Online Whiteboard
Microsoft Whiteboard
Rest of world Report an errorPanel rating · 6 judges · How to read the stars
Category median
Sovereignty: 1 of 6 dimensions proven
0–5 in half steps. 5 means the rubric's top anchor is met on the evidence.
by Microsoft Corporation · www.microsoft.com
Compare with Miro → Report an error on this page Is this your product? →
Link to this page
Add ?theme=dark to the image address for dark backgrounds.
The badge shows the category and the month of the latest evaluation, and EU-Made where
that is the product’s provenance. It never shows a score.
Microsoft Whiteboard at a glance
- Vendor
- Microsoft Corporation
- Headquarters
- Incorporated in United States source, captured 1 Nov 2026
- Data hosting
- Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 1 Nov 2026
- Free plan
- Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 1 Nov 2026
- Panel verdict
- The AI panel rates Microsoft Whiteboard 2/5, the mean of 6 judges. Microsoft Whiteboard's persona-weighted totals ran from 3.3 to 4.4. how scores are made
- As of
- Vendor pages captured 1 Nov 2026; evaluated by the panel 1 Nov 2026. all sources
Read this page as one judge. Each weighs the same scores by what they care about.
The panel's verdict
Microsoft Whiteboard's persona-weighted totals ran from 3.3 to 4.4. Its clear strength is access and administration, scored 6 to 7: boards are files in the creator's OneDrive, under retention policies, legal hold, DLP and basic eDiscovery, with audit logging, a tenant-wide toggle, Microsoft Entra conditional access and transfer of a departing user's boards. Canvas and content at 4 to 5 and facilitation at 3 to 4 sit mid-scale, with no public information on timers, voting or connectors. The weak spots are integrations and export at 2 to 3 — no documented PDF, image or CSV export and no documented REST API — and security and deployment at 3 to 4, where the captured privacy statement says Microsoft may use data to develop and train its AI models, with no documented switch to turn Copilot off. Sovereignty is the widest band, 2 to 4: lower scores cite the US provider entity and unnamed subprocessors, higher ones the EU Data Boundary commitment for qualifying tenants. No per-user price is published; pricing transparency scores 1 to 2 and is excluded from the totals.
Speaks for it
- Administration lives inside the Microsoft 365 estate, with tenant-wide enablement, Microsoft Entra conditional access and PowerShell management of boards.
- Boards stored in the creator's OneDrive fall under retention policies, quota, legal hold, DLP and basic eDiscovery, with audit logging of create, modify, share and delete.
- A departing user's whiteboards can be transferred to another user, one board or all of them, before the account is deleted.
- Real-time collaboration is documented inside Teams meetings, chats and channels, and anonymous participants can view and collaborate during a meeting when the tenant setting allows it.
- Conformance to SOC 1, SOC 2, ISO 27001, HIPAA and EU Model Clauses is stated on the product pages.
Held against it
- We found no public information on export as PDF, image or CSV, on a REST API for board content, or on import from other whiteboards.
- The captured privacy statement says Microsoft may use your data to develop and train its AI models, and we found no public information on an administrative switch for Copilot.
- Azure-stored boards — those created in Azure or initiated on Surface Hub and Teams Rooms devices — are stated not to support DLP, eDiscovery or retention policies.
- The declared provider is Microsoft Corporation of Redmond, and subprocessors appear only as unnamed affiliates, subsidiaries and vendors acting on Microsoft's behalf.
- The pages state that sharing with external users is not supported outside a Teams meeting, and that Teams guests are not supported in channel tabs.
Best for
- You already run Microsoft 365 and want boards governed by the same retention policies, legal hold, DLP and basic eDiscovery as your OneDrive files.
- Your sessions run inside Teams meetings, chats and channels, and outside participants only need to collaborate during the meeting under tenant-controlled settings.
- You need a tenant-wide off switch, Microsoft Entra conditional access and the ability to transfer a departing user's boards during offboarding.
Avoid if
- You need to share or co-edit boards with external users outside a Teams meeting — the pages state this is not supported at this time.
- Your procurement requires an EU contracting entity — the declared provider is Microsoft Corporation of Redmond, and the German legal notice states that Microsoft Deutschland GmbH is not the provider.
- You rely on the EU Data Boundary — it covers tenants with an EU or EFTA sign-up location, excludes customers who purchased Multi-Geo, and the pages acknowledge limited circumstances where data continues to be transferred outside the boundary.
- Your data protection officer or works council needs board content excluded from AI training — the captured privacy statement says Microsoft may use data to develop and train its AI models.
