Figma, headquartered in San Francisco, offers their collaborative design and prototyping application to support digital product and UI development.
$15
per month per editor
Miro
Score 9.1 out of 10
N/A
Miro is the AI Innovation Workspace that brings teams and AI together to plan, co-create, and build the next big thing, faster. With the canvas as the prompt, Miro's collaborative AI workflows keep teams in the flow of work, scale shifts in ways of working, and drive organization-wide transformation.
$10
per month per user
Pricing
Figma
Miro
Editions & Modules
Professional
$144
per year
Organization
$540
per year
Starter
Free
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
Figma
Miro
Free Trial
No
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.
Figma stands out against Adobe XD in that it is better in every way, easier to use and with more advanced tools that allow for greater customization of components and efficiency when designing. While Figma is not a 1:1 of Miro, the white boarding tool, it does have some overlap …
I think they serve different purposes. For Miro, we usually use that for workshops and brainstormings. There are some templates we can make use of. For Jamboard, it is quite lightweighted so we use that for quick brainstorming or retro. Figma is the only option for talking about …
I believe when it comes to prototyping and visualisation I would say Figma is way better than above mentioned tools. However, when it comes to workshops, brainstroming exercises and running sessions, I feel Miro might be better as compared to figjam and Mural. Figma is quite …
I think Figma is better because it's easier to create more visually appealing work. I would say that Figma is better for people who are used to using this sort of visual design software/platform. Whereas I think Miro is better for first time users, it doesn't offer as many …
Miro is more user-friendly than Figma, but is less robust in terms of web prototyping and graphic design. While Figma isn't made to be used as a design tool, our team has taken to using it as such because it's richer in functions and personalizations compared to Miro and Figma.
It's up there - but needs tweaking to ensure. We were forced to move to Figma, but it's a great tool nevertheless. Miro offers usability functions for novice users that Figma is still not fully up to speed on. Miro's overall templates are more appealing, and AI usage in Miro is …
I would use Figma for sure for any product design you need, for any marketing or visual illustrations related to a product or business. Even if the navigation between files/folders and within the design is not the best, the capabilities and focus on designing are the best in …
Adobe XD is an absurd copycat that never got to have even 10% of Figma's features. It's hyper fast because it's native, but that's the only good thing it has.
Axure RP is an excellent prototyping software, with Local Variables and complex interactions. But it's also extremely …
Compared to Adobe XD, the Figma tool is much easier to use, offers more features, and has a much lower cost. Its features are less complex, making it very easy to teach beginners how to use it. The navigable prototype is also easier and more efficient to share in Figma compared …
Figma easily wins against Adobe XD. Asset sharing on XD was a pain. Figma makes it really easy by allowing you to export any layer as an asset. XD had no comments making it incredibly hard to communicate with the designer in remote settings. XD's prototyping system was not good …
I prefer to use it comparing to Adobe XD. It surely is more intuitive and still develops itself providing new features (e.g. variables; however, I had to get used to the new interface). Now, if I had to compare it to Axure it'd depend on the project I'm working on. In case of …
Figma is the go-to design tool that can be pushed to production very easily with developer tools. In my opinion it's the most complete design tool that considers the entire design process including the creation of solid design systems, high-fidelity prototyping, user testing, …
Figma is the best for collaborative work. Very easy to learn, so easy that most people dont use it properly (which is good and bad at the same time). Prototyping is where I'd wish it will improve. Axure was awesome.
Figma is much more user friendly and collaborative. It works in your browser and contains everything you need really, whereas Sketch requires other tools to run it properly. It is also much easier to import and export things into Figma, which means we can work across lots of …
Figma is way better than Adobe Illustrator because of its ability to seamlessly integrate multiple use cases like mobile design and vector-based shape building. While Adobe Illustrator is great for adding texture and depth to illustration you can still build high-end …
Figma has more features than Zeplin or Axure. Unlike Zeplin it allows to create and share dynamic prototypes. Unlike Axure it gives tools to create detailed designs.
Figma covers all our use cases. It helps with our design systems, pattern libraries, and prototyping; it's helpful to be cloud-based and sharable. Its plugins and usability for all team members make it very useful. Autolayout functionality is head and shoulders above the rest …
Figma blows these out the park. Adobe's system is very different, and I think this shows in their attempted acquisition of Figma. I've not used Sketch or Invision, but their lack of market presence says a lot—designers like using the best tools. Axure is definitely more …
Figma is often considered superior to Sketch and Adobe XD due to its web-based nature, enabling seamless cross-platform compatibility and real-time collaboration. While Sketch is limited to macOS and Adobe XD offers robust features, Figma's ability to work directly in the …
Previously, we were using more than 1 tool for a specific use case related to design needs, but learned that Figma was more comprehensive, thus we were able to reduce usage of 2+ tools into one saving our overall budget on UX tools. Figma also seems to be an industry-wide …
What I needed was Jamboard along with Sheets and Docs all in one. Because Jamboard was simple but not meant for my bigger explanation flows and Docs, Sheets fell short at visualization because of its limited tools. The lack of infinite canvas, visualization, tracking and topic …
It is quite similar to FigJam, but I have a feeling that it's focusing on the collaboration part, whereas FigJam is an addition to Figma, which is clearly a UI-oriented prototyping tool. It's clearer and more user-friendly than Mural. I use Miro in 90% of cases - FigJam is used …
Jamboard (RIP) I like the interface and additional functionality better on Miro than in Mural Figma is great, but it's a little more than I need (I'm not a designer). I can get what I need for it from Canva.
I use both for different things really. Figma is better for design and prototype applications with coding being enabled in Figma (which isn't part of Miro's tools). As I said earlier, I use other programmes when there is a lack in Miro, in this case the coding element. Also …
Since I haven't used any other product but I must say it is difficult to switch from Miro. It is not only that it can be used in the organization only. You can utilise it in your day to day life as well. Just like your sidekick. Whatever things you are discussing can be saved …
I previously used Coda for documenting labelling rules and Google Jamboard for quick brainstorming. While using Coda, I always felt it was too text-heavy and too simplistic. Jamboard was visual but too shallow for structured mapping. Miro became the optimum choice for fast, …
Compared to Jira, draw.io, and Whimsical, Miro stands out for its fluidity and adaptability. Jira is great for structured project tracking, but Miro offers a more visual, flexible environment for ideation and alignment. draw.io feels static in comparison, and Whimsical, though …
Miro is extremely easy to use and met all of my objectives, such as creating flows, writing descriptions, building funnels, and structuring workflows and teams. All the other tools I have used were never a complete solution for my needs. Having a centralized tool with excellent …
I would recommend if you need to start from scratch a product UI or any customer journey that you need to implement that requires designing and visualizing different steps to complete a process. I would recommend that any design/UI/UX team brainstorm and make proposals that they can compare and discuss in a visual way.
I couldn't find any scenarios where Miro is not appropriate. I use it day by day and create processes and visual boards, and use it for any type of project that I implement. It's very easy to navigate and very easy to actually create it from scratch, so most scenarios that I used Miro for were:
to design the customer journey, process design for different types of processes (like an onboarding process or a community implementation or a customer portal tool implementation) to document new workflows that I'm building. It applies across all customer operations roles, even if the tool wasn't built for customer operations. I used it so far in the past five years or so in more than five or six job titles that I had with different functions and hats, and supported me during all these job functions that I managed
Figma allows us to create universal content. This means that if multiple designers want to re-use a piece of content, and if everyone's content should be dynamically updated from time to time, we can easily accomplish this by turning design elements into a universal instance. Then, if an update is needed, we can push the change out to all assets at once. It's very efficient and ensures we're all updating content accordingly.
Figma also allows us to set parameters for the company's brand guide and share them across various designers. This way, we can easily pull from approved brand fonts, colors, and more, which allows our assets to remain unified across multiple touchpoints.
Figma also allowed us to create and install our own plugin, which we use to export every slide we have in a frame at one time, versus the default export feature, which limits you to one slice at a time. This is particularly useful for us when we're working on email templates, since we tend to have a ton of slices in any given series.
Makes internal coordination between admin team and tutors extremely painless. It's like a single place where everyone can drop ideas, get updates and notes without loss of context which usually happens in long email threads.
Versioning and board history are handled very well, which drastically reduces the workload. They help me track how a policy or math guideline has evolved, and also make it easy to revert changes if something doesn't work.
Comments stick exactly where they are meant to, making internal reviews much clearer. Admins don't have to guess which note refers to which rule or section.
Exports are clean, so even non-Miro teammates get it instantly.
It will be great if Figma will consider having the Pages where interactions can be stitched together among the Pages and not just one page with so many Frames to create the stand-alone clickable prototype that can be used to simulate the intended UX
Bring back the Inspect Mode tab right on the right-side panel of the main workspace instead of hiding behind the Dev Mode.
Figma Slides feature could be improved quite a bit more in order to be easier to assemble slides into a presentation deck and having pre-built templates for slides can be useful too.
Text and size formatting - when you copy and paste items they come through tiny (always keep the paste to scale of what the rest of the project scale is
Excel linking - I want to be able to integrate excel documentations for prototyping ideas
Some extra templates and start up positions - just so it allows the user to be more creative (maybe a draw template option, so the AI can create you a template bespoke to you company)
Figma is a pretty cool tool in many areas. My team almost uses it on daily basis, such as, brainstorming on product/design topics, discussing prototypes created by designers. We even use it for retrospectives, which is super convenient and naturally keeps records of what the team discusses every month. Furthermore, I do see the potential of the product - currently we mainly use it for design topics, but it seems it is also a good fit for tech diagrams, which we probably will explore further in the future.
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
There's a bit of a learning curve, but generally I think it's both more powerful and intuitive that other UX design tools. Most of what I need to do as a designer can be done in this platform, from basic wireframes to creating a design system, to creating pixel perfect designs, to prototyping to dev handoff.
I find Miro an overall easy to use tool, but I think that it needs more tutorials to fully onboard users. As a first time user, I find it difficult to understand some of the logics of the navigation and how grouping worked. So, I think that having short and well defined "introduction video hacks" can make onboarding in the tool enjoyable and capture more usage.
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
I haven't used their support lately but in the past, they had a chat that I used often. They often responded in a few hours and were able to give a satisfactory solution. I would imagine it's less personal now but the community has expanded drastically so there are more resources out there to self serve with a bit of Google magic.
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
In-person training has its own benefits - 1. It helps in resolving queries then and there during the training. 2. I find classroom or in-person training more interactive. 3. Classroom or in-person training could be more practical in nature where participants can have an hands on experience with tools and clarify their doubts with the trainer.
Online training has its own merits and demerits - 1. Sometimes we may face issues with connectivity or the training content 2. The way training is being delivered becomes very important because not everyone is comfortable taking online training and learning by themselves. 3. With the advancement of technology online training has become popular but there is a segment of people who still prefer class-room training over online one.
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.
Miro is more user-friendly than Figma, but is less robust in terms of web prototyping and graphic design. While Figma isn't made to be used as a design tool, our team has taken to using it as such because it's richer in functions and personalizations compared to Miro and Figma.
I’ve used both Excalidraw+ and draw.io. Excalidraw+ is great for quick, lightweight sketches with a clean “hand-drawn” feel, but it’s less strong for running structured workshops at scale (facilitation tools, templates, board organization, stakeholder-friendly presentation). draw.io is solid for precise diagramming (flows, architecture), but collaboration and workshop mechanics feel more “diagram-first” than “team-first.” We chose Miro because it combines strong real-time + async collaboration with facilitation features (voting, timer, stickies), easy board structuring with frames, and presentation mode—so we can go from messy ideation to a shareable narrative without switching tools.
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