Figma, headquartered in San Francisco, offers their collaborative design and prototyping application to support digital product and UI development.
$144
per year
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.
$0
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 was a huge turning point compared to its competitors, especially Adobe XD, a tool designed for the same purpose as Figma. I would say that it and all the other tools I mentioned, including those that do not have the same focus on UX design (Photoshop and Illustrator), …
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 learned UX Design using Sketch and my team was using Sketch when I joined. We no longer use Sketch, and therefore I cannot compare its current functionality to Figma, but at the time of our switch, Figma just had more advanced capabilities- better collaboration, auto-layout …
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.
Better auto layouts, components and prototyping capabilities. Variables in Figma are also a fantastic addition to create a robust, and scalable design system. I use these features all the time. Love them!
Figma compared to other tools has user friendly UI which is very easy for all levels of designers. Compared to Adobe XD and Sketch Figma is stable, while in other tools I have faced software crashing in the middle of the work which resulted in loss of data/design. Compared to …
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 only tool that was build from the ground up for enterprise level distributed teams. If I were a one man shop or even a small team, I would consider sketch or other cheaper alternatives. For a large enterprise team, the only winner is Figma.
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, …
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 …
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 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 …
In comparison to Figma, other tools which can accomplish similar tasks (Adobe XD, Sketch, and Adobe Photoshop) feel outdated, clunky, and lacking in functionality.
When switching over to Figma, the experience feels much more elegant, convenient, and cutting-edge in a number of …
Figma is the most efficient tool for teams and sharing with clients. It's also easier to learn than other Adobe products. When sharing designs with clients, Figma looks more professional than Canva.
Miro is the more collaborative option, offering the ability for many individuals to work on the same item real-time. Though it does create some duplicate entry, we've found this added cost is minimal compared to the opportunity cost of lost collaboration.
Earlier we were using different products for different requirements, such as Microsoft whiteboard, lucidcharts for diagrams. But as Miro has all these features and other additional features which makes it "all in one place" and enable us to save out time which earlier was …
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 ran a business case analysis for these, and they didn't come close. Visual omnipresent collaboration is a must; list of different features is way longer in Miro; Kanban and its views is less clunky and requires less fiddling out of the box — Trello needed to be set up …
Miro was a big hit with all the teams involved, it was easy to stand up and start using, easy to license, and easy to manage. Other tools offered stronger connections to tools in their product suite without the freedom and ease of use that Miro did.
I was a while ago that I use Mural. At that stage the features where similar. However, Miro has developed at a very quick pace and is always adding features to improve the product, so I have had no reason to look elsewhere.
I think they all have very good features and are similar to a certain extent, however, Miro includes all the interactive features and allows you to create without limitations on format or page sizes, or oversaturation of users within the same session, which is why I appreciate …
Miro basically cover the needs of all the other tools. I started using Miro extensively during the pandemic and at that point only Jamboard provided similar options and was free when collaborating in a bigger group and when not everyone had a license. This is still the main …
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.
We assessed these tools to gain a better understanding because they are excellent and have certain unique features. But in the end, we chose Miro since it offers all the features that ClickUp, Stormboard, and Conceptboard do. Additionally, it has a special feature that lets you …
We tested every product, but the biggest problem we encountered was that most of them required plugins in order to centralize all of our work. Other problems included the products' excessive price, which was higher than Miro's. Last but not least, Miro offered us an all-in-one …
In my opinion, Microsoft White Board does not compare. So much lag, much more limited functionality (ability to customize visuals and text), no ability to lock content, etc. Mural I haven't used as much. Probably closer in competition to Miro - felt pretty similar. Miro I …
FigJam is particularly tailored for design led product teams so lack the versatility which Miro provides Better for workshop facilitation but clucky UI
Jira is actively used in conjunction with Miro to track activities, and it offers functionalities that differ from Miro. However, it is much easier to create tables and diagrams in Miro. The advantage of Jira is that it enables the management of digital projects more …
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 …
Figma is a solid design tool to craft the UX design concepts/solutions for digital products. For printed marketing materials such as brochures, marketing flyers, press releases, etc, other design tools such as Adobe Illustrator, Photoshop, or InDesign might make more sense to use for those use case scenarios.
I remember a project where all our different teams were involved in it. I created a board with timelines, KPIs, and customer journey stages, and each team added their input live. We were all able to work together in real time, view the entire project, and leave comments without switching apps, which is why it worked fantastically for us. Everyone benefited from the hours of time it saved, and we made a good profit on that project, for which I was named employee of the month.
Tappable overlaid layers - bugs on fixed components, such as an app navigation footer in a prototype
Swapping a component but retaining inputted copy or imagery.
Performance on prototypes to work better in UserZoom - having to delete hidden layers manually, optimize images, and streamline the file, in general, is time-consuming
Folder structures - larger teams need multiple layers of folder structure to help find things.
Branch performance - we need better, more user-friendly solutions to get designs to merge better.
Branch performance - branching with the option to choose which pages you want in the branch without deleting each page you don't need.
Default sharing options need improvement.
Responsive ratios' in prototyping without having to recreate pages.
Better collaboration with Jira to bring in links in the design mode not just dev mode.
When using the find functionality to locate an item in a Miro board, I do not like that it keeps my previous searched term. Other programs, like Excel, do this but they have it so that you can easily overwrite the previously-searched term.
It would be helpful if you could search by a particular frame, instead of the entire board. For our quarterly backlog review, we often have items that carry over, so there are duplicates on the board. Being able to search by a frame would make this easier.
Understanding who can access a board is not always clear to me.
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
It's easy to use for designers who are familiar with design terms and functions from Photoshop and Illustrator. However, non-tech and non-designer collaborators have a hard time figuring out how to leave comments and apply changes, compared to other online design tools like Canva and Squarespace. Even simple drag-and-drops and rearrangement of certain blocks become too complicated due to uncommon functions like Hug and Lock.
The platform is flexible, easy to use, and simple because Miro is a great visualization tool that makes it easy to collaborate on creating charts. It helps in creating workflows and other designs easily and securely. It supports integrations with major cloud storage solutions and office suites. On top of that, it provides a decent free plan, which is sufficient for basic 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.
I learned UX Design using Sketch and my team was using Sketch when I joined. We no longer use Sketch, and therefore I cannot compare its current functionality to Figma, but at the time of our switch, Figma just had more advanced capabilities- better collaboration, auto-layout tools, prototyping, etc. From what I can tell, it remains best in class for UX Design tools.
Miro is the more collaborative option, offering the ability for many individuals to work on the same item real-time. Though it does create some duplicate entry, we've found this added cost is minimal compared to the opportunity cost of lost collaboration.
Miro is great for scaling. In every department and subdivision across my entire organization, there is someone using it. From Sales to marketing, to manufacturing and operations; and even in legal and finance, there isn't a process or a department that is not using Miro, and if they aren't, they're missing out! Even at the highest to the lowest levels of the organization, it is essential for virtual collaboration.