Compare tools
Pick 2–5 published tools. Values come from our evidence-checked profiles — an em-dash means unknown, never “no”. Ranking rows reflect the current published methodology for the comparison context.
Jira vs Asana
Context: Project Management Software · methodology v1.0.0 · 33 rows
Jira
Provisional
Asana
Provisional
| Attribute | JiraAtlassian | AsanaAsana |
|---|---|---|
| Identity · Taxonomy | ||
| Documentation | https://developer.atlassian.com/cloud/jira/platform/ | https://developers.asana.com/docs |
| Tags | issue-tracking, agile, software-development, bug-tracking | project-management, work-management, collaboration, automation |
| Platform · Deployment | ||
| Delivery model | SaaS | SaaS, desktop, mobile |
| Desktop apps | — | Windows, macOS |
| Hosting options | cloud, self-hosted, data-center | cloud |
| Mobile apps | — | iOS, Android |
| Operating systems | Windows, macOS, Linux | Windows, macOS |
| Pricing · Licensing | ||
| Free plan | true | true |
| Free trial | true | — |
| License model | proprietary | subscription |
| Open source | false | false |
| Pricing model | free, subscription, seat, custom | free, subscription, seat |
| Starting price | 7.91 | 10.99 |
| Features · Product · Fit | ||
| Core capabilities | issue tracking, bug tracking, agile project management | task and project tracking, workflow automation, portfolios and goals, timeline and Gantt views, workload management, AI Studio |
| Api · Integrations · Ecosystem | ||
| API available | true | true |
| Enterprise SSO | SAML | SAML |
| Security · Privacy · Compliance | ||
| Regulatory compliance | — | GDPR, HIPAA, CCPA |
| Security certifications | SOC 2, ISO/IEC 27001, FedRAMP | SOC 2 Type II, ISO 27001 |
| Audience · Use · Case | ||
| Best for | Software teams that need issue tracking and agile project management, from small groups to large enterprises. | Teams of all sizes that want a general-purpose work management platform with task tracking, automation, portfolios, and AI features. |
| Company-size fit | individual, SMB, mid-market, enterprise | individual, SMB, mid-market, enterprise |
| Primary use cases | software development, agile project management, issue and bug tracking | project management, team work management, goal tracking, workflow automation |
| Skill level | intermediate | beginner |
| Lifecycle · Versioning | ||
| Maintenance status | active | active |
| Vendor · Maintainer | ||
| Founded year | 2002 | 2008 |
| Headquarters country | Australia | United States |
| Vendor type | commercial | commercial |
| Ranking factors (current methodology) | ||
| Usability & adoption/100 | 58.0 | 88.0◂ highest |
| Reliability & performance/100 | 78.0 | 84.0◂ highest |
| Security, privacy & compliance/100 | 84.0◂ highest | 80.0 |
| Interoperability & ecosystem/100 | 92.0◂ highest | 86.0 |
| Value & total cost/100 | 62.0 | 72.0◂ highest |
| Support & documentation/100 | 88.0 | 88.0 |
| Evidence confidence/100 | 86.0◂ highest | 84.0 |
“—” means unknown (we never treat missing evidence as a negative). Cells reflect each value's current evidence state; superseded or stale values are excluded. Ranking rows are editorial assessments under the cited methodology version — see the Project Management Software category for definitions.