FigJam
7.3Figma's whiteboard with AI sticky clustering, an official MCP server that reaches FigJam boards, 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 sorts 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 Enterprise data residency in the EU, Australia, India and Brazil. Figma's official MCP server reads and writes FigJam boards on every plan, including free. Voting sessions, open guest sessions, audio chat and webhooks all require a paid team; publishing custom templates requires Organization.
Full review →
Kollabe
6.8Agile meetings made easy — retros, standups and planning poker
Kollabe began life as a planning poker tool and now runs four rituals from one workspace: estimation, sprint retrospectives, async standups and icebreakers. The retro board is deeper than its marketing suggests — drag-to-group with optional AI clustering, dot voting configurable per board or per column, a phase timer with audio alerts, a guided workflow with auto-advance, and action items carrying owner, due date, priority and a link back to the feedback card. Exports run to PDF, CSV, JSON, Markdown, HTML, JPEG and Confluence, with action items pushed to Jira, GitHub or Linear. Billing is flat per team space rather than per seat. There are no recurring retros, no health-check instrument and no compliance certifications.
Full review →Summary
FigJam scores 7.3 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, AI sticky clustering and an agent-accessible canvas. It offers a free tier.
Kollabe scores 6.8 overall and is best for small to mid-size agile teams running poker, retros and standups who want one cheap, playful tool — and don't need health checks, recurring retros or a compliance story. It offers a free tier.
FigJam leads on fun factor, open platform and enterprise-grade. Kollabe leads on ease of use, retro toolkit and AI & insights.
Across our eight scoring dimensions, FigJam edges ahead with an overall score of 7.3. That said, the right pick depends on your team — see the dimension-by-dimension breakdown below.
Scores compared
| Detail | FigJam | Kollabe |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Whiteboard | Retrospectives |
| Team size | Mid-market | Small |
| Free tier | Yes | Yes |
| Free limit | Starter: 3 FigJam files per team (unlimited personal drafts), 150 AI credits/day up to 500/month, 300+ templates, timer, music, AI Sort/Summarize/Generate, REST API and 20 MCP tool calls/month, 30-day version history — no voting sessions, audio chat, open (no-account) sessions or webhooks | 10 participants per meeting, 4 retrospectives/month, 7-day board history, 1 survey per board; no AI, exports, API or MCP |
| Starting price | $3/user/mo | $29/mo per space (unlimited members) |
| Est. 3 teams × 8 people | $72/mo (24 Collab seats × $3, billed annually; $120/mo billed monthly at $5) — more if facilitators need $16 Full seats | $87/mo (3 Premium spaces × $29; each space allows unlimited members) |
| Enterprise | Yes | Yes |
| Founded | 2012 | 2023 |
| HQ | San Francisco, US | Sydney, Australia |
| Data residency | United States · European Union · Australia · IN · BR | Australia |
| Languages | 7 (English, Japanese, Korean, …) | 6 (English, German, Spanish, …) |
| Export formats | PDF · Image · CSV | CSV · PDF · Markdown · Image · JSON · HTML · Confluence · Jira |
| Features | 40 | 49 |
| Integrations | 10 | 6 |
Feature & integration comparison
Side-by-side checklist across features, integrations and security. Hover a note for details.
| Capability | FigJam | Kollabe |
|---|---|---|
| Features | ||
| Custom templates | ✓note | ✓ |
| Anonymous input | — | ✓ |
| Health Checks | — | ✓note |
| Action tracking | — | ✓ |
| Async mode | ✓ | ✓ |
| Whiteboard | ✓ | ✓note |
| Independent voting | ✓note | ✓ |
| Polling | ✓ | ✓ |
| Icebreaker games | — | ✓note |
| Agile Estimations | ✓note | ✓ |
| Team Kudos | ✓note | ✓ |
| AI grouping/clustering | ✓ | ✓ |
| AI action items | ✓note | ✓ |
| AI Summaries | ✓ | ✓ |
| Team Insights | — | ✓ |
| In-meeting AI assistant | ✓ | — |
| Action dashboard | — | ✓ |
| Integrations | ||
| Asana | ✓note | — |
| Azure DevOps | — | ✓note |
| Basecamp | — | — |
| ClickUp | — | — |
| Confluence | ✓note | ✓note |
| GitHub | ✓note | ✓ |
| GitLab | — | — |
| Jira | ✓note | ✓ |
| Linear | ✓note | ✓ |
| Microsoft Teams | ✓note | — |
| Monday.com | ✓note | — |
| Notion | ✓note | — |
| Shortcut | — | — |
| Slack | ✓note | ✓note |
| Trello | ✓note | — |
| Security & Privacy | ||
| SOC 2 | ✓ | — |
| GDPR | ✓ | — |
| SSO / SAML | ✓note | ✓note |
| SCIM provisioning | ✓note | — |
| ISO 27001 | ✓ | — |
| On-premises | — | — |
| Public API | ✓ | ✓note |
| Webhooks | ✓ | — |
| MCP server | ✓ | ✓note |
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, music and AI Sort/Summarize
- + Playful, engaging UX — stamps, emotes, high-fives, music, cursor chat — lifts retro fun factor
- + Best open platform of any whiteboard here: REST API on every plan, webhooks on paid, and an <strong>official MCP server that reads and writes FigJam boards</strong> on all plans
- + Strong enterprise posture inherited from Figma: SAML, SCIM, activity logs, SOC 2 Type II, ISO 27001, and Enterprise data residency in the EU, Australia, India and Brazil
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, audio chat, no-account guest links and webhooks; publishing custom templates needs Organization
- − Built primarily for designers — the canvas paradigm is fiddly for structured retros, and large boards get sluggish
Kollabe — pros
- + Flat per-space pricing — $29/mo buys unlimited members, so three teams of eight cost $87/mo total
- + Deeper retro board than the marketing implies: drag-to-group plus AI clustering, dot voting per board or per column, a phase timer with audio alerts, and a guided workflow that auto-advances when everyone marks ready
- + Action items carry owner, due date, priority, comments and a link back to the feedback card — and push one-click to Jira, GitHub or Linear
- + Official OAuth MCP server (vendor states 46 tools) and a documented REST API on every paid plan; exports to PDF, CSV, JSON, Markdown, HTML, JPEG and Confluence
- + Unusually playful: synchronised meeting music, AI-generated backgrounds, kudos with confetti, drawings and stickers, and a 1,100-strong themed template library
Kollabe — cons
- − No recurring or scheduled retros — every session is created by hand
- − No health-check instrument: a Spotify-style board template and a handful of 1–5 pulse polls, but no radar, custom model or trend chart. The vendor advertises a 1–10 Team Health Score inside its weekly Team Insights email; the report is generated server-side and we could not verify it
- − Both paid tiers cap a space at <strong>5 facilitators/admins</strong> however many members it has; lifting it means an Enterprise contract
- − Slack is standup-only (no retro summaries or actions to a channel); no Microsoft Teams
- − No SOC 2, ISO 27001 or published GDPR posture, and all data sits in Australia with no EU or US option; SSO and SLAs are Enterprise contact-sales
- − Effectively a one-person company, and the changelog has been silent since 31 May 2026
Keep comparing
Other FigJam comparisons
Other Kollabe comparisons
See alternatives
Not sure which to pick? Read our guide on how to choose a retrospective tool.