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 Data Protection Officer
Reviews every tool where unreleased products, customer screenshots and employee photos end up. Wants the contracting entity and hosting region named, the AI providers on the subprocessor list, and training on customer files excluded for the whole organisation in the terms — not behind a toggle each user has to find.
Conceptboard
This judge's pick
Miro
Criterion by criterion
Design, prototyping & design systems
Conceptboard
The captured pages position this as an online whiteboard with a pre-built template library, task boards, and facilitation tools such as live moderation, timer and voting. We found no public information on reusable components, shared styles, tokens or interactive prototypes, so this sits at the level of a canvas with templates.
Miro
The prototyping pages document a drag-and-drop canvas with 29 prototype templates, clickable prototypes shared for stakeholder comment, and AI generation of fully editable screens and flows from prompts, screenshots and PRDs. Brand Center applies company fonts, colours, styles and custom templates across boards and presentations. We found no public information on component libraries, variables or design tokens managed in the tool.
Collaboration, review & developer handoff
Conceptboard
Real-time and asynchronous collaboration on shared boards is documented, with tasks, comments and annotations, board history on the Advanced plan, role and permission management, and named integrations with Teams, Confluence, Drive, Dropbox, OneDrive and Webex. We found no public information on an inspect or developer view with measurements and asset export, and external collaboration is described only loosely as work with agencies and freelancers.
Miro
Real-time co-editing with comments, reactions, votes and @mentions tied to images is documented, alongside a structured developer handoff practice with walkthroughs and a visible changelog. The API story is public — REST APIs and WebSDKs on every plan, Enterprise APIs above that — with named MCP integrations to Jira, Confluence and Claude Code plus a copy-to-Figma workflow for prototypes. We found no public information on guests commenting without a paid seat, version history with restore, or an inspect view with measurements.
Brand assets & governance
Conceptboard
The Advanced plan lists team templates, an approval process, custom branding and advanced admin controls, and role and permission management runs across the product. We found no public information on a central brand library of logos, colours and fonts, on locked brand elements, or on rights, usage and expiry metadata for licensed assets.
Miro
Brand Center is documented as a central library where teams manage and apply company fonts, colours, styles and templates, with automatic restyling of boards and presentations, custom templates carrying brand guidelines, and admin insights monitoring template usage; a Brand Guidelines template is offered for documenting the rules. We found no public information on locked templates or restrictions on who may edit them, approval workflows for new assets, or rights and expiry metadata on licensed assets.
Files, formats & portability
Conceptboard
The Data Center Edition is documented as self-hosting on the customer's own infrastructure, containerized via Kubernetes, delivered as an OCI-compliant deployment bundle and runnable fully air-gapped, and the terms state the vendor claims no ownership rights in user content. The same terms put the burden of backup on the user before termination and reserve the right to irretrievably delete all user data, and we found no public information on export formats or bulk export of files.
Miro
The terms give customers a stated export window — during the subscription term or within 30 days after it — using export features described in the documentation, permanent deletion of all content when an account is deleted, and confirmation that customers retain all intellectual property in their content. The export routes the captured pages describe are conversion of board data to tables through a third-party marketplace app and a copy-to-Figma workflow for prototypes; we found no public information on whole-file download or export to image, PDF or vector formats.
AI features & rights to the work
Conceptboard
We found no public information on AI features, on whether customer content trains any model, on admin opt-outs, or on rights to generated output in the pages we read, including the homepage, privacy policy and terms. No AI provider appears among the subprocessors the privacy policy names, which is where I would expect one to be disclosed.
Miro
The AI addendum grants a perpetual, irrevocable, worldwide licence to use input and output for improving AI features, with direct identifiers removed; enterprise customers under a Master Cloud Agreement must consent first and may withdraw, but free, starter and business customers are given only a means to object. Output ownership is assigned to the customer, yet intellectual property infringement by output is expressly excluded from indemnification, with no warranty against third-party rights. The AI trust page documents organisation-wide admin control — provider and model choice, prompt blocking, blocking Miro AI by data classification and an audit trail of AI interactions — and the privacy policy names Microsoft as receiving limited AI data, but we found no public information on the processing locations or the full provider list for AI features.
European sovereignty
Conceptboard
The contracting entity is Conceptboard Cloud Service GmbH of Halle (Saale) with a German register number, German governing law and German data centres on named AWS, IONOS and StackIT regions, and the privacy policy publishes subprocessors with addresses and purposes alongside standard contractual clauses and a DPA. A self-hosted, air-gapped edition, ISO 27001/27017/27018 certificates and presence on the German public-sector marketplace strengthen the picture, though Zendesk in the USA appears as help-centre hosting in the published chain and ownership is not established on the captured pages.
Miro
The contracting entity is RealtimeBoard Inc. dba Miro of San Francisco under California law, with RealtimeBoard BV in Amsterdam acting as EU representative, and EU data residency selectable and included on every plan among EU, US, Australia and Japan regions. A DPA is referenced in the terms, and cross-border transfers rest on Standard Contractual Clauses and the EU-US Data Privacy Framework. We found no public information on the ownership structure, named EU infrastructure, or a published subprocessor list with locations.
Pricing transparency
Conceptboard
Three plans carry public per-user prices ("5€ / user / month Starter", "From 10€ / user / month Advanced", "From 14€ / user / month Corporate & Government") with per-plan features, storage and upload limits, and VAT is stated on top. Seat true-up rules, viewer and guest billing and the amount of the single sign-on additional fee are not stated on the captured pages, and the top plan plus customized enterprise solutions remain from-price or a sales conversation.
Miro
Per-seat prices are public with the billing period stated — Free at €0, Starter at "€8/month per member, billed yearly", Business at "€20/month per member, billed yearly", Enterprise "Custom pricing—from 30 members" — with a stated yearly saving of 20%. The plan comparison names where SSO, audit logs, EU data residency and Enterprise APIs begin, prices AI credits per member per month and MCP calls per day per plan, and the terms publish 12-month auto-renewal, 90-day non-renewal notice, 30-day payment terms and a 1.5% per month late charge. We found no public information on viewer or guest billing, seat true-up, or VAT treatment.
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.