Feedovate
The fastest way to manage feedback and ship better features.
Hey everyone 👋
Over the past few months, we’ve been building Feedovate, a platform for collecting feedback, managing feature requests, sharing public roadmaps, and publishing product updates/changelogs in one place.
Today, we’re finally launching it publicly.
While building Feedovate, we knew this was already a competitive space with products like Canny, Featurebase, and others doing great work.
But after exploring many of these tools and talking with founders, we felt that a lot of products in this category were becoming increasingly feature-heavy or mainly optimized for larger teams and companies.
So instead of trying to compete by adding endless features, we decided to focus on creating something simpler, cleaner, faster, and more approachable for indie hackers, solo founders, startups, and smaller SaaS products.
Our goal with Feedovate is straightforward:
help founders keep track of user feedback, understand what users actually want, prioritize features, share progress publicly, and keep users engaged, without the product feeling overwhelming.
A lot of effort went into the UX, performance, and keeping the overall workflow lightweight and easy to use for both founders and users.
The product is now live and actively being improved, and we’re excited to finally start sharing it with more people outside our own network.
Would genuinely love feedback from fellow builders and indie hackers here.
34 Comments
Thanks a lot,
And yes, we support both. Workspaces can choose whether they want to allow anonymous voting or require authentication. Different teams have different needs, so we wanted to keep that flexible while still giving founders control over how they collect feedback.
Really appreciate the support, and we'd love to hear your thoughts if you end up trying Feedovate with your next SaaS
That flexibility is definitely a good call. I've seen teams fall on both sides of that debate, so letting workspace owners decide seems like the right balance.
I'm curious, what has been the biggest challenge so far since launching? Has it been acquiring users, converting them from other tools like Canny, or deciding which features to prioritize without adding too much complexity?
One of the things that caught my attention is that you're targeting a space where many products gradually become bloated over time. It must be difficult to keep the product simple while still responding to customer requests.
Congrats on the launch!
I like the direction you're taking here. A lot of products in the feedback and roadmap space have become increasingly feature-heavy over time, so focusing on simplicity and usability for indie founders and small teams makes a lot of sense.
One thing I'm curious about: how are you thinking about AI in the feedback prioritization process? For example, automatically clustering similar requests, identifying common themes, or helping founders summarize user feedback at scale.
As someone who works a lot with automation and operational systems, I think keeping the workflow lightweight while still helping founders extract actionable insights could be a strong differentiator.
Looking forward to seeing how Feedovate evolves. Best of luck with the launch!
Thanks a lot, really appreciate it!
AI is definitely something we're excited about, especially around making feedback easier to understand and prioritize. We think there's a lot of opportunity there beyond just generating summaries.
For now, though, we're focused on keeping the product lightweight and solving the core workflow well. We're talking with users regularly, and a lot of our roadmap is being shaped by those conversations. AI is absolutely coming, but we're trying to introduce it thoughtfully as the product matures.
bravo
All the very best to you
Congrats on the launch! The positioning around small teams is smart — the enterprise tools in this space are genuinely overkill for most indie projects and early-stage SaaS. One thing I'd explore: SMBs running brick-and-mortar businesses (retail, services, clinics) actually have a massive feedback problem too, but they have zero tooling because everything is built for software teams. The language barrier of "feature requests" and "roadmap" might need adapting, but the underlying need (hear what customers think, act on it) is identical. Could be a whole segment worth talking to.
Thanks a lot, really appreciate it!
That's not a segment we've spent much time thinking about yet, but it's a really interesting idea. The tools and terminology are often built around software teams, while the underlying problem exists in plenty of other businesses too.
We'll definitely keep that in mind as we continue talking to users and exploring where Feedovate can provide the most value. Thanks for the thoughtful suggestion
what 'keeping users engaged' means in practice here. that phrase shows up in the description but it's doing a lot of work. are you talking about email notifications when their requested feature ships, a public voting board that creates social proof, something else entirely. because that piece is either the most interesting differentiator or just standard table stakes depending on what it actually is
That's a fair question.
For us, "keeping users engaged" is less about engagement for engagement's sake and more about closing the feedback loop. Things like letting users see what's being worked on, follow progress on requested features, and get notified when updates ship.
A lot of teams collect feedback, but users often never hear back. We're trying to help make that communication more visible and consistent.
'users never hear back' problem is real and it's not talked about enough. i've submitted feedback to tools i genuinely liked and heard nothing. didn't churn because of the missing feature, churned because the silence made it feel like nobody was home
Congrats on the launch! As someone who just started learning to build with AI tools about two months ago, this actually hits close to home.
One of the first things I realized is that collecting feedback is easy — the hard part is knowing what to do with it. I've been using sticky notes and a Notion doc, and it's already a mess with just a handful of testers.
