.svg)
If you estimate with Planning Poker for Jira, you know it has its own shortcomings. Duplicate participants showing up in sessions. Estimates mysteriously disappearing mid-session. Challenges with remote or asynchronous estimation. These aren't just minor annoyances. They affect your sprint planning.
After researching user reviews on Reddit, G2, Capterra, and Atlassian Community forums, and analyzing what users actually say about these tools, I've identified three alternatives for the planning poker tool, Planning Poker Online. Whether you need better async support, multiple estimation methods, or just something simpler, here are the top three alternatives to the estimation tool, planning poker online.
TL;DR: Which Planning Poker Online Alternative Should You Choose?
Agile Poker for Jira: Best if you want multiple estimation methods (Planning Poker, Magic Estimation, Wideband Delphi) in one Jira-native tool.
Trade-off: Complex interface with a steeper learning curve.
Quely: Best for distributed teams needing async estimation with deadlines, capacity planning, and AI-assisted planning.
Trade-off: Only project management tool it supports right now is Jira..
Scrumpy Planning Poker: Best for small, co-located teams wanting simple, free Planning Poker.
Trade-off: Limited async support and no advanced features.
Bottom line: If your team is distributed across time zones, Quely solves async estimation with structure. If you're small and synchronous, Scrumpy works fine. If you want estimation method flexibility within Jira, Agile Poker delivers that.
For the full breakdown, keep reading.
Why Teams Are Looking for Better Estimation Tools
Many teams use various Planning Poker tools and encounter similar frustrations. Whether you're using Planning Poker Online, a Jira plugin, or another estimation tool, common problems emerge.
Anchoring bias still happens. Even with simultaneous card reveals, the discussion after the reveal causes estimates to gravitate toward the first numbers mentioned. Research in cognitive psychology shows that anchoring bias persists even when you try to design around it.
Synchronous sessions create bottlenecks. When your team is spread across San Francisco, London, and Bangalore, scheduling a 2-hour estimation session becomes nearly impossible. Someone's always missing, which means you're making estimates without complete team input.
Group discussion amplifies optimism. A study published in the Journal of Systems and Software found that Planning Poker sessions actually increased optimism bias among less experienced teams. The collaborative discussion convinced teams that tasks were simpler than they actually were, leading to underestimation.
Sequential estimation causes fatigue. Estimating items one-by-one is mentally exhausting. By story 30, everyone's mentally checked out, and estimate quality tanks. You rush through the last items just to finish.
Technical issues compound the problems. Users on Atlassian Community forums and review sites frequently report issues like duplicate participants, lost estimates, and sessions crashing mid-planning. These aren't edge cases—they're recurring frustrations.
Platform lock-in limitations. Many estimation tools only work with one project management platform. If your organization uses multiple tools (Jira for engineering, Azure DevOps for another team, Linear for product), you need different estimation tools for different teams.
These problems explain why teams explore alternatives. Let's look at some of these alternatives.
Alternative 1: Agile Poker for Jira
What Agile Poker Does Well
Agile Poker helps you estimate work quickly without leaving Jira. It gives you different estimation methods to choose from, so you can pick the one that best fits your team.
- Multiple estimation methods. You can use Planning Poker for your usual sprint discussions, Magic Estimation for large backlogs, Wideband Delphi for expert input, or the Team Estimation Game when you want a more collaborative session. Having all four options means you can switch methods based on the type of work you’re estimating.
- Async sessions for distributed teams. Agile Poker supports asynchronous estimation, so your teammates can add their estimates on their own time instead of joining a meeting. This is useful if your team is spread across time zones.
- Built directly into Jira. Because it’s a native Jira app, estimates flow into the Jira field for story points. There’s no need to sync data or copy results between tools.
- Flexible estimation. You can estimate in Fibonacci numbers, T-shirt sizes, or create custom scales that fit their process.
Where Agile Poker Falls Short
- Takes time to learn. The app includes a lot of options and settings, which gives you flexibility but can be confusing for new users. Several reviewers mention that it takes a few sessions to get familiar with the product.
- Occasional session hiccups. Some users on G2 and Capterra mention sessions freezing or disconnecting participants mid-estimation. These issues aren’t common, but they can interrupt the flow when they happen.
- Estimation only. No capacity view. Agile Poker helps you size work but doesn’t show workload or capacity. If you want to see who’s overbooked or under-utilized, you’ll need another tool.
- Works only with Jira. Agile Poker can’t be used outside Jira, so if your team manages work in another platform, it’s not an option.
How Async Estimation Works
- Create an estimation session and pick the Jira stories to size.
- Choose an estimation method — Planning Poker, Magic Estimation, Wideband Delphi, or Team Estimation Game.
- Team members get notified and submit estimates independently.
- Review outliers and discuss results asynchronously or in a short sync.
