FigJam is an online interactive whiteboard from Figma headquartered in San Francisco, presently in beta (2021) but available to the public in a free trial. The vendor states that in 2022, FigJam will have plans for $0, $8, and $15 per editor, per month.
$5
per month per editor
Miro
Score 9.2 out of 10
N/A
Miro empowers cross-functional teams to flow from early discovery through final delivery on a shared, AI-first canvas. With the canvas as the prompt, Miro’s AI capabilities keep teams in the flow of work, and scale shifts in ways of working.
$10
per month per user
Pricing
FigJam
Miro
Editions & Modules
FigJam Professional
$36
per year per editor
FigJam Organization
$60
per year per editor
1. Free - To discover what Miro can do. Always free
$0
2. Starter - Unlimited and private boards with essential features
$8
per month (billed annually) per user
3. Business - Scales collaboration with advanced features and security
$16
per month (billed annually) per user
4. Enterprise - For work across the entire organization, with support, security and control, to scale
contact sales
annual billing per user
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
FigJam
Miro
Free Trial
Yes
Yes
Free/Freemium Version
Yes
Yes
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
No
No
Entry-level Setup Fee
No setup fee
Optional
Additional Details
—
Monthly billing also available at $10 per month for the Starter plan, or $20 for the Business plan.
Positive: FigJam is cheaper than Miro and allows connecting with FigJam, where we design our user interfaces. FigJam is more complete and visually appealing than draw.io, although draw.io is free. FigJam allows calls, which both competitors do not. Negative: Miro has …
Verified User
Contributor
Chose FigJam
It is similar, but it provides more usable solutions for brainstorming sessions and presentation purposes. Now empowered with AI and some new cool stuff, it may be the most dangerous competitor to FigJam. However, it will win the race if FigJam is more responsive and gets more …
FigJam works best in pair with Figma, as it allows you to keep track of your project in one place, supporting all phases of the process. The functionality is more intuitive, quick, and efficient. Visually, I also prefer it more —it’s more enjoyable and playful, making the …
Microsoft Whiteboards are better, in my opinion, but not friendly with Figma files (can't export layered assets, raster only). Better in the sense that the drawing and and marker tools felt more natural and the AI features are just better, like auto-shapes, vs. FigJam's …
I feel like Figjam is great at at what it does. It provides a great overall place to be able to use a virtual whiteboard and help teams collaborate. Especially remote teams. It actually does it better than others. There are some tools such as InVision Freehand that at the …
FigJam is okay, but just feels more clunky than Miro. It kind of reminds me of the early versions of Miro with primitive features. Figma is still a far superior screen design tool, but I like the wireframe features built into Miro for quick mockups. I'm not sure if it will ever …
I used InVision for a while - it was interesting but without many features, the work was still very manual, the tool was soon discontinued at the company I worked for. I've used FigJam, it's a good tool, but very simple in features, which is why Miro is so important, we always …
Atlassian's Confluence and whiteboard is more accessible to cross functional team. I think we just have more user licence compared to what we were allowed for FigJam then Miro.
FigJam is particularly tailored for design led product teams so lack the versatility which Miro provides Better for workshop facilitation but clucky UI
As I've mentioned, I've used FigJam before. FigJam is better for more detailed and design based ideation workshops. But Miro is better for people without much tech ability.
Miro is great for collaborating. I think it definitely is better than Mural and Jamboard because it has more features and it's easier to use. Compared to FigJam, as a designer I would probably choose FigJam to have everything in the same product. However, in my opinion, Miro …
We adopted Miro before we moved from Sketch to Figma, which is part of why it beat out FigJam for us. It was already somewhat entrenched before FigJam became available to us. Also the licensing model and the fact that Miro is available to and used by most everyone in our corp …
I would say that Miro is a better choice when you compare their performance and can be used in multiple roles. FigJam is good for collaboration but if you want to get more work done, Miro is the obvious choice.
I believe Miro is better than FigJam for most teams, the main reason for that is that it supports more complex workflows, other would be Miro is more versatile for planning, which is really crucial for my profile.
We started our investigation with FigJam and analyzed it for a very long time, but after using it for some time, we found out it is not good for the medical industry, as it is designed mostly for IT. After that we used Miro and realized that it is the best for our industry, so …
lucidspark is doing great but still delivers a disjointed experience (some features in Lucid Chats, others in Lucid Spark) - They do a better job providing pages inside the document - also more flexibility with customization
FigJam is deeply integrated to Figma, so brings some …
For the moment, we are more familiar with Miro and its boards, because we have known the templates and tools for some time. In the future, however, I believe that FigJam, being linked to Figma and detailed design, will replace it, because it is convenient to have the …
I find Miro much easier to use in terms of usability and much more inviting to use. I also observe the people that use it for the first time with the people that participated in our workshops that they don't find it intimidating, which is an importanting to make the people …
My experience is that I've used Trello similar to Jira and Confluence. It's more for task organizations and resourcing. For draw.io, I've used it for visual representations of flowcharts and diagrams. Finally, for Miro, I use it for both purposes and for other design tasks that …
We chose Miro because it filled the blanks when it comes to interactive collaboration and visualization. None of the other tools we use daily promotes the kind of active involvement by the team members and our external workshop or meeting participants. Miro has become the …
I had to select Miro because of its superior integration, which works effortlessly, and its better functionality.