What drew me to Feedovate is exactly what you described: it's not trying to be everything. For someone at my stage, a tool that's lighter and faster to set up matters a lot more than one packed with features I won't use for months.
One honest question from a total beginner's perspective — is there a free tier or trial? For indie hackers just starting out, that first step of "let me just try it" without committing to a plan makes a big difference in whether we actually sign up.
Looking forward to seeing where this goes.
Thanks a lot, really appreciate that!
And yes, we offer a 14 day free trial. We wanted people to be able to try Feedovate with their own users and workflow before making any commitment.
Also, I completely relate to the sticky notes and Notion phase, That's actually one of the reasons we started building Feedovate in the first place.
Thanks again for the support, and best of luck on your building journey
This is a good wedge because the category is already crowded, so “more features” is probably the wrong fight. The stronger angle is helping small teams close the loop with users without turning feedback management into another heavy internal process.
I’d make that sharper in the positioning: not just feedback, roadmaps, changelogs, and updates in one place, but a lightweight customer loop for small SaaS teams. Users ask, founders prioritize, progress becomes visible, and updates ship back to the people who asked.
One thing I’d pressure-test early is the name. Feedovate explains feedback, but it also feels a little feature/category-tied. If the product expands beyond collecting feedback into roadmap visibility, product updates, user engagement, and founder-user communication, the name may start feeling narrower than the workflow you are building.
A broader name like Xevoa .com could work better as a clean product workflow brand. It keeps the same product in the founder’s favor, but gives it more room to feel like a serious operating layer for small SaaS teams rather than only a feedback tool.
The product direction is solid. I’d just make sure the brand does not accidentally make people compare it only against feedback widgets.
Really appreciate this feedback.
The idea of helping small teams close the loop with users is actually very aligned with how we see Feedovate evolving. Feedback is where the conversation starts, but visibility, communication, and keeping users in the loop are just as important.
The naming point is an interesting one as well. It's not something we're actively considering right now, but it's definitely worth thinking about as the product grows.
Thanks for the thoughtful insights
Exactly, and that is the part I’d be careful with.
If Feedovate is only about collecting feedback, the name fits. But if the real product is the full customer loop, then the name may be teaching users to see only the first step of the workflow.
That can quietly affect positioning.
A founder may visit and think, “nice feedback tool,” instead of “this is where we manage the loop between users, roadmap decisions, progress, and shipped updates.”
Those are very different mental categories, and the second one is much more valuable.
That is why I would pressure-test the brand earlier than most founders do. Not because Feedovate is bad, but because the product you described is already more ambitious than the word “feedback.”
Xevoa.com felt stronger for that reason. It gives you a cleaner product-workflow brand that can hold feedback, roadmap visibility, changelog, user communication, and founder-user loops under one serious name.
The risk is not renaming too early. The risk is building too much of the product’s memory around a name that makes the category feel smaller than the actual workflow.
Congrats on launch! I don't know if it's only for me but the landing page opens extremely slow on mobile (around ~5 seconds). I suggest checking page speed insights to fix that. Other than that - great product, did it take you long to build it?
Thanks! Appreciate the heads up, we'll definitely investigate the mobile loading issue.
It's been a few months of building and iterating with real founder feedback along the way. Still lots to do, , but we're excited to finally have it out there
Feedovate looks like a seriously solid product. I love how simple and clean it is—zero fluff, and it stays perfectly focused on its core job. I have two quick questions: Does the platform currently support weighted scoring for feedback? Also, I noticed the automatic tagging feature—are you leveraging AI under the hood to parse and categorize those requests? Great work on what you’ve built so far
Thanks a lot, really appreciate it!
Weighted scoring isn't supported yet, but it's something we're actively exploring based on the feedback we've received so far.
As for tagging, it's currently manual (for now) rather than AI powered.Every project starts with a set of default tags, and teams can manage them as needed. AI is definitely on our roadmap, but we're taking things step by step and focusing on keeping the product simple while learning from teams actively using it. 🙌
The small-team angle is the right place to focus. In this category the biggest risk is becoming another inbox founders avoid, so I would make the first-run workflow very concrete: import or add 5 pieces of feedback, merge duplicates, choose one public roadmap item, and publish one short update back to users. If a founder gets that loop done in 10 minutes, the product proves the promise before the feature list matters.
"Simpler than Canny" is a relational position. Buyers don't shop for that. They shop for the outcome that maps to their week.
For an indie hacker, the outcome that lights up is something like "the feedback loop you can run between dinner and bedtime." One person, one inbox, one Tuesday. Lead with that, not with what you're not.
Canny competes on enterprise team workflows. You can't out-Canny Canny, and trying to is what flattens "simpler" into "smaller version of the same thing." The defensible position is being the only feedback tool that fits a solo founder's actual rhythm: shipping today, reading users tomorrow morning, replying from the phone on the train.
