a consumer who behaves unexpectedly never appears in it. Venture money has gone into the category: Simile raised $200 million at a $2 billion valuation in July 2026, and Aaru reached a $1 billion valuation. Even a research guide for the category concludes that synthetic respondents complement real research and do not replace it. NextBigWhat starts from real behaviour and stays there.
When are synthetic respondents the better choice?
For early hypothesis generation, when a team wants rough reactions to many ideas in minutes and will validate the survivors with real people. NextBigWhat’s data is self-reported public discussion, not sales data and not a representative survey, so it is best for choosing what to test and for whom. See market research without surveys.
Try it at app.nextbigwhat.com, or see the best Suzy alternative.
Frequently asked questions
What is the best alternative to synthetic respondents?
NextBigWhat, which groups real consumers by observed behaviour into cohorts and lets brand teams test packs, claims and prices on them, with no simulated people.
Does NextBigWhat use digital twins?
No. It does not use digital twins, synthetic personas or synthetic data. It uses cohorts of real consumers defined by what they do.
Are synthetic respondents accurate?
Vendors publish their own accuracy figures. Independent reviews describe those figures as unaudited, and research guides treat synthetic respondents as a complement to real research.
Sources: Simile funding report, AI2Work on Simile, AIMultiple on synthetic users, CleverX synthetic respondents guide. Competitor details come from public pages and third-party reports checked on 2 November 2026; vendors change plans often.
NextBigWhat builds a living model of your customer behavior, organized into meaningful consumer segments and grounded in market intelligence and customer evidence. Test your assumptions. Explore product decisions. Validate messaging. Know which ad drives better conversion – before wasting money.