Miravela vs Weavy (Figma Weave): which suits brand teams?

Figma Weave (formerly Weavy) and Miravela solve different problems. Figma Weave is a node-based canvas where you chain AI models and professional editing tools into reusable workflows. Miravela is a production platform that starts from the client brief and runs through model choice, brand kit, client approval and delivery. If your team wants hands-on control of every generation and editing step, Weave is the stronger tool. If your team's bottleneck is briefs, brand consistency and client sign-off across several brands, Miravela fits better.

What each tool is

Figma Weave. Weavy was a Tel Aviv startup founded in 2024. Figma acquired it and renamed it Figma Weave. Each step of a process (a model, an editing tool, a reference input) is its own connected block, and you can swap one block without rebuilding the rest. Its pages describe layers, masking, colour grading, compositing, inpainting and relighting as native to the canvas. A workflow built by one person can become a simplified tool with a generated mini-interface, so teammates run it without touching the node graph.

Miravela. It is an AI image and video production platform for brands and agencies, built in Paris by the team behind the creative studio Mira Studio, and in beta since September 2026. You paste an email, a voice note or a deck. The built-in agent turns it into a structured brief, proposes concepts and writes the prompts. Miravela then picks among 12 image and video models for each job. Your brand kit is applied automatically. Clients review and approve in private portals.

Side-by-side comparison

	Miravela	Figma Weave
Core idea	Brief to delivery in one place	Node-based canvas for generation plus editing
Starting point	A brief (email, voice note, deck) parsed by an agent	A prompt, a reference image or a node graph
Models	12 hand-picked image and video models, chosen per job	Models from Google, OpenAI, Kling, ByteDance, Black Forest Labs, Runway and Luma, plus audio and 3D
Editing	Editing and upscaling around the generation	Layers, masks, relighting, compositing inside the canvas
Client review	Private client portals; comments and approvals return inside the platform	Not a feature its product pages describe; check with the vendor
Reuse	Brand kits applied automatically; custom agents from Signature	Reusable workflows run on new inputs
Pricing model	Credits in euros, no per-model surcharge; Studio €199, Signature €490, Enterprise €1,790 per month (excl. VAT)	Free tier, then paid plans with monthly credits and top-ups; billed in US dollars
Credit expiry	Prepaid packs don't expire while the subscription runs	Rollover on Professional, Max and Team up to a cap; Starter and Free don't roll over
Data	Hosted in the EU (Paris), isolated workspaces, no training on client content	Platform never trains on your work; check hosting location with the vendor
Maturity	Beta since September 2026	Established product, now part of Figma

Weave has the more mature product. Miravela has a narrower, more opinionated workflow for brand and agency teams.

Where Weave is the better choice

Choose Weave when the creative work itself is the job. If a designer wants to mask an object, relight a shot, grade colour and feed the result into the next step, the node canvas is built for that. Chase Jarvis calls it the most pro-oriented product in its category, aimed at power users more than beginners. It also fits teams already working in Figma. Weave tools now run inside Figma Design, in open beta, and the plan is for Figma frames to feed Weave workflows.

Two caveats from Figma's own material. Weave and Figma are separate products with separate billing and credit systems for now. Independent reviewers also note that commercial rights depend on the specific model, so check the model list before using outputs in advertising.

Where Miravela is the better choice

Choose Miravela when the work is a campaign for someone else to approve.

The brief step matters when requests arrive as email threads and voice notes. The brand kit (logos, colours, references, rules) is applied without a designer wiring it into a graph each time. Agencies get one folder per brand, with roles and credit caps per member.

The client portal is the clearest difference. The marketing lead reviews a shared selection, comments and approves, and the comments return inside the platform instead of an email thread. Every deliverable is also copied automatically to the subscriber's own Google Drive. For compliance-minded brands, the prompt history of each visual is kept and exportable, and data is hosted in the EU (Paris). The AI models themselves run at their providers (Google, OpenAI, ByteDance and others), not in Europe.

What the numbers say about speed

Miravela platform data (its own database, last 90 days, aggregated) shows what a creative round trip looks like. Of 8,544 generations started, 7,307 were images and 1,237 were videos. The most-used model, GPT Image 2, had a median generation time of 95 seconds and a 95.9% completion rate. Nano Banana 2 had a median of 26 seconds. Seedance 2.0 video had a median of 312 seconds, with 88.6% of generations completed.

For a brand team this means two things. Stills come back within minutes, so a selection can be reviewed in one sitting. Video takes several minutes per clip and not every run completes, so plan review rounds around batches and not around single clips. Any tool that runs the same providers' models will face similar constraints, so compare the workflow around the generation as much as the generation.

How to choose

• Who sets the look? If a designer defines it once in a graph, Weave suits you. If a brand kit and a brief should drive it, look at Miravela.
• Who approves? If clients or a marketing lead must review and sign off, check that comments and approvals live in the tool.
• How many brands? Agencies need per-brand folders, roles and credit caps. Weave's Team plan allocates credits per user; Miravela adds per-brand folders.
• Do you retouch heavily? If pixel-level editing is central, favour Weave's editing nodes.
• Which currency and billing? Miravela bills in euros. Weave bills in dollars and separately from Figma.
• What risk can you accept? Miravela is in beta. Weave is more established but still integrating into Figma.
• Where must data sit? Ask both vendors, and note that model inference happens at the providers either way.

Many teams will not need to choose. A designer can use Weave for heavy retouching, while the team uses Miravela for briefing, review and delivery. See Miravela pricing, the model list, and the pages for brands and agencies.