As of 28 Oct 2026, the panel rates Conceptboard 2.5/5 and Miro 2.5/5 in Design. Weighted by what each judge cares about, 1 of the 6 judges picks Conceptboard and 5 pick Miro. Conceptboard scores higher on 2 of 6 criteria (European sovereignty and Files, formats & portability). Miro scores higher on 3 of 6 criteria (Collaboration, review & developer handoff, Design, prototyping & design systems and Brand assets & governance). Provenance — Conceptboard: EU-Made; Miro: Rest of world. Ratings are the AI panel’s opinion, formed from public evidence: how scores are made.
Conceptboard and Miro split this bench rather than resolve it. Miro leads four criteria: design and prototyping (mean 4.8 against Conceptboard's 3.0, six judges lean Miro), collaboration and handoff (6.2 against 4.0, six lean Miro), brand asset governance (4.8 against 3.3, five lean Miro, one tie) and AI and content rights (6.2 against 0.0, six lean Miro). Conceptboard leads sovereignty at 7.8 against 5.0, six judges leaning Conceptboard — its legal entity jurisdiction is DE with data residency EU only, against Miro's US jurisdiction, EU optional residency and US CLOUD Act reach subprocessor exposure — and its file ownership and portability mean of 5.2 sits above Miro's 4.7, two judges leaning Conceptboard and four tied. Pricing transparency is level at 6.5 for both, one judge leaning each way. Weighted totals favor Miro for the product designer, frontend engineer, brand marketer and skeptic; the data protection officer has Conceptboard ahead, 6 to 5.5.
Choose Conceptboard if
You need data residency fixed in the EU with no selectable alternative: Conceptboard's data residency attribute reads EU only; Miro's reads EU optional.
Your data protection officer makes the final call: that judge's weighted total stands at Conceptboard 6 to Miro 5.5.
You must run the tool fully air-gapped on your own infrastructure: Conceptboard's verdict describes a self-hosted Data Center Edition that can run fully air-gapped.
Your legal review asks for German governing law and certifications: Conceptboard's verdict cites German governing law, hosting stated in Germany on named regions, ISO 27001, 27017 and 27018 certifications, and a published DPA.
Ownership and export of your board content decides the purchase: the file ownership and portability means read 5.2 to 4.7 for Conceptboard, two judges leaning Conceptboard and none leaning Miro.
Choose Miro if
Your team prototypes and iterates inside the tool daily: design and prototyping means run 4.8 to 3.0 in Miro's favor, six judges lean Miro.
You need AI features with written terms on content rights: AI and content rights means 6.2 to 0.0, six judges lean Miro, and the captured pages for Conceptboard describe no AI features.
Collaboration and handoff across roles is the core of your workflow: means 6.2 to 4.0, six judges lean Miro.
Brand asset governance counts in your decision: five judges lean Miro there, 4.8 to 3.3, with one tie.
Your priorities track the product designer, frontend engineer, brand marketer or skeptic: those weighted totals run Miro's way — 5.5 to 4.5, 5.2 to 4.6, 5.1 to 4.5 and 5.7 to 5.2.
Read this comparison as one judge. Each weighs the same scores by what they care about.
The Agency Owner
Runs a design agency of fifteen and hands every project over to the client at the end. Wants files that export with layers and components intact, guests who are not billed as editors, and terms that say the client owns the work — and what happens to it after a cancellation.
Conceptboard
Miro
This judge's pick
Criterion by criterion
Design, prototyping & design systems
Conceptboard
This is an online whiteboard for ideas, tasks and workshops: templates, facilitation tools like live moderation, timers and voting, mood boards and Kanban workflows are documented, but I found no public information on vector or layout tooling, reusable components, shared styles or interactive prototypes. Team templates appear on the Advanced plan, which is a shared template set rather than a design system. Fine for briefings and sprints; production design work is another matter.
Miro
The captured pages document a collaborative canvas with drag-and-drop editing, clickable prototypes shared for stakeholder comment, screens and flows generated from screenshots and PRDs, AI-generated prototypes that stay fully editable, and a set of 29 prototype templates. One-click automatic styling to the brand's colours and fonts gives shared styling across boards, but we found no public information on team component libraries that update where they are used, tokens or variables with themes, or component variants — the machinery that keeps a client's product consistent after my team leaves.
Collaboration, review & developer handoff
Conceptboard
Real-time and asynchronous co-editing, tasks, comments and annotations, role and permission management, and collaboration with agencies and freelancers are documented, alongside named integrations with Teams, Confluence, Drive, Dropbox and Webex. For the handoff half I found no public information on an inspect or developer view with measurements, asset export or code links; the only mention of programmatic access is a line in the privacy policy. Clients and developers can review on the board, but engineering would be handed a whiteboard rather than a spec.
Miro
Real-time co-editing, comments and @mentions pinned to the design, prototype links stakeholders can comment on, and REST APIs, WebSDKs and 250+ integrations including Jira, Confluence and Claude Code are all documented, with a copy-to-Figma handoff that keeps prototype elements fully editable. What I could not find public information on is a developer inspect view with measurements and asset export, version history with restore, or confirmation that guests and clients can comment without a paid seat — the first thing I check before inviting a client into a workspace.