The scores
| Criterion | Panel median |
|---|---|
| Canvas, templates & content | 2 of 5 |
| Workshop facilitation & participation | 2 of 5 |
| Integrations, import & export | 1.5 of 5 |
| Sharing, permissions & administration | 3 of 5 |
| Security, AI controls & deployment | 1.5 of 5 |
| European sovereignty | 2 of 5 |
Canvas, templates & content
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
What can be put on the board and how fast: an infinite canvas, sticky notes, text, shapes and connectors, freehand drawing and pen input, frames and sections, images, files, documents and video embedded on the board, tables, mind maps, diagrams and flowcharts, a template library for workshops, retrospectives and planning, own templates for the organisation, search across boards, performance on large boards, and AI that clusters, summarises or generates content.
0 — Not a whiteboard; there is no shared canvas to put content on.
3 — A shared board with sticky notes, text, shapes and drawing; templates, embeds, diagrams and large boards are basic or not described.
5 — An infinite canvas with sticky notes, shapes and connectors, frames, images and files on the board, a template library for workshops, retrospectives and planning, own templates saved for the team, and the board usable on desktop, browser and tablet with pen input.
8 — Diagrams, mind maps, tables and kanban on the same board, embeds of live documents and video, templates managed centrally for the organisation, search across all boards, documented limits for large boards (objects, participants), and AI that clusters or summarises notes with its data use stated.
10 — A canvas a whole organisation builds on: structured data on the board (cards linked to records, custom fields), smart diagramming with shape libraries for named notations, offline work with conflict-free sync described, board performance at stated scale, and every content type exportable with its structure.
The Workshop Facilitator
The captured pages show a free-form infinite canvas built for pen, touch and keyboard, sticky notes, inking, customizable templates, real-time collaboration and a Copilot that categorizes and summarizes ideas, with whiteboard files indexed for keyword search in OneDrive. We found no public information on shapes and connectors, frames, embedded images and files, tables or saving my own organisation templates, which is what I need to build a retrospective board the evening before. Device coverage spans web, desktop and mobile clients plus Surface Hub and Teams Rooms. 1 2 3
The Product Team Lead
An infinite canvas designed for pen, touch and keyboard with sticky notes, inking and customizable templates is documented, and Copilot is described as visualising, categorising and summarising thoughts, with boards indexed for keyword search through OneDrive. We found no public information on shapes and connectors, frames, images and files on the board, own templates for the organisation, or documented limits on large boards — the diagram depth my teams need for story maps and architecture sketches is not described. 1 2 3 6
The Microsoft 365 Admin
The captured pages document an infinite canvas designed for pen, touch and keyboard, with sticky notes, inking and customizable templates for meetings, plus a Copilot that visualizes, categorizes and summarizes thoughts — the note-clustering AI I asked about, though its data use is only covered by Microsoft's general privacy terms. We found no public information on connectors, frames, embedded files or video, tables and diagrams, centrally managed organization templates, or documented limits on large boards. A solid workshop canvas, but the structured-content side is undocumented. 1 2 6
The Works Council Member
An infinite canvas designed for pen, touch and keyboard, sticky notes, inking and customizable templates are documented, and Copilot is described as categorizing and summarizing thoughts. The captured pages describe neither shapes and connectors, frames, images and files on the board, nor limits for large boards, which keeps this just under the middle of the scale. 1 2 6
The Public-Sector Project Lead
The captured pages document a free-form infinite canvas designed for pen, touch and keyboard, with sticky notes, inking and customisable templates, real-time collaboration, and Copilot that visualises, categorises and summarises thoughts; stored board files are indexed for keyword and file-type search. We found no public information on frames, connectors, images or files placed on the board, diagrams, tables or kanban, centrally managed organisation templates, or limits for large boards. That is a usable brainstorming canvas for our workshops, but not yet evidence of the full workshop surface. 1 2 3 6
The Skeptic
An infinite canvas designed for pen, touch and keyboard with sticky notes, inking and customizable templates is documented, and Copilot is described as visualizing, categorizing and summarizing thoughts. We found no public information on shapes and connectors, frames, images and files on the board, tables or mind maps, templates saved for the organisation, search across boards, or large-board limits — and the pages say nothing about what Copilot does with board content beyond its feature description. 1 2 6
Workshop facilitation & participation
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
What it takes to run a session on the board: guests who join without an account, a timer, voting and dot voting, a private or anonymous mode for notes, bringing everyone to the facilitator's view (summon, follow), a presentation or frame mode, locking objects, reactions, breakout areas, an agenda or session plan, built-in audio or video or the call apps the board runs inside, participant limits, and accessibility for participants (keyboard, screen reader, contrast).
0 — No real-time collaboration; only one person can work on a board at a time.
3 — Several people edit the same board in real time and see each other's cursors; facilitation tools and guest access are basic or not described.
