Echometer
5.3Psychology-backed retros and team health checks for engineering teams
Echometer is a German retrospective and 1:1 meeting platform built around recurring health-check pulses, structured retros, and longitudinal team development tracking. It pitches itself to engineering managers, scrum masters and agile coaches who want research-grounded surveys rather than a blank whiteboard.
Full review →
FigJam
7.2Figma's whiteboard with AI sticky clustering, voting sessions and a $3 Collab seat — free tier caps at 3 boards
FigJam is the whiteboard product inside Figma — sticky notes, timer, music, expressive cursor stamps, voting sessions, an AI co-pilot that clusters and summarises stickies, and 300+ ready-made templates including community retro boards. Design and product teams already living in Figma get retros without buying a second tool, backed by Figma's SAML/SCIM, SOC 2 Type II, ISO 27001 and EU data hosting on Organization and Enterprise plans. Voting sessions, audio chat and no-account guest links all require a paid team.
Full review →Summary
Echometer scores 5.3 overall and is best for engineering managers and agile coaches who want recurring health-check pulses tied to retros, with EU data residency and a research-flavoured question library. It offers a free tier.
FigJam scores 7.2 overall and is best for design and product teams already on Figma who want retros on the same platform as their design files, with playful engagement and AI clustering. It offers a free tier.
Echometer leads on ease of use and retro toolkit. FigJam leads on fun factor, AI & insights, integrations, open platform and enterprise-grade.
Across our eight scoring dimensions, FigJam edges ahead with an overall score of 7.2. That said, the right pick depends on your team — see the dimension-by-dimension breakdown below.
Scores compared
| Detail | Echometer | FigJam |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Retrospectives | Whiteboard |
| Team size | Mid-market | Mid-market |
| Free tier | Yes | Yes |
| Free limit | Starter: 1 team, 25 workspace members, unlimited retro guests, 1 retro/month after trial, 2-retro archive per team | Starter: 3 FigJam files per team (unlimited personal drafts), 150 AI credits/day (500/month), templates, timer and music, 30-day version history — no voting sessions, audio chat or open (no-account) sessions |
| Starting price | €29/team/mo | $3/user/mo |
| Est. 3 teams × 8 people | €87/mo billed annually (3 teams × €29 Pro) | ~$72/mo (24 Collab seats × $3, annual) — more if hosts need Full seats |
| Enterprise | Yes | Yes |
| Founded | 2019 | 2012 |
| HQ | Münster, Germany | San Francisco, US |
| Data residency | Germany | United States · European Union |
| Languages | 2 (English, German) | English only |
| Export formats | PDF · Markdown · Email | PDF · Image · CSV |
| Features | 43 | 39 |
| Integrations | 1 | 10 |
Feature & integration comparison
Side-by-side checklist across features, integrations and security. Hover a note for details.
| Capability | Echometer | FigJam |
|---|---|---|
| Features | ||
| AI Summaries | — | ✓ |
| AI grouping/clustering | — | ✓ |
| AI action items | ✓note | ✓note |
| Action tracking | ✓ | — |
| Team Insights | — | — |
| Polling | ✓ | ✓ |
| Action dashboard | ✓ | — |
| Custom templates | ✓ | ✓ |
| Anonymous input | ✓ | — |
| Independent voting | ✓ | ✓note |
| Async mode | ✓ | ✓ |
| Agile Estimations | — | ✓note |
| Health Checks | ✓ | — |
| Team Kudos | — | ✓note |
| Whiteboard | ✓ | ✓ |
| Integrations | ||
| Asana | — | ✓note |
| Azure DevOps | — | — |
| Basecamp | — | — |
| ClickUp | — | — |
| Confluence | — | ✓note |
| GitHub | — | ✓note |
| GitLab | — | — |
| Jira | ✓ | ✓note |
| Linear | — | ✓note |
| Microsoft Teams | — | ✓note |
| Monday.com | — | ✓note |
| Notion | — | ✓note |
| Shortcut | — | — |
| Slack | — | ✓note |
| Trello | — | ✓note |
| Security & Privacy | ||
| SOC 2 | — | ✓ |
| GDPR | ✓ | ✓ |
| SSO / SAML | ✓note | ✓note |
| SCIM provisioning | — | ✓note |
| ISO 27001 | — | ✓ |
| On-premises | — | — |
| Public API | — | ✓ |
| Webhooks | — | ✓ |
| MCP server | — | ✓note |
Echometer — pros
- + 200+ research-grounded health-check items, custom models and automated pulse rotation
- + Longitudinal team radars, heatmaps and workspace dashboards tied to retros
- + EU-only data residency (Open Telekom Cloud, Germany) with GDPR DPA
- + Open actions resurface automatically in the next retro, with email reminders to owners
- + Per-team pricing — €87/mo covers three teams of eight, billed annually
Echometer — cons
- − Thin integrations — Jira and calendar sync only; no Slack, Teams or Confluence
- − No public API or webhooks; export is PDF and Markdown only
- − No SOC 2 — the ISO 27001 certificate covers the datacenter, not Echometer itself
- − Retro-side AI stops at suggesting measures; transcript coaching is a separately-priced 1:1 product
- − No scheduled or recurring retros — you copy a past format and start each session manually
FigJam — pros
- + Cheap $3/user/mo Collab seat unlocks unlimited boards without a full Figma editor seat
- + Free Starter tier includes real AI credits (150/day, 500/month), 300+ templates, the timer and music
- + Same login and platform as Figma — zero friction for design-led teams
- + Playful, engaging UX — stamps, emotes, high-fives, music, cursor chat — lifts retro fun factor
- + Strong enterprise posture inherited from Figma: SAML, SCIM, activity logs, SOC 2 Type II, ISO 27001, EU data hosting on Enterprise
FigJam — cons
- − No native action-item tracking, recurring retros or health checks
- − Anonymity is weak — votes reveal who voted once the session ends, and stickies always carry a name
- − Official connectors embed Figma files in Jira/Confluence/Linear/Notion rather than pushing action items out; GitHub-issue creation is a community widget; no Azure DevOps
- − Free Starter caps a team at 3 FigJam files and excludes voting sessions, audio chat and no-account guest links
- − Built primarily for designers — the canvas paradigm is fiddly for structured retros, and large boards get sluggish
Keep comparing
Other Echometer comparisons
Other FigJam comparisons
See alternatives
Not sure which to pick? Read our guide on how to choose a retrospective tool.