As of 1 Nov 2026, the panel rates Conceptboard 3/5 and Miro 3.5/5 in Online Whiteboard. Weighted by what each judge cares about, 0 of the 6 judges pick Conceptboard and 6 pick Miro. Conceptboard scores higher on 2 of 7 criteria (European sovereignty and Pricing transparency). Miro scores higher on 5 of 7 criteria (Sharing, permissions & administration, Integrations, import & export, Canvas, templates & content, plus 2 more). Provenance — Conceptboard: EU-Made; Miro: Rest of world. Ratings are the AI panel’s opinion, formed from public evidence: how scores are made.
The lean splits by criterion. Miro is ahead on canvas and content (6.3 vs 4.5), facilitation (7.2 vs 5.8), integrations and export (6.8 vs 4.3) and access and administration (7.5 vs 4.8), with six judges leaning Miro and none leaning Conceptboard on each. Conceptboard is ahead on sovereignty (8.0 vs 6.0, six lean Conceptboard) and pricing transparency (6.2 vs 5.5, four lean Conceptboard, two tie). Security and deployment is the open split: three judges lean Miro, three tie. The weighted totals are higher for Miro for the workshop facilitator (6.6 vs 5.3), product team lead (6.8 vs 5.8), M365 admin (7.3 vs 5.6), works-council member (6.6 vs 6.4), public-sector judge (6.4 vs 6.0) and skeptic (6.4 vs 5.8). The verdicts themselves split, too — Miro on sovereignty (5 to 7), Conceptboard on pricing transparency (5 to 7) — and the Conceptboard verdict reports different figures across captured pages for third-country transfers.
Choose Conceptboard if
Sovereignty decides the purchase: six judges lean Conceptboard on sovereignty (8.0 vs 6.0), and its verdict rests the score on a German contracting entity, hosting in the Frankfurt region on named IONOS and AWS infrastructure, a published data processing agreement, and ISO 27001, 27017 and 27018.
You need an air-gapped deployment: the Conceptboard verdict documents a self-hosted Data Center Edition that runs fully air-gapped.
Your procurement wants documented hosting choices in Germany: the verdict names hosting on IONOS and AWS in the Frankfurt region, with IONOS or STACKIT as paid options.
You must state your costs up front: four judges lean Conceptboard on pricing transparency, where its verdict records published tiers and concrete free-plan limits — alongside 'additional fee' add-ons and unexplained guest counting.
Choose Miro if
Guests must join without accounts: six judges lean Miro on facilitation (7.2 vs 5.8), and its verdict documents joining by QR code or link with no account.
Your team needs SAML single sign-on and SCIM provisioning: the verdict has SAML starting on the Business plan, with SCIM provisioning and Enterprise audit-to-SIEM, and six judges lean Miro on access and administration (7.5 vs 4.8).
Integration breadth decides the buy: six judges lean Miro on integrations and export (6.8 vs 4.3), though the captured pages give different figures for its integration count (over 160 on one, 250+ on others).
You need canvas basics on day one: six judges lean Miro on canvas and content (6.3 vs 4.5), and we found no public information on sticky notes, freehand drawing or connectors in the captured Conceptboard pages.
An administrator must be able to block AI outright: the Miro verdict documents this control, and on security and deployment three judges lean Miro with three ties (7.2 vs 6.5).
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.
Conceptboard
Miro
This judge's pick
Criterion by criterion
Canvas, templates & 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.
Miro
An infinite canvas, sticky notes, a library of 7,000+ templates and serious diagramming — flowcharts, ERDs, UML class and sequence diagrams on a single board, with video and audio walkthroughs embedded — cover our workshop and process-mapping needs well. We found no public information on search across boards, documented limits for large boards, or AI clustering and summarising of notes with its data use stated.
Workshop facilitation & participation
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.
Miro
This is close to what my workshops with other authorities need: people join by QR code or link from any device with no installs and no account required, and there is a timer, dot voting, polls, private anonymous mode, breakout frames, Bring Everyone to Me, presentation mode through frames, live reactions and locking of sections. The interactive activities are capped at up to 50 participants on Business and Enterprise, and while the vendor says the platform is built to meet enterprise accessibility standards, we found no published accessibility statement or conformance report.
Integrations, import & export
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.
Miro
Connections for over 250 tools including Slack, Confluence, Jira, Teams and Google Workspace, a REST API, Web SDK, Live Embed via iFrame, a marketplace and documented Visio and Lucidchart import give a ministry room to wire this into its landscape. The terms confirm export features exist during the term and 30 days after, but we found no public information on export formats, webhooks, or a two-way Jira sync.
Sharing, permissions & administration
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.
Miro
Administration reaches the depth procurement asks for: SAML single sign-on, SCIM and just-in-time provisioning, audit logs with SIEM integration, admin roles split into company, user and content scopes, data classification with guardrails that stop high-sensitivity boards being shared publicly, retention automation and a Discovery API. Most of this, including the audit logs, sits in the Enterprise plan, and we found no public information on domain capture or transferring a leaver's boards.
Security, AI controls & deployment
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.
Miro
Encryption in transit and at rest, customer-hosted keys via AWS Key Management Service, annual independent penetration tests, sensitive-data discovery and unusually granular AI governance — administrator blocking, provider and model choice, own API keys, AI audit trails streamed to our security tools — are documented. But the key AI controls and key management are paid Enterprise add-ons, and we found no public information on an on-premises or private-cloud edition, a stated deletion period, or a statement for works councils.
European sovereignty
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.
Miro
The contracting entity in the standard terms is RealtimeBoard Inc. dba Miro of San Francisco under California law and San Francisco venue — the imprint names a Berlin GmbH and an Amsterdam EU representative exists, but the data importer in the data processing agreement is the US company. EU data residency is available on every plan on AWS, subprocessors are listed with their locations, and ISO 27001 and SOC 2 are stated; the named AI, captions, email and support processors are all in the United States, and the privacy policy warns that collected data may be transferred to and processed in the United States — with our data protection officer that ends the conversation, and we found no public information on BSI C5.
Pricing transparency
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.
Miro
Tiers are public with exact prices — Free at €0, Starter at €8/month per member, billed yearly, Business at €20/month per member, billed yearly — and the plan comparison unusually details inclusions such as 50 AI credits/member/month and 2,000 MCP calls per day. Enterprise is "Custom pricing—from 30 members", the add-ons we would need (key management, classification, eDiscovery, premium support, the AI blocking controls) carry no prices, and we found no public information on how guests or viewers are counted.
Sovereignty, side by side
Dimension
Conceptboard
Miro
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 Miro higher: 3.5/5 against 3/5. Weighted by what each judge cares about, 0 of the 6 judges pick Conceptboard and 6 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.
Where do Conceptboard and Miro store customer data?
Per the vendors’ own pages as captured — Conceptboard: Default not stated; pages mention Germany. Miro: Default not stated; pages mention the EU, the US, Australia and Japan.
Do Conceptboard and Miro 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.