5 — Guests join by link without an account, a timer, voting, bringing participants to the facilitator's view, a presentation mode through frames, locking objects, and comments with mentions.
8 — A private or anonymous mode for brainstorming, voting with results and export, breakout areas or assigned frames, a session agenda or facilitator panel, the board running inside Teams, Zoom or Webex meetings, participant limits per session stated, and an accessibility statement for the board.
10 — Facilitation that a large event runs on: hundreds of participants per board with stated limits, facilitator controls over who may edit what and when, session recordings or summaries with their data use stated, a published accessibility conformance report (WCAG), and facilitation features documented step by step.
The Workshop Facilitator
Real-time collaboration inside Teams meetings, chats and channels is well documented, and anonymous participants can interact with the board during a meeting when the tenant allows it — my account-free guests work, but only meeting by meeting, with no share link, not in Teams channel meetings, and sharing outside the organisation outside a meeting is documented as not supported at this time. Links created in meetings or channel tabs reach anyone in the organisation. We found no public information on a timer, dot voting, anonymous brainstorming, bringing everyone to the facilitator's view, a presentation mode, locked objects or stated participant limits, though an accessibility-tools section exists in the help centre. 1 2 4 6
The Product Team Lead
Real-time collaboration and whiteboards inside Teams meetings, chats and channels are documented, with anonymous and external participants able to view and collaborate during a meeting under tenant-controlled settings. We found no public information on a timer, voting, bringing participants to the facilitator's view, a presentation mode or locking objects — the retrospective and planning facilitation I run every quarter is not described on the captured pages. 1 2 4 6
The Microsoft 365 Admin
Real-time collaboration and running the board inside Teams meetings, chats and channels are documented, with admin-controlled anonymous meeting access, external users limited to meeting-only collaboration, and a read-only mode. The help centre lists an accessibility tools section, but we found no public information on timers, voting, a private or anonymous note mode, bringing participants to the facilitator's view, breakout areas, or per-session participant limits. That covers the Teams-meeting scenario well, not the facilitated-workshop toolkit. 1 2 4 6
The Works Council Member
Real-time collaboration and sharing inside Teams meetings are documented, and anonymous meeting participants can collaborate when the tenant setting allows it. We found no public information on timers, voting, a private or anonymous mode for notes, summoning participants to one view, or locking objects, so only the basic facilitation picture is evidenced. 2 4 6 1
The Public-Sector Project Lead
Real-time collaboration is documented, anonymous participants can view and collaborate on a board during a Teams meeting when the admin enables the setting, and the board runs inside Teams meetings, chats and channels, with a read-only mode and an accessibility tools section in the help centre. The captured documentation itself states that sharing with external users is not supported outside a Teams meeting and that Teams guests are not supported in channel tabs, and Teams channel meetings cannot show the anonymous whiteboard share. We found no public information on a timer, voting, private or anonymous note mode, follow-the-facilitator, breakout areas, or participant limits per session. 1 2 4 6
The Skeptic
Real-time collaboration is documented, and anonymous or external participants working on a board during a Teams meeting is described in detail, with read-only mode and an accessibility-tools help section. We found no public information on a timer, voting, a private or anonymous mode for notes, bringing everyone to the facilitator's view, a presentation mode or object locking — and the pages state that sharing with external users outside a Teams meeting isn't supported at this time, so outside collaboration is meeting-only by design. 2 4 6 1
Integrations, import & export
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
How the board connects to the work around it and whether the content can leave: apps for Teams, Zoom, Webex, Slack and Google or Microsoft files, a two-way sync with Jira, Azure DevOps or other work tools, embedding boards in Confluence, SharePoint or intranets, a documented REST API and webhooks, import from Miro, Mural or other boards and from CSV or images, and export as PDF, image, CSV of the notes or an editable file another tool can open.
0 — No integration and no export of any kind; content can only be viewed on the vendor's board.
3 — Export as image or PDF and a few named integrations; an API, imports and structured export are basic or not described.
5 — Apps for at least Teams or Zoom and Slack, an integration with Jira or another work tool, embedding a board in other tools, export as PDF, image and CSV of the notes, and a documented API.
8 — A two-way sync with Jira or Azure DevOps that keeps cards and issues aligned, a REST API with webhooks covering boards and items, import from other whiteboards documented, an export in an editable or open format, and a marketplace or app framework for extensions.
10 — Integration and exit both complete: an API that can read and write everything the board holds, a full account export in an open format that another tool imports with structure kept, SDKs or an embeddable board for own applications, and the export and deletion on termination documented.
The Workshop Facilitator
The board runs inside Teams meetings, chats and channels, is described alongside OneNote and Microsoft Loop components, and administrators manage it through a PowerShell module. We found no public information on export as PDF, image or CSV, import from other whiteboards, a public API or an editable export format — so I cannot confirm a client's board leaves the tool as a workshop report. 1 2 6
The Product Team Lead
Teams, OneNote and Loop components are named integrations and a PowerShell module manages boards, but we found no public information on export as PDF, image or CSV, a REST API for board content, import from other whiteboards, or any sync with Jira or Azure DevOps. For my teams the deciding fact is that the board has no documented path into the ticket system and no documented way to leave with its structure. 1 2 3 6
The Microsoft 365 Admin
Documented connections are all inside the Microsoft estate: Teams meetings, chats and channels, OneNote, Loop components, Surface Hub and Teams Rooms devices, administrator PowerShell cmdlets, and boards stored as files in the creator's OneDrive. We found no public information on export to PDF, image or CSV, on a REST API or webhooks, on import from other whiteboards, or on links to Jira, Azure DevOps, Slack, Zoom or Confluence. Without a documented export path another tool can open, I can only credit the integrations, not basic interchange. 1 2 3 6
The Works Council Member
Integration with Teams meetings, chats and channels, OneNote, Loop components and OneDrive storage is documented, with PowerShell cmdlets for administration. We found no public information on export as PDF, image or CSV of the notes, a REST API for board content, or import from other whiteboards. 1 2 3 6
The Public-Sector Project Lead
Documented connections are Teams meetings, chats and channels, OneNote, Microsoft Loop components, OneDrive for Business storage, and PowerShell cmdlets for management of boards stored in Azure. We found no public information on export as PDF, image or CSV, a documented REST API for board content, webhooks, or import from other whiteboards — for our procurement office's exit-planning requirement that gap is serious. 1 2 6
The Skeptic
The documented connections are the Microsoft estate — Teams meetings, chats and channels, OneNote, Loop components — plus PowerShell cmdlets for admins and Windows deployment through Intune or Configuration Manager. We found no public information on export of board content to PDF, image, CSV or any editable format, on import from other whiteboards, or on a REST API reading and writing boards — so what leaving would keep is not answerable from the captured pages. 1 2 3 6
Sharing, permissions & administration
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
Who can see and change a board and how the organisation controls it: sharing by link with expiry and password, guest and external-user rules, roles per board, project and team, default sharing settings set by the admin, single sign-on (SAML, OpenID Connect), user provisioning (SCIM), domain capture and control of shadow accounts, audit logs, content retention and legal hold, transfer of boards when a person leaves, and admin reports.
0 — No accounts or permissions; anyone with a board's address can see and edit it, with no way to restrict it.
3 — Boards are shared with named people or by link with view or edit rights; admin controls, SSO and audit are basic or not described.
5 — Roles per board and per team, link sharing that can be restricted or switched off, guest access controlled by the admin, single sign-on with SAML, a user and board admin console, and boards transferred when a person leaves.
8 — SCIM provisioning, domain capture of existing accounts, sharing policies set centrally (no public links, guests only from allowed domains), audit logs exportable to a SIEM, retention rules and legal hold, data classification labels on boards, and admin roles split by scope.
10 — Administration that a regulated organisation can sign off: every sharing and access setting the admin controls listed with its effect, complete audit trails with a stated retention, eDiscovery and export for investigations, delegated administration across subsidiaries, and every control documented in the help centre.
The Workshop Facilitator
Administration is genuinely enterprise-grade: Whiteboard can be switched on or off for the whole tenant, anonymous meeting access is a PowerShell setting that must be enabled for every site, conditional access comes through Entra, and a leaver's boards can be transferred in bulk before the account is deleted. Because boards are files in the creator's OneDrive, retention policies, quota, legal hold, DLP, basic eDiscovery and audit logging of create, modify, share and delete all apply, with sensitivity labels planned. Sharing from the clients reaches specific people or anyone in the organisation, and we found no public information on per-board roles, SCIM provisioning or audit logs exportable to a SIEM. 3 4 5
The Product Team Lead
Tenant-wide enablement, conditional access, a PowerShell-controlled anonymous sharing setting, audit activities for OneDrive-stored boards, and retention policies, legal hold, DLP and basic eDiscovery for those boards are all documented, including transferring a departed user's whiteboards to another user. We found no public information on SCIM provisioning, domain capture or centrally restricted link policies, sensitivity labels are listed only as planned, and Azure-stored boards are stated to sit outside those data controls. 2 3 4 5
The Microsoft 365 Admin
This is the strong side for my shadow-account cleanup: boards are files in the creator's OneDrive under existing retention policies, legal hold, DLP, basic eDiscovery and audit logging of create, modify, share and delete, with ownership transfer when someone leaves and a tenant-wide toggle, Entra enterprise app and conditional access on top. Sharing is organization-wide links or specific people, external sharing outside Teams meetings is not supported, and anonymous meeting access is one PowerShell setting — though the default sharing-link type is only planned, and sensitivity labels, analytics and fuller eDiscovery are listed as future. We found no public information on SCIM provisioning, domain capture, or feeding the audit stream to a SIEM. 2 3 4 5
The Works Council Member
The admin can enable or disable the product tenant-wide, control anonymous meeting access centrally, apply conditional access through Entra, and transfer a departing user's boards to another person; boards on OneDrive fall under retention policies, legal hold, DLP and basic eDiscovery, with file-level audit of create, modify, share and delete. We found no public information on SCIM provisioning, domain capture, or audit export to a SIEM. 3 4 5 2
The Public-Sector Project Lead
Administration lives in the Microsoft 365 estate we already run: tenant-wide enablement, a PowerShell switch for anonymous meeting access, conditional access policies via Microsoft Entra, and transfer of a single whiteboard or all whiteboards to another user before an account is deleted. Boards in OneDrive inherit retention policies, quota, legal hold, DLP and basic eDiscovery, with audit logging of create, modify, share and delete activities. The captured pages state that sensitivity labels and fuller eDiscovery are only planned for future releases, and we found no public information on SCIM provisioning or domain capture, so I stop short of the top band. 2 3 4 5
The Skeptic
Ownership transfer of one or all of a departing user's whiteboards, OneDrive audit logging of create, modify, share and delete, and retention policies, legal hold, DLP and basic eDiscovery for OneDrive-stored boards are documented, on top of a tenant-wide switch, a Microsoft Entra enterprise app and conditional access. But whiteboards shared in Teams meetings use company-shareable links accessible by anyone in the organization regardless of the default setting (default link type support is still planned), boards still stored in Azure are stated not to support DLP, eDiscovery or retention, and shared whiteboards are deleted when the owner's account is deleted unless transferred first, with sensitivity labels listed only as planned. 3 4 5 2
Security, AI controls & deployment
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
How the content of the boards is protected and where the product can run: encryption in transit and at rest, customer-managed encryption keys, a dedicated or private-cloud tenant and an on-premises edition, AI features that the admin can switch off and that do not train on customer boards, which AI providers process board content, data loss prevention, deletion of boards and accounts with stated periods, and whether individual activity (logins, contributions, time on board) is tracked and shown to managers, with a statement for works councils. Who processes the data and where, and the certifications, are scored under sovereignty.
0 — Content is not protected in transit, or boards are used for the vendor's own purposes by default with no way to opt out.
3 — Encryption is mentioned and the product is described as secure or GDPR-compliant; AI use, deletion and deployment options are basic or not described.
5 — Encryption in transit and at rest stated, AI features that the admin can switch off, a statement that customer content is not used to train AI models, deletion of boards and accounts with a stated period, and a security page describing the measures.
8 — Customer-managed keys or a dedicated tenant, a private-cloud or on-premises edition documented, the AI providers that process board content named with their location, data loss prevention or classification controls, individual activity tracking described with what managers can see, and a statement or template for works council agreements.
10 — Protection that can be verified: client-side or end-to-end encryption for boards with the method published, an on-premises or sovereign-cloud edition with feature parity stated, no AI processing outside the customer's chosen region, a published penetration test summary, and every security and AI control listed with its effect.
The Workshop Facilitator
The admin documentation lists SOC 1, SOC 2, ISO 27001, HIPAA and EU Model Clauses, privacy and diagnostic data are configurable, GCC and GCC High environments exist, and Windows deployment runs through Intune or Configuration Manager. The German privacy statement, however, says personal data may be used to develop and train AI models — the one question every client asks me about Copilot before a session. We found no public information on encryption in transit and at rest, an administrator switch for Copilot, stated deletion periods for boards and accounts, or a statement for works councils. 2 3 5 8
The Product Team Lead
Conformance to SOC 1, SOC 2, ISO 27001 and EU Model Clauses is stated, and deletion behaviour for shared boards of deleted users plus OneDrive-based data subject request tooling is documented. The privacy statement says Microsoft may use data to develop and train its AI models, and we found no public information on an administrative switch for Copilot, encryption in transit and at rest, stated deletion periods, individual activity tracking, or a statement for works councils — the only alternative environments documented are US Government GCC and GCC High. 2 3 5 8
The Microsoft 365 Admin
SOC 1, SOC 2, ISO 27001, HIPAA and EU Model Clauses are listed, DLP and eDiscovery reach OneDrive-stored boards, and GCC, GCC High and Intune deployment give me options — nothing European, nothing customer-managed. We found no public information on encryption for whiteboard content, a dedicated switch to turn Copilot off, stated deletion periods, or works-council statements, and the German privacy statement says Microsoft may use data to develop and train its AI models, with customer agreements stated to take precedence over that policy. Until legal clears that clause, my only documented lever is the tenant-wide Whiteboard toggle. 1 2 3 5 8
The Works Council Member
Boards inherit the OneDrive compliance controls, and Microsoft states that personal data in system-generated logs must be pseudonymized using encryption, masking and tokenization. But the published privacy statement says data may be used to develop and train AI models, and we found no public information on an admin off-switch for Copilot, encryption statements, deletion periods, or what managers can see of individual contributions — nothing here yet that would carry a works council agreement. 5 7 8 3 1
The Public-Sector Project Lead
The captured privacy statement says Microsoft may use your data to develop and train its AI models, and we found no public information on an administrative switch to turn Copilot in Whiteboard off or on which AI providers process board content — for my data protection officer and our works councils that is a stop sign. SOC 1, SOC 2, ISO 27001 and EU Model Clauses are listed, DLP and basic eDiscovery apply to OneDrive-stored boards while Azure-stored boards are stated not to support them, and system-generated logs are pseudonymised using encryption, masking, tokenization and data blurring. We found no public information on encryption of board content in transit and at rest, deletion periods for boards and accounts, an on-premises or dedicated-tenant edition, or a works council statement. 3 5 7 8
The Skeptic
We found no public information on encryption in transit or at rest, on a stated deletion period for boards or accounts, or on an admin switch for Copilot or an assurance that board content is excluded from model training; the captured privacy statement instead says Microsoft may use data to develop and train its AI models. Deployment options beyond the public cloud are the US Government GCC and GCC High environments and Windows rollout via Intune or Configuration Manager, and pseudonymization of personal data in system-generated logs is required — while Azure-stored boards are stated to sit outside DLP and retention controls. 8 2 3 5
European sovereignty
panel opinion
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
Who the contracting entity and the parent company are, where boards, files and user data are stored and processed, and who the subprocessors are (hosting, CDN, real-time collaboration servers, AI providers, email, support and payment tools). Independently sourced by the sovereignty pipeline; boards hold personal data of participants and often of customers, so the whole chain counts, not only the database. An on-premises or self-hosted edition the customer runs on its own European servers counts as the customer's chain, whatever the vendor's seat.
0 — Non-EU vendor and contracting entity, hosting unstated, subprocessors unnamed, and no data processing agreement offered.
3 — A privacy policy and a data processing agreement exist, but hosting location is unstated or non-EU and the subprocessors are not listed.
5 — EU hosting available and an EU contracting entity or EU representative, but parts of the chain (AI features, CDN, real-time servers, email, support, payment) run through non-EU providers without a stated safeguard, or EU residency is an option of the top tier only.
8 — EU hosting on named infrastructure, EU contracting entity, subprocessors listed with their locations, a data processing agreement published, and security certifications (ISO 27001, BSI C5, SOC 2) stated — or an on-premises edition documented that keeps every board on the customer's own servers.
10 — Sovereign end to end and evidenced: European ownership, entity, hosting and every subprocessor including AI, or an on-premises or open-source edition with no call home, data export and deletion documented, and certifications published with their scope rather than implied.
The Workshop Facilitator
The declared provider is Microsoft Corporation, Redmond, and the German legal notice states explicitly that Microsoft Deutschland GmbH is not the provider, while the privacy statement says personal data may be stored in the user's region, the United States and any jurisdiction where Microsoft, its affiliates or its service providers operate facilities, passing data to affiliates and unnamed vendors. An EU Data Boundary commitment exists but only for tenants that qualify — EU or EFTA sign-up, Multi-Geo customers excluded — and the same documentation acknowledges limited circumstances where customer data continues to be transferred outside the boundary. We found no public information on a published data processing agreement for Whiteboard or a named subprocessor list, so I cannot answer a city utility that asks where its boards sit. 7 8 9
The Product Team Lead
The declared provider is Microsoft Corporation in Redmond, and the legal notice states explicitly that Microsoft Deutschland GmbH is not the provider or an authorised representative. The EU Data Boundary documentation commits qualifying EU and EFTA tenants to processing in named European datacenters while acknowledging limited circumstances where data continues to be transferred outside the boundary, and the privacy statement reserves storage and processing in the United States and other jurisdictions; the chain is described only as affiliates and vendors acting on Microsoft's behalf, and we found no public information on a published data processing agreement or named subprocessors with locations. 7 8 9
The Microsoft 365 Admin
The declared provider is Microsoft Corporation, Redmond, and the German imprint states outright that Microsoft Deutschland GmbH is not the provider; the EU Data Boundary documents EU datacenter countries, but only for qualifying tenants, excludes Multi-Geo customers and admits limited transfers outside the boundary, while the privacy statement says personal data may be stored in the United States and any jurisdiction where Microsoft or its affiliates operate. Subprocessors appear only as unnamed affiliates and vendors, and we found no public information on a published data processing agreement or on where AI processing happens, though SOC 2, ISO 27001, EU Model Clauses and the Data Privacy Framework are stated. Conditional EU residency with a US contracting entity and an unnamed chain is real, but it is not a chain I can hand to our data protection officer. 5 7 8 9
The Works Council Member
The declared provider is Microsoft Corporation in Redmond, and storage under the EU Data Boundary applies only to qualifying tenants, with the documentation itself acknowledging limited circumstances where data continues to be transferred outside that boundary. Subprocessors appear only as unnamed vendors acting on Microsoft's behalf, and we found no published data processing agreement on the captured pages. 9 7 8
The Public-Sector Project Lead
The declared provider is Microsoft Corporation of Redmond, and the imprint states that Microsoft Deutschland GmbH is not the provider and not authorised to receive service for it — a US contracting entity that procurement cannot reconcile with its BSI C5 or on-premises requirement. The EU Data Boundary does commit Microsoft to storing and processing Microsoft 365 customer data in named EU and EFTA datacentre countries for qualifying tenants, but the same pages acknowledge limited circumstances where customer data continues to be transferred outside the boundary and exclude Multi-Geo customers, while the privacy statement reserves storage and processing in the United States and any other jurisdiction where Microsoft or its affiliates operate; subprocessors are named only generically as affiliates, subsidiaries and vendors, and boards created on Surface Hub or Teams Rooms devices are stored in Azure. No BSI C5 and no on-premises edition are documented anywhere I read. 3 7 8 9
The Skeptic
The declared provider is Microsoft Corporation of Redmond — the German legal notice states explicitly that Microsoft Deutschland GmbH is not the provider — and the EU Data Boundary, though its EU datacenters are named, applies only to tenants signed up or billed in the EU or EFTA, excludes customers who bought Multi-Geo capabilities, and the captured pages acknowledge limited circumstances where data continues to be transferred outside the boundary. Subprocessors appear only as categories (affiliates, subsidiaries and vendors acting on Microsoft's behalf), we found no published data processing agreement on the captured pages, and boards started on Surface Hub or Teams Rooms devices sit in Azure storage wherever that tenant's data resides. 9 7 8 3
Pricing transparency
not rated — the vendor publishes no price
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
Whether a buyer can compute the real annual cost from public pages alone: price per user and tier, how guests, viewers and external participants are counted, limits of the free plan (number of boards, objects, members), which features (SSO, SCIM, audit logs, EU data residency, AI credits, on-premises) cost extra, the enterprise tier's price or minimum, annual versus monthly billing, minimum seats and term.
0 — No public prices at all; every customer is a sales call.
3 — A starting price or a free plan exists, but how cost scales with users, guests or features is unclear.
5 — Tiers are public with their price per user and main inclusions, but at least one commonly needed piece (SSO, EU data residency, guests, AI credits, the enterprise tier) is unpriced or "on request".
8 — Every tier priced publicly with its scaling rule (members, guests, boards), free-plan limits stated, add-ons and AI credits priced, the on-premises or dedicated edition's cost or licence stated, minimum seats, term and VAT treatment stated.
10 — Complete price computability: annual cost derivable for a given team size, guest count and feature set, with every add-on, setup, support and AI fee and the cancellation and data-return terms published.
