ToolAlts
Open menu

Figma vs Penpot

Side-by-side comparison of features, pricing, and ratings.

Feature
Figma
Penpot
Rating
4.9
5
Open Source
No
Yes
GitHub Stars
N/A
54,991
Figma Design
Figma Make
Figma Draw
Dev Mode
FigJam
Figma Slides
Figma Motion
Figma Sites
Figma Buzz
Design
Auto versioning
Penpot editor
Flex Layout
Grid Layout
Path Editor
Multiplatform
Libraries & templates
Plugins
Inspect mode
Collaboration
Multiplayer edition
Comments
Share presentations
Team management
Editors
Role and permissions
AI Workflows with any Agent/LLM
Administration & Security
API REST
Webhooks
Deleted file recovery
Sneak Peek in New Ft.
Design systems
Components
Fonts management
Variants
Design tokens
Styles
Prototype
Create prototypes
Interactions
Transitions
Flows
View mode
Share prototypes with a link
Comments on prototypes
Devtools
Code inspector
Properties inspector
Distances and measurement
Component annotations
Export production assets
Support
Community forum
Help center

Detailed Comparison

Short answer

Choose Figma if your team needs the most mature design collaboration platform, broad hiring familiarity, strong handoff workflows, and a large plugin/community ecosystem. Choose Penpot if open standards, self-hosting, code-friendly design handoff, or avoiding vendor lock-in matter more than having the deepest commercial design platform.

This is not only a feature comparison. It is a governance decision. Figma is the safer default for most product teams. Penpot is the better strategic choice for teams that care about open source, portability, and controlling their design infrastructure.

Decision table

QuestionPick Figma when...Pick Penpot when...
Team environmentDesigners, PMs, engineers, and stakeholders need a familiar shared toolYour team can tolerate a smaller ecosystem for more control
Hiring and onboardingYou want the tool most designers already knowYou are comfortable training the team on a newer workflow
EcosystemPlugins, templates, design systems, and community files are importantYou prefer open source foundations and fewer platform dependencies
InfrastructureSaaS convenience is acceptableSelf-hosting or data control is a requirement
Engineering handoffYou want mature inspect, comments, and design system workflowsYou value web-native output and developer-readable design artifacts
Risk to avoidOverpaying for a platform you use only lightlyChoosing openness while lacking the team time to maintain it

Where Figma is stronger

Figma is stronger as an all-around design operations platform. It has the larger professional ecosystem, more third-party integrations, stronger hiring familiarity, and mature collaboration patterns. For teams that already work with product designers, design systems, prototypes, stakeholder review, and developer handoff, Figma is usually the lowest-friction choice.

The biggest advantage is not one feature. It is the surrounding workflow. Designers know it. Engineers have seen its inspect panels. PMs and clients understand how to comment on files. Agencies can share work without explaining the tool. When the goal is to move a cross-functional team quickly, that familiarity has real value.

Figma is also a better fit when the design system is a business-critical asset. Component libraries, variables, branches, comments, prototypes, and shared files have enough depth for serious product teams. If you need a commercial platform that can scale across multiple designers and stakeholders, Figma remains the practical default.

Where Penpot is stronger

Penpot is stronger when control and openness are part of the requirement. It is open source and can fit teams that do not want their design process entirely dependent on a closed SaaS platform. That matters for organizations with strict data requirements, public-sector constraints, privacy concerns, or a preference for self-hosted infrastructure.

Penpot also speaks more naturally to developers who think in web concepts. Its positioning around open standards makes it attractive for teams that want design artifacts to feel closer to production interfaces. For smaller teams, indie products, and open source projects, Penpot can be a credible way to avoid a commercial design stack while still keeping collaborative UI design.

The tradeoff is ecosystem maturity. You should expect fewer ready-made plugins, fewer designers with deep Penpot experience, and less institutional knowledge compared with Figma. That may be fine if your design workflow is straightforward. It becomes costly if your team depends on advanced workflows or frequently works with external designers.

Migration considerations

Moving from Penpot to Figma is usually easier from a people perspective because Figma is widely known, but design files and component systems still need cleanup. Moving from Figma to Penpot should be treated as a small migration project, not a simple export. Audit your component libraries, plugin dependencies, design tokens, and handoff process before switching.

For teams evaluating Penpot, a pilot is safer than a full migration. Pick one real product surface, rebuild the relevant design system pieces, and run design review plus engineer handoff through Penpot for a sprint. If the team can ship without friction, then expand.

Practical recommendation

Use Figma when design throughput, collaboration, and ecosystem depth are the main goals. It is the better default for startups, agencies, and product teams that need to hire designers or work with external partners.

Use Penpot when your organization values open source, self-hosting, and long-term control enough to accept a smaller ecosystem. It is especially worth testing for open source products, privacy-sensitive organizations, and engineering-led teams that want design tools closer to the web platform.