As of 1 Nov 2026, the panel rates Collaboard 3.5/5 and Conceptboard 3/5 in Online Whiteboard. Weighted by what each judge cares about, 6 of the 6 judges pick Collaboard and 0 pick Conceptboard. Collaboard scores higher on 4 of 7 criteria (Sharing, permissions & administration, Canvas, templates & content, Integrations, import & export, plus 1 more). Conceptboard scores higher on 2 of 7 criteria (Security, AI controls & deployment and Pricing transparency). Provenance — Collaboard: UK / wider Europe; Conceptboard: EU-Made. Ratings are the AI panel’s opinion, formed from public evidence: how scores are made.
Collaboard is ahead on canvas and content (6.3 versus 4.5), integrations and export (6.0 versus 4.3) and access and administration (6.8 versus 4.8) — six judges lean Collaboard and zero lean Conceptboard on those criteria — and on facilitation (6.2 versus 5.8), which leans 2 to 0 with four ties. Conceptboard is ahead on security and deployment (6.5 versus 6.0; three lean its way, three tie) and pricing transparency (6.2 versus 5.7; two leans to Collaboard's one, three ties). Sovereignty ties at 8.0 on six tied judges. Conceptboard's pricing score rests on published tiers and free-plan limits set against 'additional fee' add-ons; Collaboard's 5.7 reflects 'Custom pricing' on the tier carrying single sign-on and self-hosting, and captured pages giving different figures for currency. Judge weightings give 6.3 to 5.3 (workshop facilitator) and 6.7 to 6.4 (works-council member). The leans differ by criterion; that split is the answer.
Choose Collaboard if
You need SCIM provisioning documented in depth and tenant-wide audit logs with stated retention: access and administration runs 6.8 to 4.8, with six judges leaning Collaboard.
Your boards depend on canvas basics such as sticky notes, freehand drawing and connectors: canvas and content runs 6.3 to 4.5 with six judges leaning Collaboard.
You must export board content in named formats or integrate through a documented API rather than a promise of full export with no formats named: integrations and export leans six to zero for Collaboard.
You run facilitated workshops: facilitation sits at 6.2 versus 5.8, though only two judges lean Collaboard and four tie.
Choose Conceptboard if
Your security review requires certifications: Conceptboard's verdict lists ISO 27001, 27017 and 27018, while the bench found no public information on certifications such as ISO 27001 or SOC 2 for Collaboard.
You need published tier prices and concrete free-plan limits for budgeting, rather than 'Custom pricing' on the tier carrying single sign-on and self-hosting: pricing transparency leans 2 to 1 toward Conceptboard (6.2 versus 5.7).
You must contract with a German entity and host in Germany on named infrastructure — Conceptboard Cloud Service GmbH of Halle (Saale), IONOS and AWS in the Frankfurt region — noting sovereignty ties at 8.0.
Your team weighs security and deployment heaviest: three judges lean Conceptboard and zero lean Collaboard (6.5 versus 6.0).
Read this comparison as one judge. Each weighs the same scores by what they care about.
The Public-Sector Project Lead
Leads the digitalisation programme of a state ministry and runs workshops with municipalities, agencies and external consultants. The data protection officer has ruled out US-hosted boards, and procurement asks for BSI C5 or an on-premises installation in the state data centre. Needs guests from other authorities without accounts, a board that works in the browser on locked-down machines, an accessibility statement, and a contract the procurement office can sign.
Collaboard
This judge's pick
Conceptboard
Criterion by criterion
Canvas, templates & content
Collaboard
Infinite canvas, sticky notes, five digital pens, shapes, tables, mind maps, documents and multimedia are all documented, with a large template library (over 350 German and over 250 English templates) and organisation-wide templates created by owners and managers. We found no public information on search across boards, documented limits for large boards, or what Collaboard AI does with board content.
Conceptboard
Templates for workshops, meetings and retrospectives that can be adapted to the organisation, plus Kanban boards, timelines and Gantt-style views, tasks, comments and file uploads with stated per-tier limits, give me a solid workshop foundation. The captured pages never describe the basic canvas primitives — sticky notes, shapes and connectors, freehand drawing, pen input, an infinite canvas — nor search across boards, embedded documents or any AI assistance, so I cannot place it higher.
Workshop facilitation & participation
Collaboard
Guests can edit without an account on every paid tier, and timer, anonymous voting with two modes, participant selection, a results archive and a presentation mode that brings participants to the facilitator's view are all documented, with participant limits stated per plan. We found no public information on breakout areas, a session agenda, or an accessibility statement, which I need for participants from municipalities.
Conceptboard
Live moderation with a timer and voting, presentation sections, temporary guest access for externals, and boards running inside Teams and Webex meetings cover the core of my sessions with municipalities — and there is a real accessibility statement, audited by Materna in July 2025 against EN 301 549 and BITV 2.0, though only partially compliant with no templates marked accessible. I found no public information on an anonymous or private note mode, breakout areas, stated participant limits, or whether guests join without an account, which is a requirement I cannot yet confirm for guests from other authorities.
Integrations, import & export
Collaboard
Teams, Webex, Pexip, Nextcloud, Rocket.Chat, Stashcat, Jira and Confluence integrations are named, the Teams app supports on-premises hosting, and import from Miro, Mural and Conceptboard is documented step by step with an object mapping. We found no public information on webhooks, a two-way Jira sync, or an export in CSV or another editable format beyond PDF, which is the exit path procurement will ask about.
