Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Atlassian Confluence vs Microsoft Teams comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 8, 2024
 

Categories and Ranking

Atlassian Confluence
Ranking in Enterprise Social Software
2nd
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
103
Ranking in other categories
Corporate Portals (Enterprise Information Portals) (2nd), Knowledge Management Software (1st)
Microsoft Teams
Ranking in Enterprise Social Software
1st
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.9
Number of Reviews
162
Ranking in other categories
Virtual Meetings (4th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2024, in the Enterprise Social Software category, the mindshare of Atlassian Confluence is 10.0%, down from 18.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Microsoft Teams is 11.9%, down from 18.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Enterprise Social Software
 

Featured Reviews

Massimo Banzi - PeerSpot reviewer
Flexible, efficient, allows the concurrent development of documentation and lets you add comments offline
An area for improvement in Atlassian Confluence is encouraging more vital interaction among the project members or users involved. I was researching a tool, but I forgot the exact name of the tool, and that tool could be used for better interactions offline among users on a specific topic, development, or discussion. I want that feature to be present in Atlassian Confluence. If there's a possibility to integrate Atlassian Confluence, Jira, and that other tool, that will make Atlassian Confluence better. My team had problems accessing Atlassian Confluence a couple of times, but I wonder if that was due to a network, server, or tool issue. I have to say that I've been working with Atlassian Confluence for years, and it has been improving its functionalities, so I feel that as a tool, it's working very well, but some features could still be improved. For example, the search engine should allow you to define some keywords you could use when searching, though I wonder if it's staff-related or setup-related, or lacking in the search engine function itself. I also want artificial intelligence added to Atlassian Confluence where you're working on a specific issue or argument, and Atlassian Confluence, through its AI, can propose some improvements based on what has been done on the same topic by different teams or different projects within the same infrastructure, similar to an internal reference, which can be helpful. Through AI, it would also be great if Atlassian Confluence could advise you on what has been done outside your specific project, and maybe there's the possibility of an installation where you have several projects installed and working together. Another feature that would be good to have in the next release of Atlassian Confluence is the tool recognizing a keyword or two that's fully developed in project B, which you can use in project A, for example.
Santhosh Varghese - PeerSpot reviewer
Whiteboard and content sharing features are good
I would rate Teams's stability as a nine out of ten. However, some recent updates have made it less stable. I find it a little bit choppy. Sometimes, I find the network quality is not very good with low bandwidth. So, sometimes, when you have low bandwidth the quality becomes very poor. So, you have to optimize your usage.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"The best feature is document management."
"It seems highly scalable. There are 500 end users using this solution."
"Easy to share information and the integration with JIRA is good."
"Many people enjoy its zero learning-curve.​"
"What I like the most is the Wiki software that comes with Atlassian Confluence."
"The scalability is enough for our use cases. It covers all our needs."
"The best feature is the automatic tagging of information in documents. The automatic algorithm highlights irrelevant information that conflict with the actual documents."
"We value the way we can tag documentation to Jira because we can cross-reference a Jira ticket to a Confluence page, and we can also add a Confluence page to a Jira ticket."
"It is a scalable solution."
"The solution's stability is quite good, and it doesn't crash and freeze up when you have a large number of users."
"Our company is moving from their Skype for Business to Teams. So I've seen it, I've looked at it, I've used it somewhat enjoyed the UI."
"I find the ability to maintain group and conference information for project-related work useful."
"It is an excellent all-around communications tool that works well for business purposes."
"Compared to Zoom, Microsoft Teams is a very good solution and works well."
"The communication part has been excellent so far."
"The most valuable feature of Microsoft Teams for us is the ability to share files from OneDrive seamlessly."
 

Cons

"Atlassian Confluence is not really a community-friendly solution."
"The way Atlassian Confluence handles tickets could be improved."
"I would like to see the text editor upgraded from its current limited abilities."
"The user interface could be improved."
"RAM usage seems to be higher than it should be."
"An area for improvement in Atlassian Confluence is encouraging more vital interaction among the project members or users involved. I was researching a tool that could be used for better interactions offline among users on a specific topic or discussion. That feature would make Atlassian Confluence better."
"The scalability for larger companies could be improved."
"Atlassian Confluence could improve how information is shared outside our company. We had some negative experiences with the rights we have with our information when sharing it within Atlassian Confluence and with other teams outside the company. It's due to the limitations on the rights we have on the export capabilities. We don't have sufficient rights to do so."
"The product needs to improve its security."
"Its stability could be better."
"The desktop and mobile apps are quite different."
"In the next release, I would like to have the interface modernized and brought more up to date."
"The product is not fully integrated in Brazil."
"SharePoint was more robust and customizable earlier."
"The tool lacks AI. We will require AI in the solution to be able to integrate with all other tools."
"The solution is very expensive and I won't be able to afford it personally."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"To my knowledge, Atlassian Confluence had a pricing approach which is a commercial open-source solution, so that if you are a company, you had to pay an amount. This fee was not huge compared to other traditional solutions, and it was free for personal use or if you were an individual."
"We have a site license for Atlassian Confluence and there are some limitations on external users."
"There are some cases where you can go on Confluence as a public site without a license, but you will not have all of the features. You can also have a Confluence site that does not require a license just to read the articles. When you have Jira Service Management attached to Confluence, then you can go through the portal of Jira Service Management and read the Confluence articles without the license. This is good because when you are in an ITSM environment, you have many customers, and you do not want them to have to pay just to read articles. Regarding the use of the full features of Confluence, there is a license cost, and it depends on how many users you want."
"In my opinion, it's worth the investment"
"When you purchase this solution you get some support."
"Pricing wise, it ends up being an expensive solution. In the beginning it's cheap, but by the time you have all the functions you need, it turns out to be expensive."
"Licenses are quite expensive"
"I am using the paid version. My company has purchased it for company employees. We are using Confluence as a company. I don't know how much it costs, but its price is good enough. Its price is not so high."
"We have a license for the solution."
"Microsoft Teams comes with a yearly subscription, which is not very expensive."
"Microsoft Teams comes free if you're using it in an organization."
"We are satisfied with the price of this solution."
"It is moderately expensive than other Microsoft products."
"I don't think the solution is as expensive as big Webex licenses. It doesn't usually offer one-on-one licenses, so it's hard to compare. It's more expensive than the Google equivalent, but you can't replace Microsoft Teams with Google's offering."
"The solution's pricing is average."
"The solution is part of enterprise Microsoft 365 licensing."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Enterprise Social Software solutions are best for your needs.
816,636 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Answers from the Community

