[ Marker.io alternative ]
feedback2code vs Marker.io
Marker.io collects feedback for people to work through. feedback2code hands each message to a coding agent and gives you a pull request. Which one you need depends on what your feedback looks like.
Updated
What Marker.io is
Marker.io is a visual bug reporting tool. Reporters capture and annotate a screenshot on the live site, and the report is sent to your issue tracker together with environment details.
Side by side
| Marker.io | feedback2code | |
|---|---|---|
| How feedback is given | A widget on the site: screenshot, annotations, and technical context collected automatically. Higher plans add session replay. | A widget on the live site. The visitor describes the change in plain text. |
| What you end up with | An issue in the tracker you already use, such as Jira, GitHub, GitLab, Linear, Trello or Asana. | A GitHub pull request with the change implemented, ready for review. |
| Free plan | No free plan. 15-day free trial without a credit card. | Yes: 10 feedback submissions per 30 days, unlimited repositories, pull requests included. |
| Paid plans from | $59 per month for 3 users and 10 projects ($39 when billed yearly) | $20 per month for 100 feedback submissions per 30 days |
Marker.io plans
| Plan | Price | Includes |
|---|---|---|
| Starter | $59/mo | 3 users, up to 10 projects, screenshots, annotations, environment details |
| Team | $199/mo | 15 users, up to 50 projects, Jira integration, session replay, developer tools |
| Business | On request | SSO, audit logs, data masking, webhooks |
Source: Marker.io pricing page, read on 1 October 2026. Monthly prices without the yearly discount. Plans change, so check the page before you decide.
When Marker.io is the better choice
- Your team lives in Jira, Linear or another tracker and every report has to end up there.
- QA testers and clients need annotated screenshots with browser and console details.
- You want session replay to see what happened before a bug.
When feedback2code is the better choice
- You do not want another issue in the backlog. You want a pull request for it.
- Your code is on GitHub and review happens in pull requests anyway.
- You want to pay nothing until feedback volume grows.
Using both
Marker.io can create GitHub issues, and feedback2code opens GitHub pull requests, so both end up in the same repository. A sensible split: Marker.io for QA rounds where precise reproduction details matter, feedback2code for the steady stream of small change requests after launch.
What feedback2code does not do
- Feedback is text. There are no screenshots, annotations or video.
- The site's code has to be in a GitHub repository.
- There is no task board. Each submission has a status: coding, awaiting review, merged or failed.
- Nothing is merged automatically. Every change waits for your review.
The page on the website feedback widget describes how it works, what a submission contains and where the plan limits are.
Other comparisons
- feedback2code vs BugHerd
- feedback2code vs Userback
- feedback2code vs Usersnap
- feedback2code vs Feedbucket
- All website feedback tools in one table
Questions and answers
Does Marker.io fix the bugs it reports?
Marker.io is built to report bugs into an issue tracker with the context a developer needs. Writing the fix is left to the team. feedback2code is built for the step after the report: an AI agent implements the change and opens a pull request for review.
Does feedback2code capture screenshots like Marker.io?
No. feedback2code collects written feedback and the address of the page it was sent from. There are no screenshots or annotations.
What does Marker.io cost compared to feedback2code?
On 1 October 2026, Marker.io listed Starter at $59 per month for 3 users and Team at $199 per month for 15 users, both cheaper with yearly billing. feedback2code is free for 10 feedback submissions per 30 days and $20 per month for 100.