Compare
Zenoba vs Jira
Jira is the tool of teams that ship software: backlog, sprints, code traceability. An enterprise project — migration, compliance, construction — is not a backlog. Zenoba picks up where Jira stops.
- For whom — Jira
- Agile development teams integrated with Bitbucket, GitHub or GitLab, with a product owner rather than a project manager.
- For whom — Zenoba
- Organizations managing real projects that want a choice of hosting in Québec, hosting in France or local installation.
Where they are strong — Jira
- Tracking software work: tickets, sprints, boards, links to code
- The Atlassian marketplace: more than two thousand integrations
- A low, sliding entry price and a free plan
Where Zenoba stands out
- A real planning engine: critical path, leveling, earned value, baselines — not a Gantt through an add-on
- Budget, expenses, timesheets, committee reports, decisions and risks in the same project
- AI that plans from your documents and understands your sector; hosting in Québec or France; local installation available
When to stay with Jira
- If your team ships code in sprints and the “project” is the product: Jira is made for that, Zenoba is not.
- If your two thousand integrations are your daily life: Zenoba offers n8n, webhooks and MCP, not a marketplace.
Reference price — Surveyed 2026-08
Jira
Standard US$7.91, Premium US$14.54 per user/month (volume discounts)
Per user, sliding with size; Data Center (on-premise) end of life announced.
Zenoba
CA$59 per Management license per month (Pro); contributors, observers and approvers are included within plan limits
Starter is free; Pro CA$59, Team CA$129 and Enterprise CA$249 per Management license per month, with displayed minimums. Beta reference grid; private deployment on annual quote.
Public prices surveyed in August 2026 in the vendor’s currency, annual billing unless stated; they vary by country and volume and change often — the source is authoritative. Zenoba’s grid is a beta reference per Management license; no payment is collected yet.
The seventeen criteria, side by side
Yes = native; Partial = through an add-on, a paid module or on request; No = absent
| Criterion | Jira | Zenoba |
|---|---|---|
| A complete plan from a document | No | Yes |
| AI that knows the organization and the project | Partial | Yes |
| Automatic PMBOK quality review | No | Yes |
| Knowledge base per industry | No | Yes8 industries, 700 sections |
| References adapted to the workspace country | No | Yes |
| Critical path, baselines, four link types | Partialthrough an add-on | Yes |
| Resource leveling | No | Yes |
| Earned value (EVM), S-curve | No | Yes |
| Persistent seven-day undo, scenarios | No | Yes |
| Governance reports (steering committee, PowerPoint) | No | Yes11 reports, PowerPoint |
| Timesheets, expenses, budget | No | Yes |
| Forms, workflows, fields, lists | Yes | Yes |
| Project templates, “create from” | Yes | Yes |
| Hosting in Québec or France | Partial | YesQuébec (OVH Beauharnois); France option on request |
| On-premise installation | PartialData Center, end of life announced | YesDocker, on quote |
| Sovereign AI or customer key | No | Yes |
| Complete native French | Partial | Yes+ English + Spanish |
See Zenoba next to Jira
Thirty minutes, your requirements document: you see the plan Zenoba draws from it, and you decide.
Sources — 2026-08
The capabilities of the products cited change every quarter; this page is a dated snapshot that we correct as soon as a reader reports an error: contact@zenoba.ai. “To our knowledge” applies to every “no” attributed to a competitor.