Conceptboard
Named apps for Microsoft Teams and Webex, a Jira integration that puts tickets and status on the board, Confluence embedding, and file import from Google Drive, OneDrive and Dropbox are a workable landscape, and the terms mention interfaces for programmatic access. A full data export is promised automatically or on request, but no export formats, no import from other whiteboards, no webhooks and no documented API are described, so my procurement office cannot verify structured exit.
Sharing, permissions & administration
Collaboard
Roles for owner, moderator, editor and reader, password-protected boards, time-limited links with separate expiry values for guests, SAML and OAuth single sign-on, and detailed SCIM and LDAP provisioning are published, and tenant-wide audit logs export as CSV with stated retention of 90 days on web and Swiss environments and 365 days on the German one. We found no public information on domain capture, retention rules or legal hold, data classification labels, or transfer of boards when a person leaves.
Conceptboard
Individual rights per file, board and project with role-based permissions, SAML 2.0 single sign-on, two-factor authentication, LDAP in the self-hosted edition, and audit logs on the Corporate tier with a stated 180-day log retention give me an administrable picture. I found no public information on link-sharing expiry or passwords, SCIM provisioning, domain capture, central sharing policies, or what happens to a person's boards when they leave.
Security, AI controls & deployment
Collaboard
TLS in transit and 256-bit AES at rest are stated, functions can be deactivated for the whole tenant, and deployment in our own data centre is genuinely documented: virtual appliance, air-gapped operation, Kubernetes and OpenShift compatibility, even the customer's own AWS or Azure account. We found no public information on which AI providers process board content, a statement that boards are not used to train AI models, deletion periods, a works council agreement template, or a penetration test summary.
Conceptboard
AES-256 in transit and at rest with forward secrecy, detailed technical measures from network segmentation to daily encrypted backups and disaster recovery, and penetration tests with a summary report on customer request are documented — and decisively for us, an on-premises Data Center Edition runs containerised on Kubernetes, even fully air-gapped in a closed network, with customer-controlled updates. The captured pages say nothing about AI functions or their controls, customer-managed keys, data loss prevention, or how individual activity is shown to managers, so those stay unassessed rather than judged.
European sovereignty
Collaboard
Contracting entity IBV in Bonstetten has a registered German office in Lörrach, the published Article 28(3) agreement lists subprocessors with addresses, and the German environment runs on Open Telekom Cloud with HubSpot and Google Analytics explicitly excluded from German and Swiss hosting; an on-premises edition keeps every board on the customer's own servers. We found no public information on BSI C5, ISO 27001 or SOC 2 certifications, and the global environment's chain includes SendGrid in San Francisco with possible HubSpot transfer to the United States, so I would contract only the German or on-premises environment.
Conceptboard
A German contracting entity under German law, hosting in Germany on named infrastructure (IONOS, StackIT, AWS Frankfurt), a published data processing agreement, ISO 27001/27017/27018, a C5 attestation described for the IONOS CLOUD infrastructure of the public-sector offering, a published subprocessor list, and a documented air-gapped self-hosting edition that keeps every board on the customer's own servers — this is what my data protection officer and procurement ask for. The security page states there is no transfer to third countries while the privacy policy names third-country-connected providers for the website (Vimeo, Meta, Google, Twitter/X, YouTube) under standard contractual clauses, so the captured pages give different figures for third-country transfers.
Pricing transparency
Collaboard
Free, Basic at "$6/user per month billed yearly" and Advanced at "$11.50/user per month billed yearly" are public with participant, guest and upload limits, VAT treatment and cancellation terms, but the Enterprise tier holding single sign-on, SCIM, audit logs and self-hosting is "Custom pricing", the German hosting surcharge carries no figure, and we found no public information on minimum seats or the on-premises licence cost. The captured pages give different figures for currency: the pricing page states dollar amounts while the terms state that all prices are in Euro (EUR) exclusive of VAT.
Conceptboard
Three tiers are public at "5€ / user / month Starter", "From 10€ / user / month Advanced" and "From 14€ / user / month Corporate & Government", with free-plan limits, VAT treatment, monthly and yearly billing, minimum users and terms, EVB-IT contracting, and cancellation terms in the terms of use. Single sign-on and the IONOS or StackIT hosting options are marked as "additional fee" without amounts, the on-premises and dedicated Special Plans are "On request", and how guest contributors are counted toward the price is not stated, so my budget office can price the tiers but not the sovereign add-ons.
Sovereignty, side by side
Dimension
Collaboard
Conceptboard
Legal entity
Not determined
Not determined
Hosting location
Not determined
Not determined
Hosting options
Not determined
Not determined
Open source
Not determined
Not determined
Data processing agreement
Not determined
Not determined
Transfer impact assessment
Not determined
Not determined
Facts, side by side
Only facts both products carry under the same definition — anything else would not be a fair row.
As of 1 Nov 2026, the panel rates Collaboard higher: 3.5/5 against 3/5. Weighted by what each judge cares about, 6 of the 6 judges pick Collaboard and 0 pick Conceptboard. Which one fits depends on the criteria that matter to you; the table on this page shows both side by side, and each judge’s reading has its own page. Both were scored by the same AI bench under the same rubric, from public evidence only, as the methodology describes.
Is Collaboard or Conceptboard European?
Collaboard is European (UK / wider Europe). Conceptboard is European (EU-Made). Provenance is read from each company’s own legal pages: who builds it and who owns it.
Where do Collaboard and Conceptboard store customer data?
Per the vendors’ own pages as captured — Collaboard: its pages as captured do not say. Conceptboard: Default not stated; pages mention Germany.
Do Collaboard and Conceptboard have a free plan?
As of 1 Nov 2026, both vendors’ own pages state a free plan. Each product page links the pricing page it was read from.