- Final estimates automatically update in Jira.
Pricing
Agile Poker doesn’t use the typical “per-user per-month” model. Instead, pricing scales with the number of Jira users on your instance. As of mid-2025, Appfire lists clear, tiered plans for both Cloud and Data Center versions. For Jira Cloud, the first 10 users are free. Paid tiers start at $873/year for 25 users and $1,745/year for 50 users, going up to around $30,400/year for 10,000 users. The Data Center version follows a similar structure, with $2,750/year for 50 users and $11,000/year for 1,000 users.
Because pricing is tied to your total Jira user count (not just those using Agile Poker), costs can rise as your organization grows.
Who is Agile Poker Best For?
- Medium to large teams (especially 10 to thousands of users) looking for flexible estimation methods inside Jira
- Organizations with distributed or remote teams that benefit from asynchronous sessions
- Teams already embedded in Jira who want a deeply integrated estimation tool
- Teams willing to invest some time onboarding and training users on the interface
Not Ideal For:
- Very small teams (1–5 users) that prefer something lightweight and minimal
- Teams using multiple project management systems (non-Jira) — Agile Poker is Jira-only
- Organizations that need built-in capacity planning, resource tracking, or workload visualization in the same tool
Alternative 2: Quely
What Quely Does Well
Async estimation with deadlines: This is Quely's standout feature. Instead of scheduling a meeting, you set an estimation deadline (e.g., "Estimate these 20 stories by Friday at 5 PM"). Your team members can share their estimation within this timeframe. There's no need for a meeting.
This is valuable for matters for distributed teams. When your developers are in New York, Berlin, and Tokyo, finding a common meeting time means someone's always estimating at 6 AM or 10 PM. Async estimation eliminates that entirely.
Fibonacci-based estimation: Quely uses Fibonacci sequence estimation (1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13, 21), which is intuitive for most Agile teams and prevents the false precision of linear scales.
AI-assisted planning: Quely's AI analyzes your work items, asks clarifying questions and uses your responses to suggests estimates. The AI doesn't make decisions. It provides context to help your team make better estimates.
For example, if you estimate a "user authentication feature" at 3 points, Quely can suggest 5 points. You can still choose 3 points if you have good reasons, but you're making an informed decision.
Capacity planning: Quely shows team workload capacity and availability, helping you avoid overloading some developers while others developers sit idle. During sprint planning, you can see who has bandwidth before assigning work.
Detailed task insights: Quely provides breakdowns of how long tasks might take based on team members' experience levels. If you assign a task to a junior developer, you will see how long that task will take, compared to assigning it to a senior developer.
Built-in collaboration: You can chat directly around Jira work items within Quely. Instead of switching to Slack or Teams to discuss a story, you discuss it right where you're estimating. This keeps conversations focused and contextual.
Deep Jira integration: Like Agile Poker, Quely integrates natively with Jira. You pull stories directly into Quely, estimate them, and push estimates back into Jira.
Where Quely Falls Short
Jira exclusivity: This is Quely's biggest limitation. If you use Azure DevOps, Linear, Asana, or anything other than Jira, you'd have to move the data from Quely into these platforms.
Specialized focus: Quely covers estimation, planning, capacity management, and collaboration. But if you need broader project management features like budget tracking, resource management across projects, or executive dashboards, you'll need additional tools.
How It Works
Here's a typical async estimation workflow with Quely:
- You pull Jira stories into Quely for sprint planning
- You set an estimation deadline (e.g., 48 hours)
- Team members receive notifications and estimate stories independently using Fibonacci values
- You discuss outliers asynchronously in Quely's chat or schedule a brief sync for major discrepancies
- You use Quely's capacity planning view to assign work based on team availability
- Final estimates sync back to Jira automatically
Best For
- Distributed teams across multiple time zones who need async estimation
- Agile teams that need capacity planning and workload visibility alongside estimation
- Organizations that want to integrate AI into planning
- Teams committed to Jira with no plans to change platform
Not ideal for: Teams using multiple project management tools, organizations that need broad project management features beyond estimation and planning.
Alternative 3: Scrumpy Planning Poker
What Scrumpy Does Well
Extreme simplicity: Scrumpy is dead simple. You open it in a browser, create a session, and share the link. No installation, no account creation (for participants), no complex configuration. Your team can start estimating in under 2 minutes.
This simplicity is genuinely valuable. Not every team needs AI, capacity planning, or multiple estimation methods. Sometimes you just need straightforward Planning Poker that works.
Multiple options: You can choose Fibonacci, T-shirt sizes, or custom decks. This flexibility lets you match Scrumpy to your team's preferred estimation style.
Real-time collaboration: Scrumpy is best for live, synchronous estimation sessions. Everyone sees votes reveal simultaneously, and you can discuss in real-time. For co-located or synchronous remote teams, it works perfectly.