NC
Nov 17, 2021
Nov 17, 2021
Because Microsoft Teams is not a wiki, therefore it makes no sense to compare it to Confluence, a wiki. And one should be careful not to store wiki content in (Teams) chats because the data in the chat is not structured and is very difficult to find again. We would never choose Atlassian products again because the prices increase very much every year, longstanding errors are not fixed, the lic...
See 2 answers
TS
Oct 18, 2021
Because Microsoft Teams is not a wiki, therefore it makes no sense to compare it to Confluence, a wiki. And one should be careful not to store wiki content in (Teams) chats because the data in the chat is not structured and is very difficult to find again. We would never choose Atlassian products again because the prices increase very much every year, longstanding errors are not fixed, the licensing for on-premise is exorbitantly high and you are practically forced to store the data on the Atlassian servers. That's why we have several projects underway that aim to replace JIRA, Confluence, etc. And it is a great joy and relief for all team members to be getting closer to this goal.
Nov 17, 2021
Microsoft Teams has good conference call quality and is perfect for large group meetings - the up to 90k+ capacity is amazing! The simplicity of scheduling for video conferencing, especially when using Outlook for email and calendar, makes everything very easy. One click to schedule the meeting, one click activates the meeting. It's that easy. They offer different options with backgrounds, which our teams like very much. One favorite feature is the repository, which is great for knowledge management. We can store and retrieve documents, maintain control, and collaborate freely and easily with each other. We would like to see the same functionality between mobile and desktop applications, though. Some of the features vary greatly and this can make things difficult. Microsoft Teams takes up a lot of bandwidth, which can slow things down at peak times. This can also affect things like screen sharing, downloading, and losing sound and video. The Wiki software that comes with Atlassian Confluence is great. Atlassian Confluence is extremely intuitive and user-friendly; you don’t have to be tech-savvy to use it. Atlassian Confluence has a great offering of templates that can be used for just about any situation, such as creating documents, charts, or enhanced tables. The hyper-linking and drawing tools are one of our favorite features. Atlassian Confluence recently stopped offering the self-hosted version of the product. The cloud-based service currently offered can be very expensive for smaller companies. There could also be more flexibility when it comes to editing a page to make it look the way you want it to look. Conclusion For what we were looking for, we felt Microsoft Teams was the best fit. You get great collaborative options, documentation workflows, and follow-up. The additional benefit of extraordinary call conferencing options that are fully integrated with the Microsoft ecosystem made it a very easy choice for us.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Educational Organization
72%
Financial Services Firm
4%
Computer Software Company
4%
Manufacturing Company
3%
Educational Organization
70%
Financial Services Firm
7%
Government
3%
Computer Software Company
3%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Atlassian Confluence?
The most valuable feature of the solution stems from its document-controlling feature. In Atlassian Confluence, controlled documents cannot be edited by anyone else.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Atlassian Confluence?
The product is neither cheap nor expensive, meaning its price falls somewhere in the mid-range zone. I am not sure about the price of the product, but I know that the pricing-related information is...
What needs improvement with Atlassian Confluence?
The discoverability of documents could be improved. In scenarios where documents are managed by another department or we are looking for specific documents, the process could be enhanced for easier...
What do you like most about Microsoft Teams?
The most valuable feature of Microsoft Teams for us is the ability to share files from OneDrive seamlessly.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Microsoft Teams?
I’m unsure about the exact cost, but I believe it’s reasonable. Using Teams for collaboration, video conferencing, and messaging helps save costs, especially for communicating with third-party comp...
What needs improvement with Microsoft Teams?
Everything is running smoothly, and I’m still exploring more features. As for improvements, I think it could be more user-friendly and integrate better with third-party software, like Zoom and othe...
 

Also Known As

Confluence
MS Teams
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Facebook, Skype, Microsoft, NASA, Netflix, Adobe, Bonobos, LinkedIn, Pfizer, Citi.
Honeywll, AIRFRANCE, AccuWeather, Lilly
Find out what your peers are saying about Atlassian Confluence vs. Microsoft Teams and other solutions. Updated: October 2024.
816,636 professionals have used our research since 2012.