Verified User
Program Manager
Chose Miro
I find Miro to be more user-friendly than Figma, where we had a very steep learning curve trying to achieve real-time collaboration with both tech and non-tech users. I haven't personally spent a lot of time using that tool or others, however. At this point, I have a strong …
If you're working in small product teams, like triads, and already using Figma, this is a no brainer for white boarding, quick/fast sketches, wireframing, collaborative doodling ... it gets less appropriate with large teams, infrequent. IMO, due to the way in which they price, it's better to keep the inner circle small-ish.
For me, Miro works best for messy internal processes. One of the instances include there are updates in math guidelines or reorganizing how topics should flow. I can put everything on the board, drag things around, color code it, and suddenly everything actually makes sense. It's also a common interacting space for the team to think out loud. Keeps everyone aligned without different documents floating around. It has a downside too. When the board gets big and full of screenshots or reference files, it slows down and I have to wait for things for so long.
It misses easy-to-use pre sets of diagrams. The ones presented seem to be not native and hard to use. Miro is a good benchmark.
Navegating throught projects in the main page is confusing, specially when people are not admin users.
It should suggest ways of organizing the pages designers do, specially when the project is big and have many pages and sections.
It could have, for example, a draft version for every page, so that one can hide it when they finish the work, but can open it whenever something needs to be modified, versioning the job.
Sticky notes cannot be easily resized. It would often be useful for them to transform into workspaces, because they become actual text content rather than just notes.
Perhaps there is no option to sort the work boards according to specific criteria (such as alphabetical order or date).
The various functions available should perhaps be explained clearly with a tooltip or something similar while you are working with the various tools. I often don't realise that certain things can be done.
I have advocate for the renew of Miro quite few times, however, it is not under my control as the decision is made in another team with their own budget. I would buy for my own entrepreneur projects (1-2 members) as I do know the value and work there 100%. So, I would pay out of my own pocket to get the value. However, If I wouldn't know the value it provides, it would be hard to decide with the current freemium features
I don't use it often, because the organization I work in uses a different environment on a commo basis. This is rather used between the designers, who prototype the solutions in Figma - they just have it as a workbook/notebook for their ideas. However, if those need to be shared with stakeholders or other organization members, the designers are expected to use a different environment.
Solid usability, we transitioned from Mural, so some of it is a learning curve from what we were used to in the prior tool. As previously mentioned, the scrolling feature and moving around the board is not as intuitive as I would like. Outside of that, the functionality seems to mee the expectations we have for a collaboration tool
I only give a 9/10 because of the speed at which it loads. I have never experienced issues with Miro logging me out early, or some other technical issue causing the program to crash, or even it just loading in perpetuity without ever actually coming up (unlike other programs such as SFDC). It take a minute for all of my boards to come up after I click on it in my favorites, but besides that, it's all good.
Sometimes it gets quite slow and there is a correlation between this and the size of the board. Hence we are trying to segment the boards based on product stages or projects so that the size doesn't go big. When you go from discovery to delivery on a simple board, it will get large and difficult to load, even crash or go white screen
We have never reached out to or contacted support because Miro's platform has been incredibly intuitive and user-friendly. The comprehensive resources available, such as tutorials, documentation, and community forums, have provided all the guidance we needed. The seamless integration with our existing tools and the reliability of the platform have ensured that we rarely encounter issues that require external assistance. This self-sufficiency has allowed us to focus more on our projects and collaboration without interruptions. Overall, our experience with Miro has been smooth and efficient, eliminating the need for additional support
There was a series of webinars which Miro hosted with our organization that went over the basics, then progressively became more advanced with additional sections. The instructors were knowledgeable, and provided examples throughout the sessions, as well as answered peoples' questions. There was ample time and experience on the calls to cover a range of topics. The instructors were also very friendly and sociable, as well as honest. Of course Miro isn't a "God-tool" that does absolutely everything, but the instructors were aware and emphasized the strengths where Miro had them and sincerely accepted feedback.
Easy to learn, Miro has a series of videos on YouTube that effectively taught this program to my team members and me. The program is drag-and-drop and works excellently. People pick up on how to use it efficiently, and it's great for organizing ideas more freely. This product is more challenging for some older audiences who are not accustomed to using a touchpad, but for most, it was very easy to use.
FigJam works best in pair with Figma, as it allows you to keep track of your project in one place, supporting all phases of the process. The functionality is more intuitive, quick, and efficient. Visually, I also prefer it more —it’s more enjoyable and playful, making the experience much more engaging.
While not as feature rich to be honest as some of these focused tools, it still replaces a vast majority of them. It is enough to make it easily replace the listed tools if you wish to do so. This not only saves time pivoting between tools, but also money with licensing which is an easy sell to my management.
Maybe is possible now so... Could be useful to manage in some way source code for the projects? not to edit so when we make solutions with different components in MIro, maybe each component could redirect to the source code of this component
FigJam saves a lot of time ... it's nice to have all my visual notes/sketches within Figma itself where a lot of design work lives
The project organization and other features contribute to the ease of answering that age old question ... "where can I find that mockup?"
Dev Mode is pretty cool. Not many use it, so some designers may spend unnecessary time spec'ing out things that no one will appreciate, let alone look at.
We did a dynamic activity based on actionable insights from a research study that I conducted. It was great to see people interacting, and one of the proposals was successful, resulting in a 6 million (in local currency) contribution to the company!
