Blog center Lark insight Comparisons Sales & CRM Project management AI & Automation Team collaboration People management Retail Food & Beverage Technology & IT Marketing Lark news News mentions

Mural vs Miro: Differences, Pricing, and Best Use Cases

Ryan Tanner

Product Marketing Specialist

Sep 8, 2026

Ryan Tanner

Product Marketing Specialist

Sep 8, 2026

Try Lark for free

17 min read

As remote and hybrid work becomes the norm, teams increasingly rely on visual collaboration tools to brainstorm, plan, and execute projects effectively. Mural vs Miro are two of the most popular platforms for this purpose, offering interactive whiteboards, mind mapping, sticky notes, and diagramming features. Each tool has unique strengths depending on whether your team values structured workshops, open-ended ideation, or design workflows.

In this guide, we'll explore the key differences between Mural and Miro, their pricing plans, core features, and best use cases, helping you decide which tool best supports your team's collaboration and productivity needs.

Turn visual thinking into shared execution

Get ready

What is a Mural?

Image source: mural.com

Mural is a digital collaboration platform designed to help teams visualize ideas, run workshops, and solve problems collectively. It's widely used for facilitated workshops, design thinking sessions, and innovation exercises, making it ideal for teams that value structured collaboration. With Mural, users can create Mural boards featuring sticky notes, diagrams, shapes, and frameworks like LUMA, allowing participants to brainstorm, organize, and prioritize ideas in real time.

Mural emphasizes guided collaboration, providing facilitation tools such as timers, voting, private mode, and participant management. Unlike freeform whiteboards, Mural focuses on structured ideation, which is especially useful for change management teams, training sessions, and cross-functional workshops. Its enterprise features include advanced permissions, SSO, audit logs, and integration with tools like Zoom and Webex, ensuring secure and scalable usage.

In the broader landscape of visual tools, Mural competes with platforms like Miro, FigJam, and Figma, offering a strong solution for teams that need workshop-driven collaboration and structured brainstorming.

What is Miro?

Image source: miro.com

Miro is a versatile online whiteboarding and collaboration platform designed to support teams in brainstorming, planning, and executing projects. Unlike Mural, which focuses on structured workshops, Miro provides flexible, freeform visual workspaces that are ideal for product, UX, and design teams. Users can create Miro boards with sticky notes, flowcharts, diagrams, and mind maps, making it suitable for both synchronous and asynchronous collaboration.

Miro stands out for its extensive template library, advanced diagramming capabilities, and integrations with popular tools like Jira, Figma, Slack, and Azure. This makes it easier for teams to embed whiteboards directly into workflows, track progress, and maintain continuity between ideation and execution.

In the broader comparison of visual collaboration tools, Miro competes with Mural, FigJam, and Figma, offering a flexible environment for cross-functional collaboration at scale. It is especially popular among teams that prioritize open-ended visual thinking and product discovery workflows.

Miro vs Mural: Full features comparisons

Whiteboarding and ideation experience

When comparing Mural vs Miro, the whiteboarding and ideation experience is one of the most important factors to consider. Both platforms offer robust tools for brainstorming, mapping ideas, and running collaborative sessions, but their approach and flexibility differ.

Sticky notes, shapes, diagrams, and freeform layouts: Both Mural and Miro allow teams to use sticky notes, shapes, and diagrams to capture and organize ideas visually. Mural focuses on structured exercises, making it easy to guide participants through workshops, while Miro's freeform layouts give teams more flexibility for open-ended brainstorming. These features make real-time collaboration intuitive and visually engaging.

Templates for brainstorming, retrospectives, and planning: Mural and Miro provide a rich library of templates for retrospectives, planning sessions, and ideation workshops. Mural templates are optimized for facilitated workshops, keeping teams on track, whereas Miro offers highly customizable templates suited for design, product, and agile workflows. Templates save time while maintaining structure or flexibility depending on your team's needs.

Which tool feels faster for real-time ideation? Speed during live sessions is critical for effective collaboration. Mural feels faster when running guided workshops with participants, thanks to its facilitation tools, such as timers and voting. Miro, on the other hand, excels at real-time ideation in flexible layouts, allowing multiple team members to contribute simultaneously without predefined constraints.

Facilitation tools and workshops

When evaluating Mural vs Miro, facilitation features play a crucial role in how teams run workshops and collaborative sessions. Both tools provide options to guide participants, but their approaches differ depending on whether sessions are structured, hybrid, or asynchronous.

Timers, voting, private mode, and facilitation controls: Mural offers built-in facilitation tools, including timers, voting, private mode, and participant management. These features help workshop leaders keep sessions organized, encourage engagement, and ensure equal participation. Miro also includes similar tools but emphasizes flexibility, allowing facilitators to adapt the session to hybrid or async workflows.

