Online whiteboards have become the default place teams brainstorm, map ideas, run retros, and sketch out plans, and two tools dominate the conversation: Miro and FigJam. Miro is the established, do-everything collaboration platform with a vast template library and deep enterprise features. FigJam is the lighter, friendlier whiteboard from Figma, built to feel fun and to sit naturally alongside the design work your team may already be doing. Both are excellent, and the right choice depends on what your team needs the whiteboard to be.
We have run workshops and planning sessions in both, and here is how they compare on the things that actually matter: the canvas and ease of use, templates and structure, collaboration features, integrations, and price.
The quick verdict
If you want a powerful, flexible platform that scales from a quick brainstorm to complex diagramming, project planning, and enterprise workflows, choose Miro. If your team already lives in Figma, or you want the simplest, most playful whiteboard for brainstorms and workshops without a learning curve, choose FigJam. Miro is the broader tool, FigJam is the friendlier one.
The canvas and ease of use
FigJam’s whole personality is approachability. The canvas is clean, the stickies and shapes feel tactile, and little touches like stamps, emoji reactions, and a cursor chat make a live session feel lively rather than sterile. Anyone can jump in and be productive within minutes, which is exactly what you want when you are pulling non-designers into a workshop.
Miro’s canvas is more powerful and, as a result, a touch denser. There is more on screen and more you can do, from advanced diagramming to mapping dependencies, which is a strength once you are comfortable but a little more to absorb at first. For raw approachability FigJam wins, while for depth and flexibility Miro pulls ahead.
Templates and structure
This is where Miro’s maturity shows. Its template library is enormous, covering everything from retrospectives and user story maps to flowcharts, mind maps, and Kanban boards, and many come with built-in structure and frameworks. If you want to run a specific kind of session or build a particular diagram, there is almost certainly a polished Miro template waiting for you.
Miro is our pick for all-round collaboration
The most capable online whiteboard, with a huge template library, deep diagramming, and a free plan to get your team started.
FigJam has a growing set of templates too, and they are well designed and cover the common use cases like brainstorms, retros, and diagrams. It simply does not have the sheer breadth or the depth of structured frameworks that Miro offers. For a team that wants guided, ready-made structure for many kinds of work, Miro is the stronger pick.
Collaboration features
Both are built for real-time collaboration and both do it well, with live cursors, comments, and voting. FigJam leans into the social feel of a session, and its audio chat, reactions, and the recently added AI features for generating and organizing ideas make group work feel smooth. Miro matches the core collaboration and adds heavier facilitation tools like timers, voting, and presentation modes that suit larger or more formal workshops. For casual team brainstorms FigJam feels lovely, while for structured facilitation at scale Miro has more in the toolbox.
Integrations and ecosystem
FigJam’s killer advantage is Figma. If your designers already work in Figma, FigJam sits right next to that work, shares the same account, and lets you move between ideation and design without friction. That tight integration is a genuine reason to choose it for design-led teams.
Miro counters with breadth. It integrates with a long list of tools including Jira, Confluence, Slack, Microsoft Teams, Asana, and many more, which makes it a natural hub for cross-functional teams that span product, engineering, and operations. If your whiteboard needs to plug into a wider project stack, Miro’s integration catalog is hard to beat.
Pricing
Both offer a free plan that is genuinely usable for small teams or occasional sessions, with paid tiers that unlock unlimited boards, more advanced features, and admin controls. FigJam tends to be the more affordable option on its own, and if your organization already pays for Figma, adding FigJam is straightforward. Miro’s pricing reflects its broader feature set and enterprise capabilities, so it can cost more at scale, but you are paying for a more comprehensive platform. Both deliver good value for what they are.
So which should you pick?
Choose Miro if you want the most capable, flexible whiteboard that can handle brainstorming, diagramming, planning, and enterprise workflows, and you value a deep template library and wide integrations. Choose FigJam if your team already uses Figma, or if you want the simplest, most enjoyable whiteboard for brainstorms and workshops with almost no learning curve. For most cross-functional teams that want one tool to grow into, Miro is the safer all-round bet, while design-led teams and those who prize simplicity will be happiest in FigJam.
