Choose Penpot if openness, self-hosting, and developer-friendly SVG matter most; choose Figma if your team needs the fastest real-time UI collaboration with the largest plugin and community ecosystem. Both tools are strong, but they solve different problems. Penpot is the better open design choice. Figma is still the smoother shared workspace for many product teams.
TLDR: Penpot is best for teams that care about open source, privacy, ownership, and CSS/SVG-friendly workflows. Figma is better for teams that want polished multiplayer editing, mature prototyping, and a huge library of templates and plugins. For example, a 12-person SaaS team might save hours each month with Figma’s ready-made ecosystem, while a public-sector team with 40 designers may prefer Penpot because it can be self-hosted and controlled internally. If collaboration speed is the only metric, Figma usually wins; if freedom and control matter, Penpot deserves serious attention.
Penpot and Figma are not really the same kind of tool
Figma is a commercial cloud-based design platform. It became popular because designers, product managers, and developers could work in one browser file without sending files around. Comments, cursors, sharing links, design systems, and dev handoff all happen in one place.
Penpot is an open-source design and prototyping tool. It also runs in the browser, supports collaboration, and uses web-friendly formats. Its biggest promise is simple: design tools should not trap teams inside closed file systems.
That difference matters. Figma feels more polished. Penpot feels more open. If your team has ever lost access to a file because of billing, seat permissions, or a workspace change, Penpot’s model starts to look very attractive.
Collaboration: Figma is still faster, but Penpot is catching up
Figma’s collaboration is hard to beat. Multiple users can edit at once, leave comments, inspect components, follow another user’s cursor, and present work with little friction. Even non-designers often understand it after a few minutes.
That polish is a big deal. Product teams do not want to spend 15 minutes explaining how to zoom, comment, or inspect a button. Figma turns design review into something close to a shared whiteboard.
Penpot also supports real-time collaboration, comments, shared files, and team libraries. It works well for UI design, especially for teams already comfortable with open-source tools. Still, it can feel a bit rough in heavier files. Honestly, it feels like Penpot sometimes asks for patience where Figma simply gets out of the way.
If five people are reviewing a checkout flow, Figma will likely feel smoother. If your organization needs to keep the file inside its own infrastructure, Penpot has the stronger argument.
Open source and ownership: Penpot wins clearly
This is Penpot’s strongest category. Penpot is open source. Teams can inspect the code, self-host it, contribute to it, and avoid full dependence on one vendor. That matters for governments, universities, banks, healthcare teams, and companies with strict data rules.
Figma is not open source. It is powerful, well-supported, and widely trusted, but it is still a closed commercial platform. Your files live in Figma’s system unless you export them. Your workflow depends on its pricing, permissions, and product decisions.
The catch is that self-hosting Penpot is not magic. Someone has to maintain it. Updates, backups, performance, access control, and security still need care. For a small startup with no DevOps help, hosted Figma may be simpler.
Design systems and components: Figma has the mature edge
Figma has excellent support for components, variants, variables, styles, auto layout, shared libraries, and design system governance. It is not perfect, but it is deep. Large teams can create reusable systems and roll them out across multiple products.
Penpot supports components, assets, grids, flex layouts, tokens-related workflows, and shared libraries. Its approach is promising, especially because it thinks more like the web. Designers and developers can speak a more similar language.
Still, Figma is ahead for complex design systems. If your team maintains hundreds of components across mobile, web, and marketing surfaces, Figma offers more refinement. Penpot is improving, but expect extra effort in edge cases.
Developer handoff: Penpot has a real philosophical advantage
Penpot is built around open standards such as SVG. That is not just a nerdy detail. It means the tool speaks a language closer to what browsers already understand. Developers often appreciate that Penpot’s output is less mysterious than files locked into a private format.
Figma’s inspect mode is familiar and useful. Developers can check spacing, colors, typography, measurements, and CSS-like values. Plugins can improve handoff even more. For many teams, it is good enough.
But Figma handoff can still get messy. Auto layout may not match production layout. Components may look tidy in the file but become awkward in code. It drives me crazy that design files can look “done” while developers still have to ask ten questions about states, breakpoints, and tokens.
Penpot does not solve all of that. No design tool does. Yet its web-native thinking makes designer-developer conversation feel more direct.
Prototyping: Figma feels more complete
Figma’s prototyping tools are strong enough for most UI teams. You can create flows, overlays, transitions, interactive components, and presentation-ready demos. It also integrates well with research, documentation, and testing workflows through plugins and third-party tools.
Penpot includes prototyping too. You can connect screens, define interactions, share previews, and test flows. For standard app and website prototypes, it works fine.
Figma has the advantage when prototypes get richer. Microinteractions, design reviews, stakeholder presentations, and usability test links are usually more polished. If prototypes are a key part of how your team gets approval, Figma has fewer rough corners.
Performance and reliability
Figma has had years to tune browser performance. It can still slow down in massive enterprise files, but it is generally quick and dependable. Teams know what to expect.
Penpot performance depends on setup. The hosted version is convenient. A self-hosted version depends on your infrastructure. A well-managed instance can work nicely. A neglected one can become painful fast.
For small and medium teams, both tools are usable. For very large files with many editors, Figma remains the safer bet.
Plugins, templates, and community
Figma’s community is enormous. UI kits, wireframe kits, icon sets, plugins, accessibility checkers, content tools, chart generators, and design system templates are everywhere. This saves real time.
Penpot’s community is smaller, but active. The open-source crowd brings strong energy. You will find templates and shared resources, just not at Figma’s scale.
If your team depends on plugins for icons, copy, tokens, charts, audits, and export workflows, Figma is more convenient. If your team prefers fewer dependencies and more control, Penpot feels cleaner.
Pricing: Penpot can be cheaper, but not always
Penpot’s open-source model can reduce licensing costs, especially through self-hosting. That is appealing when many people need access. Designers, developers, QA testers, and stakeholders can join without the same seat anxiety.
Figma’s pricing can add up as teams grow. Paid seats, organization plans, branching, libraries, and admin controls may become necessary. For a startup with three designers, that may be fine. For a 200-person product organization, it becomes a serious budget line.
Still, self-hosting Penpot has hidden costs. Server costs, maintenance time, backups, and internal support are not free. The cheaper option depends on team size and technical capacity.
Which tool is better for UI collaboration?
Figma is better for collaboration out of the box. It is faster to adopt, easier to explain to stakeholders, and richer in team features. Most design teams will complete reviews, comments, prototypes, and handoff with less training.
Penpot is better for open collaboration. It gives teams more ownership, more transparency, and a stronger fit with open standards. It is the better choice when vendor control, file access, and self-hosting are serious concerns.
- Pick Figma if you want the smoothest team workflow, mature design systems, strong prototyping, and a giant plugin library.
- Pick Penpot if you want open source, self-hosting, SVG-first thinking, and long-term control over your design files.
- Test both if your team includes designers and developers who care equally about speed and ownership.
The practical answer is simple. Figma is the safer default for most UI teams today. Penpot is the more interesting long-term choice for teams that believe design tools should be open, portable, and closer to the web itself.