Mural's strength in structured workshops: Mural shines in structured workshops, design sprints, and training sessions. Its guided templates and visual frameworks keep teams aligned and productive, making it ideal for innovation, change management, or strategy-focused exercises.

Miro's approach to async and hybrid collaboration: Miro excels in asynchronous and hybrid collaboration, giving distributed teams the freedom to contribute on their own schedule. Its flexible boards, rich templates, and integrations with tools like Jira and Slack enable ongoing ideation beyond live workshops, supporting continuous teamwork.

Design, product, and UX workflows

In the Mural vs Miro comparison, design, product, and UX workflows highlight some of the most significant differences between the two platforms. While both tools support visual collaboration, their suitability for design teams varies depending on workflow requirements and integrations.

Miro's popularity with product and design teams: Miro is widely adopted by product and UX teams for creating user flows, wireframes, and prototypes directly on the board. Its flexible canvas, advanced diagramming features, and integration with tools like Figma and Jira make it a go-to platform for ongoing design work and collaborative product discovery.

Comparison with FigJam and Figma: Miro often competes with them for design and brainstorming workflows. While FigJam excels in ideation for UI/UX designers, Miro offers broader flexibility and can accommodate product, engineering, and cross-functional teams working on complex workflows beyond pure design.

Where Mural fits, and where it falls short for design: Mural is best suited for design thinking workshops and structured ideation sessions, helping teams organize ideas and run creative exercises. However, it falls short for ongoing product or UX workflows, as it lacks deep diagramming capabilities and tight integration with design tools, which limits its utility for continuous design processes.

Collaboration beyond the canvas

When comparing Mural vs Miro, it's essential to consider how teams collaborate beyond the whiteboard itself. While both platforms excel at real-time visual collaboration, sustaining communication and context after sessions can be challenging.

Comments, mentions, and reactions: Mural and Miro both allow participants to leave comments, use mentions, and add reactions on boards. These features facilitate discussion, provide feedback, and help keep team members engaged during workshops. However, these interactions remain largely board-bound and may not integrate with broader project workflows.

Limitations of canvas-based discussions: Canvas-based discussions can become isolated from other team tools, which limits long-term context and actionable follow-ups. Critical decisions, task assignments, and outcomes often need to be exported or manually transferred to project management or documentation platforms.

New angle: what happens after the workshop ends: After sessions conclude, boards often become static archives, and the momentum of ideas can be lost. Teams must ensure outputs are translated into tasks, projects, or documentation to maintain continuity; this gap is sometimes addressed through integrations or additional tools.

Organization, governance, and scale

When evaluating Mural vs Miro, organization, governance, and scalability are key factors for larger teams or enterprises. Proper management of boards, permissions, and access ensures smooth collaboration across departments and projects.

Board organization and access control: Both Mural and Miro offer robust tools for organizing boards and controlling access. Teams can categorize boards by project, department, or client, and set view or edit permissions to maintain order and security across the workspace.

Admin features, permissions, and enterprise readiness: Enterprise users benefit from advanced admin features, including SSO, audit logs, user provisioning, and granular permissions. These capabilities help IT and team leaders maintain governance and compliance across multiple boards and teams.

Friction teams face managing hundreds of boards: As teams grow, managing them can become cumbersome. Without clear organization, boards may get duplicated, permissions may be mismanaged, and context may be lost, making it challenging to maintain consistent workflows and collaboration across the organization.

Mural vs. Miro pricing plans: Side-by-side comparison

Below is a consolidated pricing table based on the plans and features shown in the images, highlighting how Mural and Miro compare across free, team, business, and enterprise tiers.

Image source: mural.com

Image source: miro.com

Platform	Plan	Price (annual billing)	Best for	Key features included
Mural	Free	$0	Individuals & small teams exploring visual collaboration	Create up to 3 murals, unlimited view-only visitors, open rooms, core visual collaboration tools
Mural	Team+	$9.99/user/mo	Teams collaborating frequently	Unlimited murals, unlimited visitors with edit rights, private rooms, Mural AI, basic integrations (Zoom, Webex), monthly billing option
Mural	Business	$17.99/user/mo	Cross-team collaboration at scale	All Team+ features, SSO (SAML 2.0), unlimited external users, advanced integrations (Azure, GitHub, Okta), priority support, LUMA frameworks
Mural	Enterprise	Contact sales	Large organizations with strict governance needs	All Business features, advanced admin controls, SCIM user management, audit logs, reporting APIs, 2FA, data residency, BYOK, enterprise security
Miro	Free	$0	Individuals & early-stage teams	3 editable boards, 5,000+ templates, 160+ app connections, layers, basic Miro AI credits
Miro	Starter	$8/user/mo	Small teams needing unlimited boards	Unlimited boards, unlimited visitors, high-resolution exports, version history, brand center, custom templates, Miro AI credits
Miro	Business	$16/user/mo	Teams & consultants (highlighted use case)	Multiple private workspaces, unlimited guests, advanced diagramming, Jira/Azure sync, planner & dependencies, SSO, synced copies
Miro	Enterprise	Custom pricing (from 30 users)	Large enterprises	Organization-wide controls, SCIM, centralized account management, advanced security, data residency (EU/US), Miro AI+ controls, customer success support

