Why Look for Jira Alternatives?
Jira has been the default issue tracker for software teams for over two decades. Its depth of configuration, extensive integration ecosystem, and full support for Scrum and Kanban workflows have made it the standard in enterprise engineering organizations. If you have worked at a company with more than 200 engineers, you have almost certainly used Jira.
But Jira's dominance comes with real costs. The interface is sluggish compared to modern tools. Loading a board or searching issues involves multi-second waits that compound across a workday. Configuration complexity is another friction point: workflow schemes, issue type schemes, permission schemes, notification schemes, screen schemes, and field configuration schemes. Many teams need a dedicated Jira admin just to keep the tool usable. For smaller teams, that overhead is not justified.
Pricing adds pressure as teams scale. The free tier covers 10 users, but the Standard plan at $8.15/user/month jumps to Premium at $16/user/month once you need advanced roadmaps, cross-project automation, or sandbox environments. Teams of 50 or more start spending serious money on a tool that frustrates half its users. If your team has outgrown Jira's free tier but does not need enterprise-grade compliance, there are faster, simpler options worth considering.
The 7 Best Jira Alternatives
1. Linear
Best for: Engineering teams that want speed and opinionated workflows
Linear is the anti-Jira. Where Jira gives you infinite configuration options and lets you build whatever workflow you want, Linear ships with opinions. Triage, cycles, projects, and teams are built-in concepts with sensible defaults. You start productive on day one instead of spending a week configuring schemes.
The speed difference is the first thing every team notices. Linear's interface responds in milliseconds. Keyboard shortcuts let engineers create, assign, triage, and close issues without touching the mouse. For teams that found Jira's UI was actively slowing them down, the performance gap alone justifies the switch.
Linear's roadmap and project views have matured significantly. You can plan by team, project, or time horizon, then track execution against those plans in the same tool. The trade-off is flexibility: Linear's opinionated approach means less customization for non-standard workflows.
Pricing: Free (up to 250 issues), Standard $8/user/month, Plus $14/user/month
Pros:
- Fastest, most responsive interface in the issue tracking category
- Opinionated workflows reduce setup time and process debates
- Keyboard-first design built for engineer productivity
Cons:
- Limited customization for teams with non-standard workflows
- Not designed for non-technical stakeholders or business teams
- Roadmap features are still less mature than Jira's
2. Asana
Best for: Cross-functional teams that need multiple project views and workload management
Asana is the strongest pick for teams where product, design, engineering, and marketing all need visibility into the same work. Unlike Jira, which is fundamentally built around developer workflows, Asana was designed for any team type. Its board, list, timeline, and calendar views give every stakeholder the format that makes sense for their role.
Portfolio tracking is where Asana pulls ahead for product leaders. You can monitor progress across multiple initiatives from a single dashboard, spot bottlenecks, and reallocate resources. This cross-project visibility is something Jira only delivers through third-party plugins or the Premium tier.
The flip side is that Asana lacks native sprint management and backlog grooming. You can build sprint-like workflows with custom fields and rules, but it requires more setup than Jira's out-of-the-box agile boards.
Pricing: Free (up to 10 users), Premium $10.99/user/month, Business $24.99/user/month
Pros:
- Multiple views (board, list, timeline, calendar) accessible to any team member
- Portfolio-level tracking for cross-project visibility
- Strong workflow automation without code
Cons:
- No native sprint or agile methodology support
- Free tier limited to 10 users
- Reporting depth requires the Business tier
3. ClickUp
Best for: Teams wanting maximum features per dollar
ClickUp packs more functionality into its $7/user/month plan than Jira puts into its $16 Premium tier. Docs, goals, whiteboards, time tracking, custom fields, sprints, and 15+ views are all included. For teams that were paying for Jira plus Confluence plus a time tracker plus a goals tool, ClickUp consolidates all of that.
The hierarchy model (Workspace, Space, Folder, List, Task) gives you structure that scales from a 5-person startup to a 200-person org. Sprint management is built in, with velocity tracking and burndown charts. The sprint setup is simpler than Jira's, which is either a pro or a con depending on how much process control you need.
The honest trade-off is performance and learning curve. ClickUp ships so many features that the interface can feel overwhelming, and large workspaces occasionally lag. Teams that value speed and simplicity over feature breadth should look at Linear instead.
Pricing: Free (unlimited users), Unlimited $7/user/month, Business $12/user/month
Pros:
- Most features per dollar in the category
- All-in-one platform replaces multiple tools (docs, goals, time tracking, sprints)
- Generous free tier with unlimited users
Cons:
- Feature density creates a steep learning curve
- Performance can lag in large workspaces with thousands of tasks
- Interface complexity is the opposite of Jira's problem, but still a problem
4. Monday.com
Best for: Visual project management with built-in automation
Monday.com approaches project management from the visual side. Color-coded boards, 30+ column types, and drag-and-drop automation recipes make it intuitive for teams that find Jira's interface intimidating. The kanban view is one of eight available layouts, and switching between them takes one click.
The automation engine is Monday's strongest differentiator. You build if-this-then-that recipes from a visual menu. When a status changes, assign the item. When a date arrives, send a notification. When all sub-items complete, move the parent. These automations cover most of what teams use Jira workflows for, without the configuration complexity.
Monday's weakness shows up with deep engineering workflows. There is no native sprint management, no backlog refinement view, and no built-in velocity or burndown tracking. Engineering teams that need those features are better served by Linear or Shortcut.
