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 Product Designer
Owns the design system of a B2B software product. Wants components with variants, tokens with modes, prototypes that test a real flow, and library releases that are versioned and reviewable — a design system is a product, not a page of nicely arranged buttons.
Conceptboard
Miro
This judge's pick
Criterion by criterion
Design, prototyping & design systems
Conceptboard
The captured pages show an online whiteboard: a pre-built template library, facilitation tools like live moderation, timers and voting, boards for mood boards and design briefings, and a 100-object cap on the free plan that implies a drawing canvas. I found no public information on reusable components, shared styles, tokens, component variants or clickable prototypes — this is a canvas with templates, not a tool in which a design system can live.
Miro
A real prototyping canvas: drag-and-drop editing on an infinite canvas, clickable prototypes stakeholders can comment and vote on, 29 prototype templates, AI generation of wireframes and editable flows, and on-demand AI review of the prototype itself. What I found no public information on is the design-system layer — shared component libraries that update where used, component variants and properties, variables or tokens with modes, and library publishes with versions — so this lands as prototyping, not design-system management.
Collaboration, review & developer handoff
Conceptboard
Real-time and asynchronous collaboration with tasks, comments and annotations is documented, alongside role- and permission-based access control, board history on the Advanced plan, and named integrations with Teams, Webex, Confluence, Google Drive and Dropbox. Handoff to engineering is not addressed anywhere I read: no developer or inspect view with measurements, no code linking, no version restore or branching, and programmatic access appears only as a general mention of interfaces in the terms.
Miro
Real-time co-editing, comments with @mentions pinned to uploaded images, and a handoff discipline I respect: walkthroughs, questions captured next to the design, a visible changelog, copy-to-Figma with fully editable elements, and an MCP handoff where a coding agent builds a React app straight from the prototype. REST APIs and WebSDKs are on every plan, with named connections to Jira, Confluence and Claude Code among 250+ integrations. I found no public information on free guest reviewers, an inspect view with measurements and asset export, or version history with restore and branching.
Brand assets & governance
Conceptboard
A pre-built template library ships on the Starter plan and the Advanced plan adds team templates, an approval process and custom branding, which gives teams a shared template set. I found no public information on a central brand kit carrying logos, colours and fonts, on locking brand elements, or on rights, usage and expiry metadata for licensed assets — templates without governance.
Miro
Brand Center gives teams a central place for company fonts, colours, styles and templates, custom templates apply brand guidelines from the first board, and one-click automatic styling pushes brand colours and fonts across boards and presentations; admin insights even track featured-template usage. I found no public information on locking brand elements or restricting who edits templates, approval workflows for new assets, or rights, usage and expiry metadata on licensed assets.
Files, formats & portability
Conceptboard
The Data Center Edition is a documented self-hosting path: containerized via Kubernetes and Helm charts, running on the customer's own S3-compatible storage and PostgreSQL, delivered as an OCI-compliant bundle with installation and operations manuals, and operable fully air-gapped. The terms state plainly that users must secure their data before contract end and that stored data may be irretrievably deleted after termination; I found no public information on export of designs to formats like PNG, PDF or SVG or on bulk export of boards.
Miro
The terms are clear that customers retain the IP in their content, may export it during the term or within 30 days after it ends, and that deleting an account deletes content permanently and irretrievably. The export paths I could see are copy-to-Figma with fully editable prototype elements and a table export to an external data app — the latter requiring a third-party Marketplace app to be installed. I found no public information on whole-file download with structure, an open or documented file format, or bulk export of a team's boards.
AI features & rights to the work
Conceptboard
I found no public information on AI features, on whether customer content trains any model, or on rights to generated output — the captured homepage, pricing and terms pages describe no AI capabilities at all. The terms address ownership of user content in general terms, but nothing specific to AI training, models or generated material.
Miro
The AI terms put ownership in writing — customers retain their input and own the output — with enterprise plans getting withdrawable consent before inputs and outputs improve Miro's AI and other plans getting means to object, though the granted training licence is broad and irrevocable. Admin governance is unusually deep: per-person gating of AI features, sensitive-prompt blocking, provider and model choice, running Miro AI on your own API key, and an audit trail of AI interactions streamed to security tools. Set against that, the indemnity explicitly excludes IP claims over AI output, Microsoft is named as receiving limited AI data, and I found no public information on the processing location of AI features or labelling of generated content.
European sovereignty
Conceptboard
The contracting entity is Conceptboard Cloud Service GmbH in Halle (Saale), registered in the German commercial register with a German VAT number, under German law; hosting in Germany on AWS is included, with IONOS and StackIT as German alternatives, and the privacy policy publishes subprocessors with names, locations and purposes, including Amazon Web Services EMEA in Luxembourg and Zendesk in the USA for the help centre. ISO 27001/27017/27018 certifications and a self-hosted, air-gappable Data Center Edition are documented; the USA-hosted help-centre subprocessor is the visible non-European link that holds this below the very top level.
Miro
EU data residency is included on every plan and selectable among EU, US, Australia and Japan, an EU representative is named in Amsterdam, and a DPA with Standard Contractual Clauses is in place. The contracting entity is RealtimeBoard Inc. dba Miro in San Francisco under California law. I found no public information on the named infrastructure behind EU hosting, a published subprocessor list with locations and purposes, or where AI features are processed.
Pricing transparency
Conceptboard
All three plans are public at per-user monthly prices with features, storage caps and file-size limits per plan, a free tier limited to 3 boards and 100 objects, VAT treatment stated, and terms covering auto-renewal, a 90-day notice period for non-card payments, and once-yearly price adjustments tied to the German consumer price index. A buyer can compute an annual editor cost, but the pages I read leave viewer and guest billing and the mechanics of added seats unexplained, and single sign-on appears only as an additional fee on some plans.
Miro
Free at €0, Starter at €8/month per member and Business at €20/month per member, both billed yearly, are public, with Enterprise at custom pricing from 30 members — and the comparison runs deep: AI credits per member per month, daily MCP calls per plan, SAML SSO from Business, audit logs on Enterprise, and named add-ons such as Enterprise Guard and eDiscovery. The terms publish 12-month auto-renewal and 90-day non-renewal notice. I found no public information on how viewers and guests are billed, how and when added seats are trued 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.