A product team has two hours for a remote workshop. Ten people join from four time zones, ideas fly onto sticky notes, someone needs to run a quick vote and the designer wants to turn the best concept into a flow diagram. If the whiteboard tool is slow, confusing or poorly connected to the rest of the workflow, half the session is lost to the tool instead of the ideas.

FigJam and Miro are two of the most popular online whiteboards for brainstorming, planning and workshops. They look similar at first glance, but they differ in ecosystem, depth and focus. This guide compares them across the factors that matter most so you can pick the right one for your team.

FigJam vs Miro: A Quick Overview

FigJam is Figma’s online whiteboard, designed to be simple, playful and tightly connected with Figma’s design tools. Miro is a standalone visual collaboration platform with a large template library, extensive integrations and features aimed at a wide range of teams, from design and product to engineering and consulting.

Features, pricing and plan limits change often, so confirm current details on each tool’s website before deciding.

Ease of Use and Learning Curve

FigJam

FigJam is intentionally simple. Sticky notes, shapes, connectors, stamps and cursor chat are easy to find, and new participants can start contributing within minutes. This lowers the barrier for stakeholders who are not designers.

Miro

Miro offers a deeper toolset, including advanced diagram shapes, frames, tables, cards and presentation features. That power comes with more menus and options, so facilitators may need a little more time to set up boards and guide newcomers.

Verdict: FigJam is easier for quick sessions and mixed audiences, while Miro rewards teams who invest time in more structured boards.

Templates and Workshop Support

Both tools offer templates for retros, brainstorming, journey maps, roadmaps and design sprints.

• FigJam: a clean, curated set of templates and community-contributed boards, ideal for common design and product workshops.
• Miro: a very large library covering agile ceremonies, strategy frameworks, UX mapping, planning and training sessions.

If your team runs many different workshop types, Miro’s breadth can save setup time. If your needs are mostly design-focused, FigJam’s selection is often enough.

Facilitation and Collaboration Features

Both support lively, real-time sessions. Miro tends to offer more facilitation controls, while FigJam focuses on keeping the experience light and fun.

Diagramming and Mapping

FigJam handles flowcharts, user flows and simple system diagrams well, and it works nicely when those diagrams need to connect with design work in Figma. Miro offers a broader diagramming toolkit with advanced shapes, mapping options and tools suited to complex process or architecture diagrams.

Verdict: FigJam suits quick flows and journey sketches, while Miro suits more detailed diagrams and large-scale planning.

Integrations and Ecosystem

FigJam

FigJam’s biggest advantage is its link to Figma. Designers can move ideas into design files, embed Figma frames and keep everything within one platform. It also integrates with common collaboration tools such as chat and project management apps.

Miro

Miro offers a large marketplace of integrations with project management, product, engineering and communication tools. Teams that live across many platforms often value that flexibility.

Verdict: FigJam wins on design workflow continuity, and Miro wins on breadth of integrations.

AI and Automation Features

Both platforms have added AI-assisted features, such as summarizing sticky notes, clustering ideas and generating diagrams or templates. Capabilities, names and plan availability change quickly, so check the latest information before relying on a specific feature. Use AI to speed up synthesis, but review results carefully, since summaries can miss nuance.

Pricing and Value

Pricing models differ and change over time, so check the official pages. Consider these factors:

Compare total cost across everyone who needs to edit, not only the people who run workshops. Check how viewers and guests are treated on each plan.

Who Should Choose FigJam?

• Design teams already using Figma who want a seamless connection.
• Teams that value simplicity and quick, informal sessions.
• Mixed audiences where many participants are new to whiteboards.
• Small to mid-sized teams with straightforward workshop needs.

Who Should Choose Miro?

• Cross-functional teams using many different tools.
• Facilitators and consultants who run complex, structured workshops.
• Product and engineering groups needing advanced diagramming and planning.
• Large organizations that need extensive templates and enterprise controls.

Alternatives Worth Considering

Alternative products change quickly, so check current features and availability.

Using FigJam and Miro in Design Workflows

Whiteboards are most useful when they connect research, ideas and design decisions.

A sample workflow

A well-run design thinking workshop uses these activities to align stakeholders quickly, and the whiteboard tool you choose should make them easier, not harder.

Tips for Running Better Online Workshops

• Set up the board in advance: use frames, instructions and templates so participants start quickly.
• Give a short orientation: show how to add notes, vote and react before the session.
• Time-box activities: use timers to keep energy and focus high.
• Encourage silent brainstorming first: this reduces groupthink and gives quieter voices space.
• Capture decisions clearly: summarize outcomes and next steps on the board.
• Move work into the right tool afterward: transfer designs, tasks and documentation into your regular workflow.
• Test the tool beforehand: check access, permissions and connection issues before the session.

Common Mistakes When Choosing a Whiteboard Tool

Whiteboards Support Better Decisions, but Research Drives Them

A whiteboard organizes thinking, but good decisions depend on good inputs. UX research gives workshops real user insight to work with, so ideas and priorities are grounded in behavior rather than assumptions.

FigJam vs Miro Decision Checklist

• Does your team already use Figma heavily?
• How complex are your typical workshops and diagrams?
• Who needs to edit and who only needs to view?
• Which integrations matter most to your workflow?
• Have you checked current pricing and plan limits?
• Do you need advanced facilitation or presentation features?
• Have you tested both tools in a real session?
• Do you have a plan to move outcomes into your project and design tools?

Getting Started

You do not need a long evaluation. Run one real workshop in each tool, gather feedback from participants and facilitators, and compare setup time, ease of use and how well results flow into your next steps. If you want expert help turning workshop insights into polished, research-led interfaces, a specialist team offering UI/UX design services can help you move faster with less risk.

Final Thoughts

FigJam and Miro are both strong online whiteboards. FigJam shines for simplicity and close ties to Figma, while Miro stands out for depth, templates and integrations. Choose based on your team’s workflow, the complexity of your sessions and the tools you already use, and test before committing. The best whiteboard is the one that helps your team think clearly together and turn ideas into action.

FAQs

Is FigJam better than Miro?

Neither is better for everyone. FigJam suits teams that want simplicity and a close link to Figma, while Miro suits teams that need a deeper feature set and broader integrations.

Is FigJam free?

FigJam offers a free option with limits, and paid plans unlock more features. Plans and limits change, so check the current details on the official site.

Which tool is better for design workshops?

Both work well. FigJam is convenient for design teams already in Figma, while Miro offers more templates and facilitation features for larger or more structured workshops.

Can I move content between FigJam and Miro?

Moving content between tools can involve exporting images or rebuilding boards, as direct transfers are limited. Plan for some manual work if you switch.