Comparison - IcePanel vs Miro

⚡ TL;DR

IcePanel and Miro are tools that can help you visualize your software architecture.
IcePanel is a more specialized tool for documenting software systems. It uses a simple set of abstractions (based on the C4 model) and a model-based system.
Miro offers a larger selection of templates including mind maps, journey maps, and UML diagrams.
Both tools offer rich collaboration tools and exporting options and are secure. IcePanel costs more than Miro when comparing Growth and Business plans, but offers a tiered discount above 15 seats.

🆚 Comparing IcePanel with Miro

IcePanel is a collaborative diagramming and modelling tool based on the C4 model. It’s best for consistently mapping software systems across teams for technical and non-technical audiences. With IcePanel, you can create hierarchical diagrams with a simple set of abstractions and interactive user journeys with Flows.

Miro is a general-purpose whiteboarding tool that helps teams create and collaborate on various activities, from ideation to planning. With Miro, you can diagram everything from flow charts to UML, journey maps, and mind maps in real-time with your team.

So, which tool is right for you? In this article, we’ll compare them for documenting software architecture.

Audience

IcePanel: Mainly for software architects and developers. Product managers, business analysts and other non-technical audiences can benefit from viewing and commenting on diagrams.
Miro: Built for multiple audiences, from product managers, designers, marketers, business analysts, and developers.

Use case

IcePanel: Software architecture diagramming and modelling using the C4 model for complex systems.
Miro: Diagramming (flow charts, journey maps, UML, BPMN), brainstorming, and project planning.

📝 Key diagramming features

Miro offers various templates for creating diagrams, such as flowcharts, mind maps, and customer journey maps. This includes software architecture-specific templates for UML and the C4 model. It’s a tool that can do many things but isn’t especially focused on software architecture diagrams. It’s a jack of all trades but a master none.

IcePanel is built to help teams create structured and detailed software architecture diagrams using the C4 model. It includes additional features to help maintain and communicate complex systems to different audiences. Since IcePanel is model-based and has a diagram hierarchy (read more about this here), it provides several benefits for representing software architecture.

In general, IcePanel is a more opinionated tool for documenting software architecture. There are less diagram types (only 3 in a hierarchy), a smaller set of abstractions (5 object types), and a single source of truth with a model. These ‘constraints’ remove a lot of the unnecessary complexity when it comes to diagram layout or formatting, instead allowing teams to focus on the actual design of their architecture.

Diagram types

IcePanel: 3 diagram levels from the C4 model (context, container, component).
Miro: Extensive collection of diagram types from templates (UML, BPMN, C4 model, journey maps, etc.).

Model-based

IcePanel: ✅ Yes.
Miro: ❌ No.

Ability to add icons

IcePanel: ✅ Yes; a collection of over 3000 icons with metadata available on all plans.
Miro: ✅ Yes, only on Business or Enterprise plans.

Shapes

IcePanel: Fixed set of shapes for different abstractions in the C4 model (actor, system, app, store, component).
Miro: Basic and custom shapes for different notations (UML, BPMN, Data flows, etc.).

Text fields in canvas

IcePanel: ❌ No.
Miro: ✅ Yes.

Connection types

IcePanel: Single-direction, bi-direction.
Miro: Single-direction, no direction.

Custom tags for objects

IcePanel: ✅ Yes.
Miro: ❌ No.

Interactive user journeys

IcePanel: ✅ Yes, with Flows.
Miro: ❌ No, static diagrams with presentation mode.

Dependencies view

IcePanel: ✅ Yes.
Miro: ❌ No.

Custom pen tool

IcePanel: ❌ No.
Miro: ✅ Yes.

👥 Collaboration

IcePanel and Miro enable teams to collaborate on diagrams with comments, share links, and different role types. Both tools are designed to be used across a team, helping drive alignment and clarity through visual artifacts.

Commenting

IcePanel: 3 comment types (Question, inaccuracy, ideas) with mentioning.
Miro: General commenting with mentioning.

Share links

IcePanel: Read-only links with password protection or SSO-restricted access are available on Growth plans.
Miro: Edit, comment, and read-only links with password protection.