Jira integration: You can sync Jira stories into Scrumpy and push estimates back when you're done.
Cost-effective: Scrumpy offers a free tier with full Planning Poker features. For small teams or teams on tight budgets, this makes Scrumpy extremely attractive.
No installation required: Being browser-based eliminates installation and maintenance overhead. No plugins to update, no compatibility issues with Jira versions.
Where Scrumpy Falls Short
Limited async support: This is Scrumpy's weakness. You can technically leave a session open and have people vote asynchronously, but there's no deadline management, no notifications reminding people to estimate, and no structure for async work.
No advanced features: Scrumpy does Planning Poker. That's it. No capacity planning, no AI suggestions, no collaboration tools, no analytics. If you need more than basic estimation, Scrumpy won't provide that.
Scaling issues: As your team grows and your estimation needs evolve, Scrumpy's minimalistic approach becomes limiting. You'll eventually need more features.
Jira-only integration: Like Agile Poker and Quely, Scrumpy only integrates with Jira. Unlike Planning Poker Online, you can't use it with Azure DevOps, Linear, or other platforms.
How It Works
Here's a typical synchronous estimation session with Scrumpy:
- You open Scrumpy in a browser and create a session
- You share the session link with your team (via Slack, Teams, or meeting invite)
- You import Jira stories or manually enter items to estimate
- Everyone selects their estimate card
- When everyone's voted, you reveal cards simultaneously
- You discuss outliers and re-vote if needed
- Final estimates sync back to Jira
For async estimation, you'd leave the session open and hope people remember to check it. There's no automated process.
Pricing
Scrumpy offers a compelling free version: full Planning Poker functionality, browser-based use, and integrations with platforms like Jira, Confluence, GitHub, GitLab, Azure DevOps, without registration or installation. If you want advanced or plugin-based features (e.g. a Jira add-on), Scrumpy does offer paid options, though those premium pricing details aren’t clearly displayed in the public marketplace listings.
Best For
- Small teams (3-15 people) who primarily work synchronously
- Co-located teams doing sprint planning together
- Teams on tight budgets needing free, functional Planning Poker
- Teams wanting minimal complexity and zero learning curve
- Organizations testing out Planning Poker before committing to more robust tools
Not ideal for: Distributed teams needing async support, larger teams that need advanced features, teams that want capacity planning alongside estimation, or organizations using multiple project management platforms.
Choose Agile Poker If:
✓ You want multiple estimation methods in one Jira-supported tool
✓ Your team needs flexibility to try different approaches
✓ You have time to train people on a complex interface
✓ You use Jira exclusively and need deep integration
Choose Quely If:
✓ Your team is distributed across time zones
✓ You need async estimation with the ability to set deadlines
✓ Capacity planning and workload visibility are priorities
✓ You want AI-assisted estimation
✓ You only use Jira and don't plan to change
Choose Scrumpy If:
✓ Your team is small and co-located
✓ You primarily work synchronously
✓ Budget is a major constraint
✓ You want dead-simple Planning Poker with zero learning curve
FAQs About Planning Poker Online Alternatives
Q: Can we switch tools mid-sprint?
Technically yes, but it's not ideal. Your historical velocity data won't transfer, which makes it harder to plan future sprints accurately. If you must switch, do it at the start of a new sprint or quarter so you're not disrupting active work.
Q: What if our team is half remote, half in-office?
This is increasingly common. Quely works best because everyone participates asynchronously regardless of location—no one feels excluded or forced into awkward hybrid meetings. Planning Poker Online and Agile Poker can work if you structure sessions so remote folks aren't disadvantaged. Scrumpy is hardest to make work in this scenario.
Q: We use Jira, Azure DevOps, AND Linear. Which tool works with all three?
Only Planning Poker Online integrates with multiple platforms. It supports Jira (via plugin), Azure DevOps, Linear, and GitHub. The other tools reviewed here are either Jira-only or single-platform focused.
Q: How do I convince my team to switch tools?
Run a pilot with one sprint. Show concrete data—if the new tool saves 30 minutes per sprint planning session, that's 26 hours per year per team member. Data speaks louder than opinions. Also involve the team in the decision. If they help choose the tool, they're more invested in making it work.
Q: What about teams new to Agile estimation?
Start with Scrumpy or Planning Poker Online. Both are simple, intuitive, and have minimal learning curves. Scrumpy is free; Planning Poker Online has a free tier with ads. Once your team is comfortable with estimation concepts (relative sizing, Fibonacci sequence, handling outliers), you can consider more advanced tools if needed.
Q: What if we need to estimate in multiple formats (story points, hours, T-shirt sizes)?
Planning Poker Online, Agile Poker, and Scrumpy support custom decks including T-shirt sizes. