Retrospective Tools

FigJam vs Kollabe

A side-by-side look at scores, pricing, features and integrations to help you pick the right retrospective tool.

FigJam logo

FigJam

7.3

Figma's whiteboard with AI sticky clustering, an official MCP server that reaches FigJam boards, and a $3 Collab seat — free tier caps at 3 boards

FigJam is the whiteboard product inside Figma — sticky notes, timer, music, stamps and emotes, voting sessions, one-click AI that sorts and summarises stickies, and 300+ ready-made templates including community retro boards. Design and product teams already living in Figma get retros without buying a second tool, backed by Figma's SAML/SCIM, SOC 2 Type II, ISO 27001 and Enterprise data residency in the EU, Australia, India, Brazil and Japan. Figma's official MCP server reads FigJam boards on every plan; letting an agent write to them is a beta that needs a Full seat. Voting sessions, open guest sessions, audio chat and webhooks all require a paid team; publishing custom templates requires Organization.

Full review →
Kollabe logo

Kollabe

6.9

Agile meetings made easy — retros, standups and planning poker

Kollabe began life as a planning poker tool and now runs estimation, sprint retrospectives and icebreakers from one workspace. The retro board is deeper than its marketing suggests — drag-to-group with optional AI clustering, dot voting configurable per board or per column, a phase timer with audio alerts, a guided workflow with auto-advance, and action items carrying owner, due date, priority and a link back to the feedback card. Exports run to PDF, CSV, JSON, Markdown, HTML, JPEG and Confluence, with action items pushed to Jira, GitHub or Linear. Billing is flat per team space rather than per seat. There are no recurring retros, no health-check instrument and no compliance certifications.

Full review →

Summary

FigJam scores 7.3 overall and is best for design and product teams already on Figma who want retros on the same platform as their design files, with playful engagement, AI sticky clustering and an agent-accessible canvas. It offers a free tier.

Kollabe scores 6.9 overall and is best for small to mid-size agile teams running retros and planning poker who want one cheap, playful tool — and don't need health checks, recurring retros or a compliance story. It offers a free tier.

FigJam leads on integrations, open platform and enterprise-grade. Kollabe leads on ease of use, retro toolkit, fun factor and AI & insights.

Across our eight scoring dimensions, FigJam edges ahead with an overall score of 7.3. That said, the right pick depends on your team — see the dimension-by-dimension breakdown below.

Scores compared

FigJam
Ease of Use7.0
Retro Toolkit4.5
Value8.0
Fun Factor8.0
AI & Insights5.0
Integrations7.0
Open Platform9.5
Enterprise-grade9.0
Kollabe
Ease of Use8.5
Retro Toolkit7.5
Value8.0
Fun Factor8.5
AI & Insights7.5
Integrations6.0
Open Platform6.0
Enterprise-grade3.0
DetailFigJamKollabe
CategoryWhiteboardRetrospectives
Team sizeMid-marketSmall
Free tierYesYes
Free limitStarter: 3 FigJam files per team (unlimited personal drafts), 150 AI credits/day up to 500/month, 300+ templates, timer, music, AI Sort/Summarize/Generate, REST API and 20 MCP tool calls/month, 30-day version history — no voting sessions, audio chat, open (no-account) sessions or webhooks10 participants per meeting, 4 retrospectives/month, 7-day board history, 1 survey per board; no AI, exports, API or MCP
Starting price$3/user/mo (Collab seat, billed annually; $5 billed monthly)$29/mo per space (unlimited members)
Est. 3 teams × 8 people$72/mo (24 Collab seats × $3, billed annually; $120/mo billed monthly at $5)$87/mo (3 Premium spaces × $29; each space allows unlimited members)
EnterpriseYesYes
Founded20122023
HQSan Francisco, USSydney, Australia
Data residencyUnited States · European Union · Australia · IN · BR · JPAustralia
Languages7 (English, Japanese, Korean, …)6 (English, German, Spanish, …)
Export formatsPDF · Image · CSVCSV · PDF · Markdown · Image · JSON · HTML · Confluence · Jira
Features4252
Integrations105

Feature & integration comparison

Side-by-side checklist across features, integrations and security. Hover a note for details.

CapabilityFigJamKollabe
Features
Custom templates✓note✓
Anonymous input—✓
Health Checks—✓note
Action tracking—✓
Async mode✓✓
Whiteboard✓✓note
Independent voting✓note✓
Polling✓✓
Icebreaker games✓note✓note
Agile Estimations✓note✓
Team Kudos—✓
AI grouping/clustering✓✓
AI action items✓note✓
AI Summaries✓✓
Team Insights—✓
In-meeting AI assistant✓note—
Action dashboard—✓
Integrations
Asana✓note—
Azure DevOps—✓note
Basecamp——
ClickUp——
Confluence✓note✓note
GitHub✓note✓
GitLab——
Jira✓note✓
Linear✓note✓
Microsoft Teams✓note—
Monday.com✓note—
Notion✓note—
Shortcut——
Slack✓note—
Trello✓note—
Security & Privacy
SOC 2✓—
GDPR✓—
SSO / SAML✓note✓note
SCIM provisioning✓note—
ISO 27001✓—
On-premises——
Public API✓✓note
Webhooks✓—
MCP server✓✓note

FigJam — pros

  • + Cheap $3/user/mo Collab seat (billed annually; $5 monthly) unlocks unlimited boards and full FigJam editing without a Full Figma seat
  • + Free Starter tier includes real AI credits (150/day, 500/month), 300+ templates, the timer, music and AI Sort/Summarize
  • + Playful, engaging UX — stamps, emotes, high-fives, music, cursor chat — lifts retro fun factor
  • + Best open platform of any whiteboard here: REST API on every plan, webhooks on paid, and an <strong>official MCP server that reads FigJam boards</strong> on every plan
  • + Strong enterprise posture inherited from Figma: SAML, SCIM, activity logs, SOC 2 Type II, ISO 27001, and Enterprise data residency in the EU, Australia, India, Brazil and Japan

FigJam — cons

  • − No native action-item tracking, recurring retros or health checks
  • − Anonymity is weak — votes reveal who voted once the session ends, and live cursors show who is writing even when a sticky's name tag is switched off
  • − Action items leave the board only by hand: the Jira, GitHub and Asana widgets turn selected stickies into tickets, but Confluence, Linear and Notion are embeds only and there is no Azure DevOps
  • − Free Starter caps a team at 3 FigJam files and excludes voting, audio chat, no-account guest links and webhooks; publishing custom templates needs Organization
  • − Built primarily for designers — the canvas paradigm is fiddly for structured retros, and large boards get sluggish

Kollabe — pros

  • + Flat per-space pricing — $29/mo buys unlimited members, so three teams of eight cost $87/mo total
  • + Deeper retro board than the marketing implies: drag-to-group plus AI clustering, dot voting per board or per column, a phase timer with audio alerts, and a guided workflow that auto-advances when everyone marks ready
  • + Action items carry owner, due date, priority, comments and a link back to the feedback card — and push one-click to Jira, GitHub or Linear
  • + Official OAuth MCP server (vendor states 46 tools) and a documented REST API on every paid plan; exports to PDF, CSV, JSON, Markdown, HTML, JPEG and Confluence
  • + Unusually playful: synchronised meeting music, AI-generated backgrounds, kudos with confetti, drawings and stickers, and a 1,100-strong themed template library

Kollabe — cons

  • − No recurring or scheduled retros — every session is created by hand — and no Slack or Microsoft Teams integration for retros
  • − No survey-based health check: a Spotify-style board template, a handful of 1–5 pulse polls, and a Team Health score in the paid weekly Insights report that is computed from activity (engagement, action follow-through, blockers, kudos) rather than from asking the team
  • − Both paid tiers cap a space at <strong>5 facilitators/admins</strong> however many members it has; lifting it means an Enterprise contract
  • − No SOC 2, ISO 27001 or published GDPR posture; core data is hosted in Australia with no EU or US option, and AI features send content to OpenAI and Groq. SSO and SLAs are Enterprise contact-sales
  • − A one-person company whose founder is also building a second product, and no product update has shipped since 31 May 2026

Keep comparing

Not sure which to pick? Read our guide on how to choose a retrospective tool.