Information source: mural.com

Update time: 2025-12-12

Note: Pricing and plan details reflect publicly available data as of the update date and may vary based on region, billing cycle, and number of agents.

👉 Know more: Google Workspace Pricing: A Comprehensive Guide

When Mural is the better choice

In the Mural vs Miro comparison, specific scenarios clearly favor Mural due to its structured approach and workshop-focused features. Teams that rely on guided collaboration and framework-driven sessions will benefit most.

Facilitated workshops and training sessions: Mural excels in facilitated workshops and training sessions, providing timers, voting, private mode, and templates to guide participants effectively. These tools help ensure engagement, structured brainstorming, and productive outcomes.

Change management and innovation teams: Teams focused on change management or innovation can leverage Mural's structured workflows to design thinking exercises, prioritize ideas, and implement organizational initiatives. Its guided format supports alignment and accountability.

Teams prioritizing structured collaboration: For teams that value structured collaboration over open-ended exploration, Mural provides a clear framework to capture, organize, and refine ideas. This makes it ideal for cross-functional workshops, retrospectives, and strategic planning sessions.

When Miro is the better choice

In the Mural vs Miro comparison, specific scenarios highlight Miro's strengths in flexibility and open-ended collaboration. Teams that need adaptable canvases and cross-functional workflows will find Miro particularly valuable.

Product discovery and UX workflows: Miro is ideal for these workflows, enabling design, product, and engineering teams to map user journeys, create wireframes, and collaborate on prototypes in real time. Its flexibility supports iterative design and ongoing innovation.

Cross-functional collaboration at scale: For organizations with large, distributed teams, Miro enables it. Multiple team members can work simultaneously on boards, share feedback, and integrate with tools like Jira, Figma, and Slack to maintain continuity.

Teams needing flexible, open canvases: Teams that prioritize flexible, open canvases over structured frameworks benefit from Miro's freeform whiteboards. Unlike Mural, Miro allows participants to explore ideas, create complex diagrams, and collaborate asynchronously without predefined constraints.

In short:

Mural is well-suited for facilitated workshops and structured collaboration, especially when frameworks, guided sessions, and enterprise governance are priorities.

Miro offers stronger flexibility and ecosystem depth, with broader integrations, richer diagramming, and better support for ongoing product, design, and engineering workflows.

The better choice depends on whether your team values guided collaboration (Mural) or open-ended, scalable visual workspaces (Miro).

Common limits: Why Mural and Miro can't cover all team needs

Even the best platforms in Mural vs Miro comparisons have limitations when it comes to turning visual collaboration into actionable outcomes. Teams often face challenges once workshops or brainstorming sessions conclude.

Ideas don't translate into owners or tasks: Whiteboards can generate many creative ideas, but without clear ownership or task assignments, these ideas often remain dormant. Teams may struggle to convert brainstorming outputs into executable action items or project plans.

Boards become archives instead of action hubs: Over time, boards can become static repositories rather than living workspaces. Without integration into workflows or documentation tools, the outputs of Mural or Miro sessions risk being forgotten or underutilized.

Disconnected communication silos: Because each platform's tools lack integrated, persistent communication, discussions about the board often happen in separate apps like Slack or Zoom. This forces teams to constantly switch back and forth between the visual board and the chat history, leading to fragmented feedback loops and a "ping-pong" effect that slows down decision-making.

Performance lags with large-scale projects: As boards grow to capture long-term planning or complex roadmaps, both tools frequently suffer from significant performance drops and "visual chaos." This makes it difficult to scale for large teams who need a structured, high-performance environment for ongoing work rather than a temporary session.

As teams mature, visual whiteboards alone often fall short of what day-to-day work demands. Brainstorms create great ideas, but without clear ownership, follow-up, or shared context, boards quickly become static references rather than drivers of progress. This is the moment many teams look beyond pure whiteboarding tools, and toward Lark, which connects visual thinking directly to collaboration, documentation, and execution in one workspace.

Connect ideation directly to team workflows

Contact sales

Meet Lark: Collaborative visual workshop combining smart features

While Mural and Miro are excellent for standalone visual workshops, Lark's strength is continuity. Lark Docs' overall collaboration platform, mind maps, sticky notes, flowcharts, and diagrams don't exist in isolation; they live inside documents that also handle communication, planning, and follow-through. For teams that want visual collaboration to lead directly into execution, Lark provides a more connected and sustainable workflow.

Lark Docs that move from brainstorming to execution

Unlike isolated canvases in Mural or Miro, Lark Docs is an online document collaboration platform that enables multiple people to view or edit documents at the same time. With features like @mention, comments, and replies, teams can brainstorm, sketch ideas, and visually organize thoughts while staying within a document that also includes goals, context, and outcomes. All collaboration results can be checked in the "edit history" and shared in group chats, making coordination smoother than ever.

Unlike Mural or Miro, where whiteboards and document editing often become standalone artifacts after a session ends, Lark ensures whiteboard content stays actionable. Teams can revisit, refine, and expand visual ideas as the project evolves, without exporting images or copying content into another tool.

Whiteboards that move from brainstorming to execution

Mind maps that naturally become structured plans

Lark supports mind mapping as part of visual blocks embedded in Docs, allowing teams to break down complex ideas, hierarchies, and dependencies visually. These mind maps aren't just for exploration; they sit alongside written sections, tables, and task references in the same document.

This design makes it easy to turn a mind map into a structured plan. For example, a brainstorming map can quickly evolve into a documented strategy, requirements list, or execution outline. Compared to Miro or Mural, where mind maps often need to be reworked elsewhere for execution, Lark enables teams to stay in one continuous workflow from ideation to delivery.

Mind maps that naturally become structured plans

Embedded boards that keep context intact

One of Lark's most substantial advantages is how boards are embedded directly inside Docs rather than living as separate files. Visual elements, whether sketches, frameworks, or collaborative diagrams, remain tightly connected to the surrounding content. Diagrams or flowcharts can be reviewed, commented on, and updated collaboratively, making them easy to maintain as processes change.

This means readers don't need to jump between tools or links to understand the whole picture. In contrast, Mural and Miro boards often require switching tabs or sharing external links, which can fragment understanding over time.

Embedded boards that keep context intact

Sticky notes that remain part of the work, not just the workshop

Lark supports sticky-note-style collaboration through visual board elements embedded in Lark Docs, allowing teams to capture ideas quickly during live sessions. What makes Lark different is what happens after the session: sticky notes remain editable and connected to the document's structure.

Teams can group notes, add explanations, reference them in later sections, or turn insights into concrete next steps, all without losing context. While Mural and Miro excel at real-time sticky note exercises, those notes often become static snapshots. Lark ensures they remain part of an evolving workspace.

Sticky notes that remain part of the work, not just the workshop

Pricing:

Starter plan: Free forever plan that includes 11 powerful tools for up to 20 users. It also comes with 100GB of storage, 1000 automation runs, AI translations, and more.

Basic plan: $6/user/month (billed annually) for up to 500 users. It includes everything in Starter plus group calling for up to 500 attendees, 5TB of storage, 1000 automation runs, and more. For more details, please contact sales.

Pro plan: $12/user/month (billed annually) for up to 500 users. It includes everything in Basic plus group calling for up to 500 attendees, 15TB of storage, 50,000 automation runs, and more. Companies looking to optimize software spending frequently compare their options against ClickUp pricing.

Enterprise plan: Contact sales for custom pricing. Supports unlimited users and includes even more automation runs and advanced security, compliance, and management features.

Starter

Pro

Enterprise

Starter

For small teams with simple communication needs

/ user / month

Try for free

No credit card needed

20 users max

18 months message history

1-on-1 video meetings

100 GB storage

Lark Docs & Mail

1000 Base automation runs/month

2000 rows per table in Base

Mural vs Miro vs Lark: Key differences that matter

When comparing Mural, Miro, and Lark, it's essential to look beyond basic whiteboarding features. Each platform has a distinct focus, strengths, and ideal use cases. While Mural and Miro excel at standalone visual collaboration, Lark combines ideation, documentation, and execution in one workspace. Understanding these differences helps teams choose the tool that best fits their workflow needs.

Dimension	Mural	Miro	Lark
Primary focus	Facilitated workshops and guided visual collaboration	Flexible, freeform visual workspaces for design and product teams	End-to-end collaboration that connects ideation, documentation, and execution
Whiteboards	Strong workshop-focused boards with facilitation tools	Highly flexible whiteboards with deep diagramming and templates	Embedded whiteboards inside Docs, connected to plans and tasks
Mind maps	Supported mainly for brainstorming sessions	Advanced mind mapping with rich visual controls	Mind maps embedded in Docs that evolve into structured plans
Sticky notes	Excellent for live workshops and retrospectives	Widely used for brainstorming and ideation	Sticky-note style elements that stay part of living documents
Diagrams & flows	Good for facilitated exercises	Extensive diagramming for systems and product flows	Diagrams embedded alongside explanations and decisions
Context & documentation	Boards often stand alone after sessions	Boards usually live separately from docs	Visuals live inside Docs with full narrative context
Execution & follow-through	Requires exporting or moving outputs elsewhere	Often paired with additional tools for execution	Visual ideas transition directly into tasks and workflows
Tool sprawl	Typically paired with docs and task tools	Often paired with PM and doc tools	Collaboration, Docs, tasks, and visuals in one workspace
Piricing	Free with 3 murals; paid from $9.99/member/month	Free with 3 editable boards; paid from $8/member/month	Free with unlimited boards and documents; paid from $6/member/month
Best for	Workshop facilitators and design thinking sessions	Product, UX, and engineering teams	Teams that want ideas to turn into action without switching tools

Final verdict: Which tool should your team choose

Mural and Miro are excellent choices for teams that need standalone visual collaboration, especially for workshops, design sprints, or complex system mapping. However, when visual thinking is only one part of a broader workflow, teams often struggle with handoffs, duplicated work, and lose context.

Lark stands out as the better long-term choice for modern teams because it doesn't treat whiteboards, mind maps, or diagrams as isolated artifacts. Instead, visual collaboration lives directly inside Docs, alongside discussions, decisions, and next steps. This continuity allows teams to move seamlessly from brainstorming to execution, without exporting boards or switching tools. For teams that value speed, clarity, and follow-through, Lark is the clear winner.

Move from brainstorming to execution faster

Try now

Conclusion

When comparing Mural vs Miro, the choice depends on your team's collaboration style and workflow needs. Mural is ideal for structured workshops, training sessions, and teams that prioritize guided, framework-driven ideation. Miro excels in product discovery, UX workflows, and teams that need flexible, open-ended visual canvases for cross-functional collaboration.

Both tools are strong standalone solutions for brainstorming, whiteboarding, and design exercises, but they can fall short in translating ideas into action. For teams seeking continuity, context, and seamless execution from ideation through follow-through, Lark provides an integrated platform that keeps visual collaboration aligned with tasks, documentation, and workflow management.

FAQs

Is Miro or Mural free?

Both offer free tiers, but their limits differ. Miro provides 3 editable boards with unlimited team members, while Mural's free plan is often considered more generous, offering 5 editable boards and access to advanced facilitation tools like voting and timers that are typically locked behind paid tiers in Miro.

Does Mural have frames like Miro?

Yes, but they are called "Outlines." Just like Miro's frames, Mural's Outlines allow you to group content into "slides" for easier navigation and structured presentations. You can right-click any object to "Add to Outline," which then appears in a sidebar for quick jumping between different parts of the board.

Is there anything better than Miro?

Considering you are looking for an alternative to Miro, here, "Better" depends on your specific workflow. For example, Lark is a strong all-in-one alternative that combines whiteboarding directly with group chat and collaborative docs, making it easier to turn brainstorms into actionable tasks. FigJam is often preferred by designers, while Lucidspark is superior for technical diagramming. For Microsoft users, Microsoft Whiteboard is a great budget choice included with Business 365.

What are the downsides of Miro?

Miro can feel overwhelming and "bloated" for new users due to its massive feature set and steep learning curve. Performance issues, such as lagging or slow loading, are common on very large, complex boards with thousands of elements. Additionally, its mobile app is frequently criticized for being less reliable and harder to use than the desktop version.

How do teams manage long-term knowledge in whiteboards?

Managing knowledge long-term can be tricky in Mural vs Miro vs Figma workflows. Boards capture ideas effectively, but without linking to documentation or tasks, insights may be lost. Teams often export content, create structured repositories, or integrate with tools like Confluence to maintain a record of decisions, frameworks, and follow-ups from workshops.

Are visual tools practical for async-only teams?

For async collaboration, Mural vs Miro pricing and features matter. Miro's flexible boards and integrations support asynchronous input, while Mural can be more structured and guided. Teams working across time zones benefit from templates, comments, and sticky notes to provide context, feedback, and updates without relying on real-time sessions.