# Miro vs FigJam > Source: https://thinkdrop.io/compare/miro-vs-figjam · Last reviewed 2026-08-26 · The thinkdrop facilitation team Choose FigJam if your team already pays for Figma and your workshops feed design work: it is lighter, faster and sits beside your files. Choose Miro if you need the broader canvas, diagramming depth and integrations, or if most participants are not designers. Both count editors, so wide participation costs money in either. _Note: prices are described in shape rather than quoted, because vendor pricing changes often. Every tool links to its own live pricing page. thinkdrop.io is our product and is marked as such._ ## The two tools side by side ### Miro Best for: Teams who want one infinite canvas for diagrams, workshops and everything visual. Pricing: Free plan with a limited number of editable boards; paid plans are per user per month. Source: https://miro.com/pricing/ Strengths: - The most complete infinite canvas: diagrams, frames, drawing, embeds - Very large template library and a mature integration marketplace - Widely known, so most participants have used it before Limitations: - Per-user pricing gets expensive once occasional participants need edit access - The blank canvas is a lot of surface area for a 30-minute session - Heavy in the browser on older machines and on mobile ### FigJam Best for: Product and design teams already living inside Figma. Pricing: Free tier with limits; paid FigJam seats priced per editor per month. Source: https://www.figma.com/pricing/ Strengths: - Sits next to your design files, so design handoff is seamless - Fast, light and pleasant to use compared with heavier canvases - Good sticky-note and voting basics out of the box Limitations: - Most valuable if your team is already on Figma; otherwise it is another account - Editor seats are counted, so wide participation costs money - No structured written summary of the session ### thinkdrop.io (our product) Best for: Structured, timeboxed idea sessions where you want a written summary at the end. Pricing: 7-day free trial (card required to start), then one flat monthly price — no per-seat charge for participants. Source: https://thinkdrop.io Strengths: - Participants join from a link without creating an account - Cards are entered individually, so the loudest voice does not anchor the room - AI suggests angles the group has missed while the session is still running - Closing the board produces a structured written summary instead of a screenshot - One price for the facilitator; guests are not billed Limitations: - It is a card board, not a freeform canvas — no drawing, diagramming or infinite zoom - No native video conferencing; you run it alongside your call - Fewer third-party integrations than the large whiteboard suites ## The deciding question is who is in the room If the participants are the design team, FigJam wins on proximity and speed. If the participants are engineering, marketing, support and a stakeholder or two, the calculation changes: each of them needs an editor seat and a login in a design tool, for a session that lasts half an hour. That is where Miro's familiarity, or a link-and-go card board, is worth more than integration depth. ## Pick by the session you actually run The useful question is not which tool is best but which shape of session you run most often. Freeform visual work — architecture sketches, journey maps, anything you would draw on a wall — wants an infinite canvas. A recurring 20-to-45-minute session that ends in decisions wants a structured card board with a timer and a summary. Most teams pick a canvas because it is famous, then use one per cent of it for a fortnightly retro. - Drawing, diagramming, spatial layout → an infinite canvas tool. - Timeboxed idea generation and voting → a structured card board. - Agile ceremonies specifically → a retrospective-native tool. - Async collection over days → a document or table, not a live board. ## How this comparison is put together Everything on this page is taken from each vendor's own public pages, linked on every entry. We deliberately do not quote competitor prices: they change several times a year and a stale number is worse than none, so pricing is described in shape (free tier, per-seat, per-team) and the link takes you to the live figure. We do not publish ratings, review counts or benchmark scores, because we have no defensible way to produce them. - Every claim is checkable on the linked vendor page. - No prices are quoted, because prices go stale — the links do not. - Where a tool beats us, we say so plainly. - thinkdrop.io is our own product and is marked as such wherever it appears. ## FAQ **Is FigJam included with Figma?** Figma's free tier includes FigJam with limits, and paid plans price FigJam editors separately from design seats. Confirm the current arrangement on Figma's pricing page. **Which performs better in the browser?** FigJam is generally the lighter of the two, which is noticeable on older machines and large boards. **Can non-designers use FigJam?** Yes, the interface is approachable, but they still need a Figma account and an editor seat to contribute — which is the practical obstacle, not the interface. --- Written and maintained by The thinkdrop facilitation team at thinkdrop.io, a real-time idea board for brainstorms, retrospectives and workshops. Free to quote with a link to https://thinkdrop.io/compare/miro-vs-figjam.