If your team is shopping for a shared whiteboard, you've probably narrowed it down to two: FigJam (Figma's whiteboard) or Miro (the veteran collaboration platform). I've used both across multiple projects — sprint retros, user flow mapping, architecture sketches, and the occasional late-night "let me just dump everything in my head onto a canvas" session.
This comparison isn't going to recite feature lists from their marketing pages. I'll focus on what actually matters when you're the one staring at a blank board, trying to get work done.
At a Glance
| FigJam | Miro | |
|---|---|---|
| Best for | Design teams, quick brainstorms, Figma users | Cross-functional orgs, complex workshops, enterprise |
| Free plan | Unlimited files, 3 collaborators per file | Unlimited members, 3 editable boards |
| Paid from | $5/user/month (or $3 bundled with Figma Design) | $8/user/month (Starter), $16 (Business) |
| Templates | ~300 (design and ideation) | 2,500+ (all industries and functions) |
| Top integrations | Figma, Slack, MS Teams | Jira, Asana, Confluence, Slack, Teams, 100+ |
| Offline | No | No |
| Learning curve | Low (Figma familiarity helps) | Medium (dense toolbar, many panels) |
| Hand-drawn style | No | No |
| Version history | 30 days (Professional) | Forever on paid plans |
Where FigJam Wins
Zero friction for Figma users. This is FigJam's single biggest advantage and it can't be overstated. If your team designs in Figma, opening a FigJam board is a single click from the file browser. No new tab. No separate login. The interface mirrors Figma's — the selection handles, the auto-layout mindset, the keyboard shortcuts. You already know how to use it before you open it.
Price. FigJam Professional is $5/user/month, but here's what most people miss: if you already pay for a Figma Design seat ($12/month), you can add FigJam for $3. A 10-person design team with Figma already pays $120/month for design — adding whiteboards for everyone costs $30/month more. The same team on Miro Business would be $160/month just for whiteboarding.
It stays out of your way. FigJam's toolbar is sparse by design. Markers, sticky notes, shapes, connectors, stamps, and a timer. That's the core set. There is no "insert Jira ticket," no "create dashboard," no kanban board template hiding in a submenu. This minimalism is a feature, not a bug — it means you spend your time drawing and talking, not clicking through panels.
Playfulness that actually helps. FigJam has stamps, emoji reactions, a lively cursor, and a timer with music. It sounds gimmicky until you use it in a real workshop. A well-timed stamp or a cluster of emoji reactions lowers the barrier for quiet team members to participate. Miro feels like a conference room with a projector; FigJam feels like a wall covered in butcher paper and markers.
Where Miro Wins
Template depth is genuinely useful. 2,500 templates is a big number, but what matters is coverage. Miro has structured templates for things that aren't even diagramming: Sprint planning boards, project charters, stakeholder maps, risk matrices, customer journey maps, technical architecture diagrams (AWS, Azure, GCP), UML class diagrams, BPMN workflows. If you need a ready-made framework at 9 AM on a Monday, Miro probably has three versions of it.
Cross-functional power. Miro connects to Jira (turn a sticky note into a ticket), Confluence (embed a live board in a doc), and 100+ other tools. A product manager can run an entire sprint planning without leaving Miro: pull up the board, drop stickies for tasks, convert to Jira tickets, and link to the Confluence spec — all on one canvas. FigJam intentionally doesn't do this. Figma's philosophy is "stay in Figma," not "connect everything."
Enterprise administration. SAML SSO, SCIM provisioning, domain whitelisting, content governance, audit logs. FigJam's admin controls are thinner because they lean on Figma's existing org structure. This works fine if your company already manages Figma at scale. If your team doesn't use Figma at all, you'd need to set up Figma accounts to use the whiteboard — an extra step that standalone tools don't require.
Diagramming is a first-class citizen. Miro has a full shape library, connector routing, and diagram-specific features (UML shapes, ER diagram tools, flowchart templates). FigJam has basic connectors and that's about it. If your whiteboard sessions regularly turn into architecture diagrams or process flows, Miro's toolset is better matched.
The Overlap: What Both Handle Fine
Both do real-time collaboration with multiple cursors visible. Both have voting, timer, and facilitation features for workshops. Both let you export to PNG/PDF and share via link. Both work in a browser without installing anything. Both let you leave comments on specific elements. If your use case is "we run a retrospective every two weeks and need a place to put sticky notes," either tool will serve you well and the decision comes down to price and ecosystem.
Specific Scenarios: Which One I'd Actually Pick
Scenario 1: A 5-person startup doing product discovery. Miro, free plan. Unlimited collaborators on the free tier means the whole team can jump into a single board without paying. FigJam's 3-collaborator-per-file limit on free makes it unworkable for teams above 3.
Scenario 2: A design team of 8 that already uses Figma. FigJam, no question. The bundled pricing, the single-account convenience, the muscle memory from Figma — it's the path of least resistance.
Scenario 3: A 40-person product org running quarterly planning. Miro. The Jira integration alone saves hours of manual ticket creation. The template library means you don't build planning boards from scratch. FigJam tops out around the "small design team" use case.
Scenario 4: A solo user who wants to sketch a flowchart and share it. Both FigJam and Miro were built for team collaboration — their free plans, their interfaces, and their feature sets all reflect that. For someone working solo who just wants to open a canvas and sketch, there are simpler options. An infinite whiteboard like CodePic opens in one click, no account needed, with a hand-drawn canvas that feels like paper.
The Real Cost of "Free"
Both tools use freemium to hook you, but the pressure points are different. FigJam's free plan limits collaborator count per file — you can make as many boards as you want, but only three people can touch a given board at once. Miro's free plan limits board count — you can invite the whole company to a board, but you only get three editable boards total. Miro also locks features like video chat, voting, and timer behind the paid plans, while FigJam keeps those free. Read the fine print before you standardize your team on a tool.
Bottom Line
Pick FigJam if your team already pays for Figma, you run quick brainstorms more than structured workshops, and you value speed over feature depth.
Pick Miro if you need 2,500+ templates, cross-functional integrations (especially Jira), or you're in an organization that requires SAML and audit controls.
A lighter option exists if your needs are simpler. FigJam and Miro are both built for teams — they carry the feature weight that team workflows require. For solo work, quick sketches, or when you just want a canvas without account setup, free tools like CodePic offer an infinite whiteboard that opens in one tab, no signup required.