Quickest test: take feedovate.com hero, cover the visual, read just the words. If a solo founder reading them couldn't tell whether this is for them or for a 20-person PM team, the wedge is hiding. The first sentence of your IH post ("a place for small teams to listen to users and share progress") is closer to the actual hero than what's likely on the page right now.
For the comparison block further down the page (Canny / Featurebase / you), don't pitch on feature count, pitch on the founder's calendar. "5 minutes to setup. 30 seconds to triage a request from the bathroom queue at a conference." That's the only thing the other tools genuinely can't match.
Curious about positioning here most teams I've talked to (and I'm building a consumer product so this is from research, not personal experience) struggle less with collecting feedback and more with knowing which feedback to act on. Does Feedovate help you weigh signal vs. noise, or is the value mostly the central-collection layer? Asking because I'm about to enter a 14-day "watch period" with my own product and I'm trying to figure out the same thing for myself.
That's a great question.
We definitely agree that collecting feedback is only half the problem. Understanding which feedback actually matters and turning that into clear priorities is where most teams struggle.
Our focus is very much on both. We're already working on ways to help founders evaluate and prioritize feedback better, including things like value vs effort, rather than just collecting requests in one place.
looked at the site. the positioning is clean but i kept wondering what happens when a founder collects a bunch of feedback and decides not to build something users voted for. that conversation is where trust actually gets built or lost and most tools in this space make it awkward to communicate a no. does Feedovate have anything for that flow or is it mostly built around the positive case where you ship what was requested
curious how you handle the gap between collecting feedback and deciding what to build. that's the step where I see teams lose the thread - not the collection side.
The "share progress" angle is interesting — most feedback
tools are one-directional (user → product) but closing
the loop back to users is underrated.
Question: how do you handle the case where a team wants
to share progress publicly with users but not expose it
to competitors? Is there any visibility control?
Also curious what "small teams" means in your target —
solo founders, 2-5 person startups, or up to ~20?
Congrats on shipping. The crowded space is not actually your problem. Canny and Featurebase win because product teams already trust them. Your wedge has to be opinionated workflow that the big players cannot copy without breaking their existing customers. A few questions I would dig into before adding any more features: 1) What is the one decision a founder makes 10x faster using Feedovate than a spreadsheet plus a Slack channel? Make that the homepage. 2) How do you get the OP's customers to actually leave feedback? That is the real activation event, not the founder signing up. If you nail those two, the rest works itself out.
Thanks, really appreciate this.
You raised some great points, especially around activation and helping founders move from feedback to decisions faster. Those are exactly the kinds of questions we're spending a lot of time thinking about right now.
We're still early, so a big part of the journey is talking to users, understanding where the friction is, and refining the workflow around those insights.
Thanks for sharing your perspective, definitely gave us some things to think about.
I have spoken with some successful entrepreneurs, and one thing that is particularly important is listening to user feedback—or designing a system to obtain it.
This certainly doesn't mean just looking at metrics. That kind of purely data-driven approach has lost its meaning to some extent. The reality is that users often don't know how to describe their own needs, which is a major challenge.
You've named the hard part (Canny, Featurebase exist), so straight to it — "simpler/cleaner than bloated incumbents" is the weakest wedge in any crowded category.
It's not defensible (incumbents launch a lite tier overnight). It's not a switching reason (nobody migrates feedback history because the new tool is prettier). And the category's more crowded than you named — Frill, Sleekplan, Nolt, Hellonext, Fider (free), GitHub Discussions, Notion roadmaps.
Deeper issue: indie hackers/solo founders are the worst-paying segment here. Few users = little feedback, tight budgets, high churn. Incumbents target bigger teams because that's where the money is, not because they forgot small ones.
The question your post doesn't answer: why does someone leave Canny's free tier for this? "Simpler" isn't it. What's the one thing Feedovate does that none of them do?
Fair points, and honestly, I agree with a lot of what you're saying.
We're not claiming to have some revolutionary feature that nobody else has. Right now, our focus is on building a product that small teams genuinely enjoy using and improving it alongside our users.
A lot of the direction is still being shaped by conversations with founders using Feedovate today. We have our own ideas about where we want to take the product, but we're trying not to race into adding features before we've earned the right to build them.
Whether that's enough to convince someone to switch from Canny or another tool is something the market will ultimately decide, but it's a challenge we're excited to take on.
"The market will decide" sounds humble but it's surrender disguised as humility. Markets don't decide on undifferentiated products — they ignore them. Market deciding requires offering a clear choice.
"Not racing into features before earning the right" sounds disciplined but is the same thing. Real discipline is picking the one thing you do differently and doubling down. Restraint without specificity is drift.
You conceded gracefully without addressing the underlying point. Pattern usually ends in six months of building that won't earn switching from Canny.