Revision history and versioning

IcePanel: Versions are created through an explicit user action. Ability to create versions, view them in a timeline and revert to a previous version.
Miro: Activity feed with the ability to restore specific deleted objects. Versions are created every hour when a change is made and are stored for 90 days. Users can restore a previous version.

Drafts

IcePanel: Ability to create drafts and merge them to the current state with a simple Git-like flow.
Miro: ❌ No.

Embeds

IcePanel: Embed interactive diagrams using iFrames.
Miro: Embed interactive areas or frames as iFrames.

Viewers

IcePanel: Viewers are free and unlimited on all plans.
Miro: Viewers or Guests are free and unlimited on Business and Enterprise plans.

🔁 Importing and exporting

IcePanel and Miro support importing and exporting in multiple file formats. IcePanel has fewer importing options due to its model-based system. Both tools support exporting in several file formats, with some small differences (IcePanel exports in SVG and PNG vs Miro in JPG).

Importing

IcePanel: Model objects can be imported from Structurizr, Backstage, and the REST API.
Miro: One-way import from Draw.io, Figjam, LucidChart, Mural, Visio, and more.

Exporting

IcePanel: SVG, PNG, PDF, JSON, CSV, REST API.
Miro: JPEG, PDF, CSV, REST API, Save to Google Drive.

🔒 Security

IcePanel and Miro are both SOC 2 Type II and GDPR compliant. SAML-based SSO is available on both IcePanel Growth and Miro Business plans. Miro’s also compliant with ISO/IEC 27001, SOC3, and CCPA.

Viewers (read-only)

IcePanel: ✅ Yes.
Miro: ✅ Yes.

SSO

IcePanel: ✅ (available on Growth plans).
Miro: ✅ (only available on Enterprise plans).

SOC 2 Type II

IcePanel: ✅ Yes.
Miro: ✅ Yes.

GDPR

IcePanel: ✅ Yes.
Miro: ✅ Yes.

ISO/IEC 27001

IcePanel: ❌ No.
Miro: ✅ Yes.

Data protection

IcePanel: TLS 1.2 for transit and AES 256 at rest.
Miro: TLS 1.2 for transit and AES 256 at rest.

Audit logs

IcePanel: ✅ (Isolation plans).
Miro: ✅ (Enterprise plans).

SCIM

IcePanel: ❌ No (coming soon).
Miro: ✅ (Enterprise plans).

Data Residency

IcePanel: US. Other GCP locations are available on Isolation plans.
Miro: EU, US (Enterprise only)

Trust page

IcePanel: https://trust.icepanel.io/
Miro: https://miro.com/trust/

💰 Pricing

Both IcePanel and Miro charge per editor on monthly or annual plans. IcePanel is more expensive than Miro, but it has a tiered discount above 15 seats, which reduces the per-editor cost below Miro. Since IcePanel is a more specialized tool, teams are likely to require fewer editor seats for architects or engineering team leads compared to Miro.

Business pricing

IcePanel: Monthly plans are $50/editor/mo, and annual plans are $40/editor/mo. Seats above 15 cost $14/mo on monthly plans and $12/mo on annual plans.
Miro: $20/editor/mo on monthly plans, $16/editor/mo on annual plans. No tiered discounts.

Enterprise pricing

IcePanel: Starting at $25/editor/mo (minimum 50 seats). Single-tenant environment in a GCP region of your choice. The yearly fee is $85,000.
Miro: Custom pricing (minimum 30 seats).

🏁 To wrap up

If you’re looking for a tool to document your software architecture, IcePanel and Miro are two options you’ll likely consider. Miro’s a great choice if you’re looking for a general-purpose tool that can do a bit of everything from ideation to UML diagramming. If you mainly need throwaway software diagrams that won’t be referenced in the future, it’s a good choice.

However, IcePanel is a better fit if you’re looking for a specialized tool that excels in documenting software architecture consistently with a source of truth. Comparing these tools 1:1 is tricky because they solve different problems. There may be a world where you use both tools in your organization, depending on the use case and team.