Comparison

Glattice vs Jira

Jira is the most configurable issue tracker in existence, and swimlanes mean its boards genuinely are two-dimensional. The trade is administration: getting there means schemes, screens, workflows and permissions, usually maintained by someone whose job that is. Glattice gives you the second axis without the apparatus — any facet on either axis, swapped in one click — and gives up the workflow engine, the sprint machinery and the enterprise governance to do it.

The short version

Jira and Glattice compared across 7 dimensions
Dimension	Jira	Glattice
Board structure	Columns plus swimlanes; the swimlane field is configured per board.	Two fields at once. Any facet on the rows, any other on the columns.
Changing the question	Reconfigure the board; swimlane and column fields are not interchangeable in one action.	Swap the rows and columns in one click; the same cards re-sort.
Public API	Extensive REST API and a large marketplace.	REST, 76 documented endpoints, not tier-gated.
AI agents	Rovo and Atlassian’s own AI surface; MCP support via Atlassian’s connectors.	Remote MCP server over OAuth 2.1; agents read and write the same board.
Change history	Full issue history and audit log.	Append-only, tagged with the interface behind each change. 30 days on Free.
Seats	Every user is a paid seat above the free tier.	Viewers and billing-only members are free; you pay for people who edit.
Entry price	Free up to 10 users; paid from around $8/user/month.	Free for 5 boards per space; Pro $6/month.

Where Jira is strong

A comparison that concedes nothing is not worth reading, so here is the honest read on where Jira earns its place — and where the two of us are simply built for different jobs.

A real workflow engine — transitions, conditions, validators — and the agile reporting apparatus around sprints, points and releases.
Enterprise governance: SSO, audit logs, data residency, and a marketplace of thousands of apps.
Deep configurability for organisations that have someone whose job is to configure it.

Where Glattice is different

The differences are configuration cost and what the two axis fields mean. Jira uses a configured board setting for the second dimension. Glattice makes both dimensions facets that can trade places in one click. The web app uses the public REST application, and MCP offers focused workflows under the authorizing person’s permissions; MCP is deliberately coarser than the browser and REST surfaces.

Moving from Jira

Export issues from Jira as CSV and import them, mapping two fields to the rows and the columns. Titles, descriptions and whichever two fields you choose to drive them come across, and everything you import can be exported again as JSON or CSV on any plan — including Free.

Keep reading

What is a 2D kanban board?Browse the templates See pricing

Frequently Asked Questions

If you depend on workflow transitions, sprint reporting or enterprise governance, Jira — it is built for exactly that and does it thoroughly. If what you want is the second dimension without the schemes, screens and permissions apparatus that getting there requires, this.

Through Jira’s CSV export. Titles, descriptions and any two fields you choose to drive them come across. Workflow configuration does not.

If you depend on workflow transitions, sprint reporting or enterprise governance, Jira, and it is not close. If you want the second dimension without the schemes, screens and permissions apparatus that Jira makes you build to get it, this.