Pricing: Free (up to 2 users), Basic $9/seat/month, Standard $12/seat/month, Pro $19/seat/month
Pros:
- Highly visual interface that non-technical team members adopt quickly
- Built-in automation recipes that replace most workflow configuration
- Dashboard widgets aggregate data across boards and projects
Cons:
- No native sprint management or agile-specific features
- Per-seat pricing scales quickly for larger teams
- Free plan limited to 2 seats
5. GitHub Issues + Projects
Best for: Open-source and developer-first teams
If your code already lives on GitHub, adding another tool for issue tracking creates unnecessary friction. GitHub Issues handles bug reports, feature requests, and task tracking directly alongside your pull requests. GitHub Projects adds kanban boards, tables, and roadmap views on top of issues.
The integration between code and issues is seamless. Close issues from commit messages, link PRs to project board items, and automate card movement based on branch status. For open-source teams or small engineering squads, this is all the project management tooling you need, and it is free.
The limitations are real for product teams. There is no native sprint planning, no time tracking, no resource management, and no stakeholder-friendly views. Custom fields in Projects are improving but still basic compared to Jira or Linear. GitHub Projects is best for teams that want minimal process overhead and maximum code-to-issue proximity. Use the RICE Score Calculator to prioritize issues before pulling them into your GitHub project board.
Pricing: Free (public repos and all users), Team $4/user/month, Enterprise $21/user/month
Pros:
- Zero tool switching between code, PRs, and issues
- Free for public repositories with full functionality
- Automation via GitHub Actions is extremely flexible
Cons:
- No sprint management, velocity tracking, or burndown charts
- Custom fields and views are still maturing
- Limited visibility for non-technical stakeholders
6. Notion
Best for: Flexible teams building their own project management system
Notion is not an issue tracker, but its database system can function as one. Teams build task boards with custom properties (status, assignee, priority, sprint, story points), then view them as kanban boards, timelines, tables, or calendars. The appeal is that your specs, meeting notes, retrospectives, and task boards live in one workspace.
For teams frustrated by Jira's rigidity, Notion offers total control. You define exactly which fields, views, and workflows exist. There are no hidden configuration menus or admin-only settings. Everyone on the team can modify the system as needs evolve.
The cost is maintenance. Notion does not enforce any process. There is no built-in sprint velocity, no automated workflow transitions, no backlog health metrics. Your system is exactly as disciplined as the people maintaining it. Teams that want guardrails around their process should pick a purpose-built tool. Teams that want a blank canvas should consider Notion, especially if they already use it for documentation. If you are evaluating Notion for project management more broadly, see our Trello alternatives comparison where Notion also appears.
Pricing: Free (personal use), Plus $8/user/month, Business $15/user/month
Pros:
- Total flexibility to build the exact system your team needs
- Combines documentation and project management in one workspace
- Your team probably already uses Notion, reducing tool sprawl
Cons:
- No built-in agile workflows, velocity tracking, or sprint automation
- Requires ongoing manual maintenance to stay organized
- Performance slows with very large databases (1,000+ items)
7. Shortcut (formerly Clubhouse)
Best for: Small-to-mid engineering teams wanting Jira-lite
Shortcut was built by developers who wanted Jira's capabilities without Jira's weight. It offers stories, epics, iterations (sprints), and milestones with a cleaner interface and faster setup. The data model maps closely to Jira's, which makes migration straightforward.
What sets Shortcut apart is the balance between structure and simplicity. It has enough agile tooling (iterations, velocity charts, burndown) to satisfy teams with real process needs, without the admin overhead that makes Jira painful. The iteration planning view lets you drag stories from the backlog into a sprint with effort estimates, which is basically what most teams actually use Jira for.
Shortcut sits in a specific niche: too structured for teams that want Linear's speed-first approach, too lightweight for enterprises that need Jira's compliance features. For teams of 10 to 80 engineers that need sprint management, backlog grooming, and basic roadmapping without a dedicated admin, it fits well.
Pricing: Free (up to 10 users), Team $8.50/user/month, Business $16/user/month, Enterprise custom
Pros:
- Familiar Jira-like concepts (stories, epics, iterations) with a cleaner interface
- Built-in velocity and burndown charts for sprint retrospectives
- Faster setup and simpler administration than Jira
Cons:
- Smaller integration ecosystem than Jira or Asana
- Less name recognition can make it harder to sell to leadership
- Roadmap views are functional but basic
How to Choose
If speed and simplicity are your top priorities: Linear is the clear choice. Its keyboard-driven interface and opinionated workflows eliminate the configuration overhead that makes Jira frustrating. Engineering teams that value execution velocity over process customization will not look back.
If your team spans engineering, product, design, and marketing: Asana or Monday.com give non-technical stakeholders views they can actually use. Neither has the engineering depth of Jira, but both are stronger at cross-functional visibility.
If you want maximum features and lowest cost: ClickUp replaces Jira, Confluence, and your time tracker in one tool at $7/user/month. Expect a learning curve, but the value per dollar is unmatched.
If your code is on GitHub and your process is lightweight: GitHub Issues + Projects gives you issue tracking where your code already lives. No context switching, no extra bills.
If you want Jira's structure without Jira's weight: Shortcut offers the same data model (stories, epics, iterations) with a simpler interface and no admin burden. It is the closest Jira replacement on this list.
Not sure which direction fits your team? The PM Tool Picker recommends tools based on your team size, methodology, and priorities.
Bottom Line
Jira remains the right choice for large engineering organizations with dedicated admins, complex compliance requirements, and deep Atlassian ecosystem investments. But for the majority of product and engineering teams, the alternatives on this list deliver the sprint management, backlog tracking, and roadmap visibility that actually matter day-to-day, with less friction and lower cost. Start with the pain point that prompted you to search for alternatives, and pick the tool that solves that specific problem best.