Pricing Audit

Pricing page teardown · Visual collaboration

Miro: clarity, trust & conversion friction

Scored · lens: hybrid (self-serve + sales) motion, optimizing for sign-up

Overall rubric score

82

Strong — 82/100

The average of our five category scores below. This is our reading of the public page on the date shown — useful as a constructive starting point, not a verdict on the business.

By category

  • Clarity90
    • Title does not clearly frame the pricing page.
    • Multiple plans are explicitly named.
    • At least one concrete price is visible.
  • Trust85
    • The page includes visible social-proof or logo-wall language.
  • Plan differentiation70
    • Three or more plans are explicitly differentiated.
  • CTA friction70
    • CTA language supports a self-serve conversion goal.
    • Too many CTA variants can add friction and decision noise.
  • Objection handling95
    • FAQ section is visible on the page.
    • The page addresses multiple pricing objections explicitly.

What a buyer can see on the page

The real public signals our pipeline extracted from Miro’s pricing page — rendered exactly as found.

Plans named

  • Free
  • Starter
  • Business
  • Enterprise
  • Enterprise Guard

Prices shown

  • $0
  • $8/mo
  • $10
  • $20/mo
  • $25

Calls to action

  • Contact sales
  • Get started free
  • Buy Starter
  • Try it free
  • Contact us
  • Try it for free
  • miro.com/contact/sales

Trust cues

  • soc 2
  • security
  • trusted by
  • g2
  • guarantee

FAQ questions

  • How do I get started?
  • What is included with the Free plan?
  • Can I change the team size?
  • How can I increase Miro AI credits?
  • Does everyone need a Miro account to collaborate?
  • Does Miro integrate with my existing workflow?
  • Is my data secure?
  • We need additional help on documentation (like an MSA or security questionnaire). Who can I reach out to?
  • My team is a nonprofit organization. Is special pricing available for NPOs or charitable organizations?
  • What forms of payment do you accept?
  • Annual billing mentioned
  • Monthly billing mentioned
  • Free trial mentioned
  • No-credit-card mentioned
  • Contact-sales path
  • Comparison table
  • Has FAQ
  • Social proof / logos

No high-priority fixes flagged

Our pipeline didn’t surface a high-priority fix from the public signals on this page — it scores well on the rubric. That’s a read of the public surface only.

How we scored this

Scored on our 100-point rubric for clarity, trust, plan differentiation, CTA friction, and objection handling on . This is our analysis of the public page, not Miro's claim. We fetch the live public pricing page and read what a buyer can actually see — named plans, visible prices, CTAs, trust cues, and FAQ — then score those signals. No internal data, no conversion promises, no invented numbers: every score below is a direct read of that one run.

Clarity
Can a buyer tell what each plan is and what it costs, fast?
Trust
Are there credible trust cues near the pricing decision?
Plan differentiation
Is it obvious which plan is for whom, and why to move up?
CTA friction
Does the call-to-action match how this product is actually bought?
Objection handling
Are the common pricing objections answered on the page?

Source: https://miro.com/pricing/ (the live page we read on ).