Freehand versus Miro
November 04, 2022

Freehand versus Miro

Anonymous | TrustRadius Reviewer
Score 3 out of 10
Vetted Review
Verified User

Software Version

Freehand Enterprise

Overall Satisfaction with InVision Freehand

At first I was super excited that Invision had created Freehand because I had been using Miro for years at my previous organization and because tool consolidation is always a win-win. The tool is easy to learn and has lots of useful features and templates that can help streamline collaborative sessions and planning. Additionally it's nice that access to the board can be shared internally and externally to help visualize concepts and convey information.
However, while the tool might look EXACTLY like Miro, it lacks in very fine technical details and usage elements, which Miro does much better. The tool itself is hard to navigate no matter the devices or browsers (mouse, track pad, PC, Mac, Chrome, Safari, Edge). Zooming in and out is also pretty lack-luster but is a critical feature of this type of tool, especially when you are creating large documents that need precise navigation. Additionally, the There are fine controls for typing and selecting that are also sub-par to Miro. I would advise the product team to focus more on fine-tuned usability than the overall perception of this tool.
  • Template Offerings so you don't have to re-create the wheel
  • Multiple Users At Once (Collaboration)
  • Process Mapping elements (goodbye Visio)
  • Navigation Controls
  • Precise selection and deselection of features/tools
  • Zoom in/out functionality (it's not smooth or easy to do)
  • Latency with multiple users
  • Collaborative access and editing
  • Creating large and complex size boards
  • Easy editing and changes
  • Positive - We use it for collaboration when we can't physically be in a room "white boarding"
  • Positive - It has allowed us more creative ways to share complex concepts with other stakeholders across the business
  • Positive - Ease of getting more non-verbal people to participate in meetings by contribution
  • Negative - Waste time during meetings trying to "get the damn thing to work"
  • Negative - Hard to use for those stakeholders who are not in the tool every day (perception)
Miro (formerly Realtime Board) is the original product concept for this tool and I used it for 3-4 years for product development. Invision is aesthetically a carbon copy of the tool but lacks in fine usability controls. We actually didn't choose Freehand, it just came as an added tool under our Invision subscription. It's helpful but knowing the previous tool, it's been a hard sell because it's just not as good. Again, it's really fine tuned usability things like navigation, zoom, switching from tool to tool, selecting and deselecting, etc.

Do you think Freehand by InVision delivers good value for the price?

Not sure

Are you happy with Freehand by InVision's feature set?


Did Freehand by InVision live up to sales and marketing promises?


Did implementation of Freehand by InVision go as expected?

I wasn't involved with the implementation phase

Would you buy Freehand by InVision again?


Freehand has been well suited for creating process maps and getting stakeholder feedback. It has also been good for brainstorming and "freehand" board creation.
Some of the templates are hard to customize for specific needs so it's sometimes better to build your own from scratch.
There are a lot of navigational issues with larger boards that require zooming in/out and navigating to different sections.