Brand assets & governance
Conceptboard
The pages show a shared template library, team templates and an approval process on the Advanced plan, custom branding, and boards where marketing teams define visual guidelines — a shared template set at the basic end of brand tooling. I found no public information on a central brand kit holding logos, colours and fonts, locked templates non-designers can fill, or rights and expiry metadata on licensed assets. Usable for brand briefings, but not evidenced as a governed asset library.
Miro
Brand Center is documented as the place to manage company fonts, colours, styles and templates, custom templates carry the brand's visual guidelines onto every new board, and one-click automatic styling restyles boards and presentations to brand colours and fonts, with a brand guidelines template for documenting the rules. We found no public information on locking brand elements, restricting who may edit templates, or rights, usage and expiry metadata on licensed assets.
Files, formats & portability
Conceptboard
The terms tell customers plainly to secure their data before the end of the contract and reserve the right to delete all user data irretrievably, while stating Conceptboard claims no ownership of user content; a self-hosted Data Center Edition, delivered as a containerised bundle for your own infrastructure, is the strongest exit route documented. For the cloud product I found no public information on export formats, whole-file downloads to a local copy, or what an export preserves. The ownership clause and on-premises option earn credit; the undocumented export path is exactly what I need to hand a client their files.
Miro
The terms say the customer retains all intellectual property rights in customer content and may export it during the subscription term or within 30 days after it ends, with permanent deletion if the account is deleted — the post-cancellation clarity I look for — though the export formats themselves are only described as being in the documentation and are not shown on the captured pages. A copy-to-Figma workflow with fully editable prototype elements and an MCP push to a coding agent are documented; we found no public information on an open or documented file format, bulk export of a team's boards, or transferring the files of removed users to the organisation.
AI features & rights to the work
Conceptboard
We found no public information on AI features, whether customer content trains any model, admin controls over AI, or commercial rights to generated output; the pricing page, terms of use and product pages captured here describe no AI capability.
Miro
The AI terms are unusually explicit: customers retain ownership of Input and Output, and administrators get granular control over which AI features are available, organisation-wide moderation filters, prompt blocking and the ability to switch Miro AI or MCP off entirely, with an audit trail of AI interactions and even the option to run Miro AI on your own model subscription with your own API key. Rather than excluding training, the terms grant a perpetual, irrevocable, worldwide, royalty-free licence to use Input and Output for improving the AI features, with withdrawable consent required on Enterprise and reasonable means to object on other plans, and the terms expressly place IP infringement claims over AI output outside the indemnification — a gap I would flag to any client before shipping generated campaign visuals.
European sovereignty
Conceptboard
Contracting is with Conceptboard Cloud Service GmbH of Halle (Saale), registered at Amtsgericht Stendal and governed by German law, with hosting in Germany on named infrastructure — AWS Germany included, IONOS and StackIT Germany for an additional fee — plus ISO 27001/27017/27018 certifications and a published DPA. The privacy policy lists subprocessors with location and purpose, including Amazon Web Services EMEA in Luxembourg and Zendesk in the USA for help-centre hosting, with third-country transfers covered by EU standard contractual clauses, and an air-gapped Data Center Edition exists for full self-hosting. Company ownership is not stated on the captured pages, and the US help-centre subprocessor is what keeps this below the top level.
Miro
EU data residency is listed as included on every plan and selectable alongside the US, Australia and Japan, an Amsterdam entity (RealtimeBoard BV) is named as the EU representative, and the terms bind both parties to a DPA. The contracting party is the San Francisco company under California law, the privacy policy notes AI features may share limited data with Microsoft, and we found no published list of subprocessors with locations — EU storage on the table, chain largely unstated.
Pricing transparency
Conceptboard
Per-seat prices are public for three plans with billing period, storage and main features listed — 5€ / user / month Starter, From 10€ / user / month Advanced, From 14€ / user / month Corporate & Government — with VAT treatment stated, payment methods named, and the terms covering auto-renewal, 90-day notice, once-yearly index-based price adjustment and a 12-month minimum for Advanced. I found no public information on viewer or guest seats and their limits, on how added seats are trued up, or on the price of the SSO add-on beyond "additional fee". An agency can budget its editors but cannot see what it costs to let a client watch.
Miro
The pricing page publishes Free at €0, Starter at €8/month per member, billed yearly, and Business at €20/month per member, billed yearly, with Enterprise at custom pricing from 30 members, and a comparison table naming where SSO, audit logs, video calls, AI credits of 25 and 50 per member per month, and MCP call limits land on each plan; the terms add auto-renewal for successive 12-month periods with 90 days' notice of non-renewal, payment within 30 days, and non-refundable fees. We found no public information on how viewers or guests are billed, how and when added seats are trued up, or VAT treatment — the pieces a buyer needs to compute a full annual cost for a mixed team of editors and reviewers.
Sovereignty, side by side
Dimension
Conceptboard
Miro
Legal entity
Not determined
Not determined
Ownership
Not determined
Not determined
Data residency
Not determined
Not determined
Subprocessors
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 28 Oct 2026, the panel rates both 2.5/5. Weighted by what each judge cares about, 1 of the 6 judges picks Conceptboard and 5 pick Miro. 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 Conceptboard or Miro European?
Conceptboard is European (EU-Made). Miro is not European by provenance (Rest of world). Provenance is read from each company’s own legal pages: who builds it and who owns it.
Do Conceptboard and Miro have a free plan?
As of 28 Oct 2026, Miro’s own pages state a free plan; Conceptboard’s pages as captured do not. Each product page links the pricing page it was read from.