ToolStack

Miro vs Confluence

Side-by-side comparison · Updated 2026-03-30

Our VerdictMiro wins overall

Miro leads on our composite score — 4.7/5 on G2 vs Confluence's 4.1/5 — but the gap is meaningful at the category level.

Choose Miro if…

Choose Miro if your team focuses on brainstorming and user story mapping and fits a startup, scaleup profile. Starting at $8/user/mo/user/mo with a free tier. Best-in-class infinite canvas experience — the gold standard for collaborative whiteboarding with real-time multiplayer editing

Choose Confluence if…

Choose Confluence if your team focuses on product requirements documentation and team wiki and fits a startup, scaleup profile. Starting at $6.05/user/mo/user/mo with a free tier. Deep native integration with Jira makes it the de facto documentation tool for teams already using Atlassian — Jira issues embed seamlessly in pages

Miro
by Miro
4.7
out of 5 · 7k+ G2 reviews
Visit Miro ↗
Confluence
by Atlassian
4.1
out of 5 · 4k+ G2 reviews
Visit Confluence ↗

Feature Comparison

FeatureMiroConfluence
Category
whiteboarding
documentation
G2 Score
4.7 / 5.0Better
4.1 / 5.0
G2 Reviews
6700
3600
Free Tier
Starting Price
$8/user/mo
$6.05/user/moBetter
Mobile App
AI Features
API Access
SSO / SAML
SOC 2
Learning Curve
easy
moderate
Platforms
web, mac, windows, ios, android
web, mac, windows, ios, android

Pros & Cons

Miro

Pros
✓ Best-in-class infinite canvas experience — the gold standard for collaborative whiteboarding with real-time multiplayer editing
✓ Massive template library with 2,500+ community and built-in templates for user story mapping, retrospectives, journey maps, and more
✓ Extremely intuitive interface — new users can be productive in minutes, making it ideal for cross-functional workshops
✓ Excellent facilitation features including voting, timer, attention management, and presentation mode for remote workshops
Cons
✗ Performance can degrade significantly on very large boards with thousands of sticky notes, images, and embedded objects
✗ Free plan limited to only 3 editable boards — previous versions were more generous, which frustrates longtime users
✗ Pricing adds up quickly for large teams since all members need paid seats for full collaboration

Confluence

Pros
✓ Deep native integration with Jira makes it the de facto documentation tool for teams already using Atlassian — Jira issues embed seamlessly in pages
✓ Extensive template library with 100+ templates for PRDs, meeting notes, retrospectives, decision logs, and more — accelerates team onboarding
✓ Real-time collaborative editing with inline comments, @mentions, and page watching enables asynchronous team communication at scale
✓ Powerful space and page tree organization allows structured knowledge bases that scale from small teams to thousands of users
Cons
✗ Search functionality is frequently criticized — finding content across large instances with thousands of pages is unreliable and slow
✗ Page editor, while improved with the new editor, still feels less fluid than Notion or modern wiki tools for rapid content creation
✗ Information architecture degrades over time — spaces and pages become disorganized without dedicated governance and regular content audits

Frequently Asked Questions

It depends on your needs. Miro scores 4.7/5 on G2, while Confluence scores 4.1/5. Miro is better for brainstorming and user_story_mapping, while Confluence excels at product_requirements_documentation and team_wiki.
Miro starts at $8/user/mo per user/month with a free tier. Confluence starts at $6.05/user/mo per user/month with a free tier.
Miro supports 200 integrations, while Confluence supports 3,000.
Full Miro Review →Full Confluence Review →
Data verified 2026-03-30. Some links may be affiliate links — see disclosure.