The Workshop Facilitator
The only pricing facts are one-month free trials of Microsoft 365 for home and Business Standard that auto-convert to a 12-month paid subscription, require a credit card and can be cancelled during the trial. We found no public information on any per-user price, tier structure, free-plan limits, guest counting or enterprise terms, so a client cannot compute what a workshop series would cost. 1
The Product Team Lead
The captured pages show a one-month free trial of Microsoft 365 Business Standard that requires a credit card and automatically converts to a 12-month paid subscription, with the applicable subscription fee unstated. We found no public information on a per-user price for the whiteboard product itself, tier limits, how guests or external participants are counted, or which features such as single sign-on or AI cost extra. 1
The Microsoft 365 Admin
No price appears anywhere on the captured pages — not for Whiteboard itself, which is enabled by default for applicable Microsoft 365 tenants, nor for the Microsoft 365 plans it ships with; the only commercial terms are one-month free trials that auto-convert to a 12-month paid subscription with a credit card required. The applicable subscription fee is never stated, and we found no public information on seat minimums or VAT treatment. I cannot compute an annual cost from public pages. 1 5
The Works Council Member
The captured pages publish only trial terms — one month free, converting automatically to a 12-month paid subscription with a credit card required and cancellation possible during the trial. We found no public price per user or tier for the product itself, so a real annual cost cannot be computed from these pages. 1
The Public-Sector Project Lead
The captured pages show only a one-month free trial of Microsoft 365 for home or Business Standard that automatically converts to a 12-month paid subscription with a credit card required and cancellation possible during the trial. We found no public information on a price per user or tier for Whiteboard, which tiers include it, how guests, viewers or external participants are counted, or annual versus monthly billing — my procurement office cannot compute an annual cost from these pages. 1 2
The Skeptic
The product pages show one-month free trials for Microsoft 365 for home and Business Standard that automatically convert to a 12-month paid subscription charged at an unspecified "applicable subscription fee", with a credit card required to sign up. We found no public information on a price for Whiteboard itself, tier or board limits, how guests or external participants are counted, or what an enterprise arrangement costs — and creating boards requires a provisioned OneDrive, which ties the cost to a wider Microsoft 365 subscription these pages do not price. 1 3
European sovereignty — proven facts
1 of 6 dimensions provenBuilt only from facts shown on the vendor's own pages. A dimension we could not prove is left open, not scored as zero.
| Legal entity | Incorporated in US ⚠ unverified | 0/2 pts | 9 Report an error |
|---|---|---|---|
| Hosting location | Not determined ⚠ unverified | — | uncited Report an error |
| Hosting options | Not determined ⚠ unverified | — | uncited Report an error |
| Open source | Not determined | — | uncited Report an error |
| Data processing agreement | Not determined | — | uncited Report an error |
| Transfer impact assessment | Not determined | — | uncited Report an error |
Questions about Microsoft Whiteboard
Is Microsoft Whiteboard European?
No. whats-best.ai classifies Microsoft Whiteboard as Rest of world. Its vendor, Microsoft Corporation, is incorporated in United States, per the vendor’s page captured 1 Nov 2026.
Where does Microsoft Whiteboard store data?
Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 1 Nov 2026.
Does Microsoft Whiteboard have a free plan?
Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 1 Nov 2026.
What are the best alternatives to Microsoft Whiteboard?
As of 1 Nov 2026, the panel rates Miro (3.5/5), Collaboard (3.5/5) and Klaxoon (3/5) highest among the other 12 Online Whiteboard products evaluated. Ratings that look equal are rounded to half stars; the order uses the unrounded rating, then the name. The highest-rated European alternative is Collaboard (UK / wider Europe). Ratings are the AI panel’s opinion, formed from public evidence: how scores are made. The full list, with European products first: Microsoft Whiteboard alternatives.
Where this could be wrong
- Evidence ages. The oldest capture behind this page is from 1 Nov 2026. Vendors change pricing and policies without notice; every fact reflects its source as of the capture date shown in the registry.
- Weak sourcing — Legal entity. The imprint explicitly states that Microsoft Deutschland GmbH is not the provider; the privacy statement mentions Microsoft Ireland Operations Limited in passing, but the provider named here is the Redmond parent alone.
- Weak sourcing — Hosting location, Hosting options. Not confirmed on the vendor’s own pages as captured.
- AI can misread a source. Extraction and judgement are automated; a citation guarantees traceability, not infallibility. If something here is wrong, say so — no account needed, every report is decided within 5 business days, and accepted corrections are published.
What we left out
A claim that does not survive our checks costs us the claim, not the page. This is what was taken off this one.
- 3 product facts could not be confirmed on the vendor’s page as captured and were left out of this page and of the panel’s material. Know more? Tell us
- 1 compliance fact could not be confirmed on the vendor’s page as captured and was left out of this page and of the panel’s material. Know more? Tell us
- 1 support fact could not be confirmed on the vendor’s page as captured and was left out of this page and of the panel’s material. Know more? Tell us
- 2 sovereignty dimensions could not be confirmed on the vendor’s own pages and are shown as unknown. Know more? Tell us
- 6 of the readings below were written against an earlier fact sheet — a fact has been corrected, added or pulled since. Until the panel next runs on this product you are reading the older judgement. Know more? Tell us
Sources (9)
The pages every claim on this page was read from — each one checked, dated, and kept verifiable.
- 1 Vendor homepage (Whiteboard) www.microsoft.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
- 2 Product documentation (admin overview) learn.microsoft.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
- 3 Documentation (data storage and retention) learn.microsoft.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
- 4 Documentation (sharing settings) learn.microsoft.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
- 5 Documentation (access settings) learn.microsoft.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
- 6 Help centre support.microsoft.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
- 7 EU Data Boundary documentation learn.microsoft.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
- 8 Privacy policy www.microsoft.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
- 9 Legal notice www.microsoft.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →