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 9.2 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.
$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.
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 …
In theory it can do the all the things these other apps offer. And it does to a certain extend. if your prototypes are not too complex it can completely remove the need for other prototyping software. Through Figjam presentation and collaboration, alternatives provide no extra …
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 …
FigJam is okay, but just feels more clunky than Miro. It kind of reminds me of the early versions of Miro with primitive features. Figma is still a far superior screen design tool, but I like the wireframe features built into Miro for quick mockups. I'm not sure if it will ever …
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.
Atlassian's Confluence and whiteboard is more accessible to cross functional team. I think we just have more user licence compared to what we were allowed for FigJam then Miro.
Its a good product for a wider range of user types/users from a range of teams. It does a wide scope of functionalities. From whiteboarding, presentation creation, workshopping, onboarding space, and more!
I used InVision for a while - it was interesting but without many features, the work was still very manual, the tool was soon discontinued at the company I worked for. I've used FigJam, it's a good tool, but very simple in features, which is why Miro is so important, we always …
as i said i am a Miro fangirl, so I haven't used the other ones much. to be honest they are all quite similar so to me it's a matter of habit and familiarity
While in Google Docs everything is listed vertical, in Miro I can use much more space and it's easier to explain dependencies and build an easy-to-understand big picture.
Nuclino was simply not feature rich enough. I may have spent an entire five minutes in it. When I can't even edit the formatting of text at all, that's an issue. Milanote is a really good tool, but isn't as flexible as Miro and tends to be on the expensive side. Miro has a big …
It's challenging to describe how Miro stacks up against every other product listed above. Some are more relevant at different stages of the design realisation journey, some are more hyperfocused to certain usecases.
Trello for example; I found myself creating Kanban boards in …
Speed, intuitivness, collaboration aspects of Miro particularly during the meetings are way beyond to competitors. Its indeed a one platform which I use daily, as a Software Architect where I'm every day work with my peers in design or process discussion Miro is invaluable. It …
- FigJam it cost too much and don't have as may functions as Miro - Atlassian is not good of collaboration and doing things in creative way - Mural is very similar to Miro but I prefer Miro it was my first tool
We have all these in place and use Miro on top, besides, as stated before I do not see a need in reducing tools but connecting them better. Ideal situation is done at Confluence and jira. for some of our tasks they are a bit techie driven and therefore we use Miro.
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.
Miro is the ideal tool where a highly collaborative environment is needed in order to be productive. Projects or ideas that are complex and require input from many people all at once are where Miro really shines. Where Miro is not ideal is when it becomes the 'source of truth' for information. Because it is very collaborative and editable by all, it's not the right tool for maintaining comprehensive information, or 'south of truth' IE project plan commitments etc.
Prototyping in Figma is pretty much nothing more than a glorified slide show. Sure, variables, etc are available but it takes way to long to set them up and even more time when there are revisions needed.
It would be helpful if there were a contextual help system for various functionality. For example, advanced autolayout (like space between) can become very tricky to implement sometimes. I often wish there were an AI assistant to ask for help. I often use ChatGTP to help me through these times.
Searching layers needs to be much easier and more intuitive.
I would like to be able to make groups like the layers palette in Photoshop. That would help with organization and speed a lot.
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.
My rating for Miro is 10 because it has delivered excellent outcomes for my team. We can now plan in real time before taking any action, and anyone can participate in the plans we are creating to boost our company's sales. We all have good plans and strategies for the target audience, so most team members are able to create a good incentive
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.
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 other tools it's fast and shows less lag. Collaboration in Figma is very easy as it is cloud based but in XD it's not that smooth working with other designers.
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 solution.
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
