FeedbackKit vs Luciq (formerly Instabug): Feature Voting Compared

If you used Instabug for crash and bug reports, you may have noticed its Feature Requests screen: users suggest ideas and vote on them without leaving the app. Instabug is now called Luciq, and that screen is still there. FeedbackKit does the feature-request part and nothing else, for app teams who want voting without a full observability platform. This post compares the two on that common ground.

We make FeedbackKit, so read this with that in mind. Every Luciq fact below comes from Luciq's own pages: luciq.ai, its pricing page, its newsroom and its documentation, checked on 17 October 2026 and linked where used. The side-by-side table is on our FeedbackKit vs Luciq comparison page.

The short version

• Luciq is an enterprise mobile observability platform for iOS, Android, React Native and Flutter: crash reporting, bug reporting, performance monitoring, session replay, in-app surveys and AI agents, with in-app feature requests as one part. Prices are not published; plans are sold after a demo.
• FeedbackKit is a feature-request and voting tool with native SDKs for Swift and SwiftUI, Kotlin with Jetpack Compose, Flutter and React Native. It ranks requests by MRR, syncs them with nine issue trackers on Pro and up, and has a free plan and public prices.
• They do not have to compete. A team can run Luciq for crashes and FeedbackKit for feature voting, though the two do not connect to each other.

Instabug is now Luciq

Luciq's newsroom lists the Business Wire release "Instabug Becomes Luciq.ai, Pioneers New Category: Agentic Mobile Observability", dated 24 September 2025, and instabug.com/pricing now redirects to luciq.ai/pricing. The footer reads "Luciq (formerly Instabug)". The SDKs and docs use the new name, so the iOS call that opens the board is FeatureRequests.show() from the Luciq SDK.

What each product is for

Luciq describes itself as mobile observability built for mobile. Its documentation index covers crash reporting (crashes, app hangs, ANRs), bug reporting with logs and screenshots, app performance monitoring, session replay, in-app surveys including NPS and app-rating surveys, feature flags and AI features. Its AI agents, Companion and Autopilot, triage issues and, per the homepage, can write fixes and open pull requests. You can also reply to a user who filed a bug or survey response through an in-app chat.

FeedbackKit has none of that: no crash or bug reporting, no session replay, no surveys and no in-app chat. It is a feedback board with votes, comments, statuses and integrations, inside your app.

Feature requests in each

Luciq's feature-request docs for iOS and Android describe users submitting ideas, voting and commenting on other users' requests, and seeing the status of each idea, all inside the app. You moderate requests and update their status from the Luciq dashboard. The show feature requests reference has the same one-line call for iOS, Android, React Native and Flutter, which you hook to a button in your app. Users are asked for an email when they post a request or a comment. An email is required by default; apps can make it optional. A public web board is not listed.

FeedbackKit's SDKs show a request list, a submit form, a detail view with comments and vote buttons in native screens: Swift and SwiftUI for iOS, macOS and visionOS 26 or later, Kotlin with Jetpack Compose, Flutter and React Native. A new request starts with its submitter's vote, and voting stops once a request is Completed or Rejected. If you want the board on your website too, FeedbackKit can show a roadmap and a board of requests on your own website through an iframe, and visitors can vote on the board when you turn voting on. It has no changelog for your users.

Two caveats from our side. Luciq's docs also cover Kotlin Multiplatform, which FeedbackKit does not. And FeedbackKit's Swift SDK needs iOS 26, macOS 26 or visionOS 26 or later, so it does not fit an app that supports older iOS versions.

Deciding what to build

This is where the two think differently. Luciq's Opportunities feature, in beta, uses AI to read bug reports, app store reviews and survey responses and turn them into a ranked list of what to build next. Its pricing page groups this under Sentiment. Luciq does not list ranking feature requests by revenue.

FeedbackKit keeps it to votes and money. On every plan, your app passes each user's MRR through the SDK, and you can sort requests by the total MRR of the users behind them. Requests move through six statuses on every plan: Pending, Approved, In Progress, TestFlight, Completed and Rejected. Pro and up choose which ones a project uses, and there are no custom statuses. For Trailmate, the sample hiking app, you can see at a glance that Offline maps leads on votes and on MRR, and move it from Pending to TestFlight as the build gets closer.

Here is how that looks in FeedbackKit, with sample data from a fictional hiking app:

Integrations

Luciq's integration list is long. It includes Jira Cloud and Jira Server, Linear, GitHub, GitLab, ClickUp, Asana, Trello, Azure DevOps and Shortcut, plus Slack, Microsoft Teams, Zendesk, Freshdesk, Front, Zapier, webhooks and an MCP server. Its Jira Cloud page describes two-way sync of status and comments. Read the scope carefully, though: the integration pages describe sending bug reports, crashes and alerts, and do not mention feature requests.

FeedbackKit's nine trackers differ in what they sync after a ticket exists: GitHub has no comment sync, and GitHub, Linear, Trello and Basecamp have no vote-count sync. The matrix is on the integrations page.

Closing the loop

Luciq's docs say you can contact users to ask for more detail or tell them about upcoming releases, and users see each request's status in the app.

FeedbackKit emails the submitter on every plan when a request moves to a status on the project's list. Choosing that list needs Pro, and emailing voters who opted in needs Team. A rejected request can carry a reason that goes into the email. Your team gets email for new requests on every plan, and push for new requests and new comments in the FeedbackKit app. New-comment email to the team needs Pro, and Slack is on Pro and up. Your app's users get status email, never push. More in closing the loop with status emails.

Pricing

Luciq publishes no prices. Its pricing page describes one plan "priced on DAU and Seats", in two support levels, and FeedbackKit's prices are on our pricing page:

Luciq's price scales with daily active users and member seats. Its FAQ says DAU is the higher of app store data and its own SDK telemetry, reviewed twice a year against a rolling six-month average. To try it, you request a demo, and Luciq may set up a limited technical proof of concept. There is no self-serve free plan or trial listed. FeedbackKit's price does not grow with your users: there is no limit on how many people vote, and Free shows 10 feedback items per project, saving any past that and leaving them off the board.

So which one

Choose Luciq if you want crash reporting, bug reporting, performance monitoring, session replay and surveys in the same mobile SDK as feature requests. Choose it if your team works in Jira, GitLab, Azure DevOps or Shortcut, relies on Microsoft Teams, Zapier or webhooks, or needs enterprise terms such as SSO, SCIM, custom data retention and regional hosting.

Choose FeedbackKit if you want feature voting on its own, with public prices and a free plan to start, rather than a full observability platform. Choose it if you want requests ranked by the MRR of the users behind them, native admin apps for iPhone, iPad and Mac, or feature requests synced with GitHub, Linear, Notion, ClickUp, Monday.com, Trello, Airtable, Asana or Basecamp.

For more tools in this space, see our round-up of in-app feedback tools for iOS. To try FeedbackKit in a test build, start free.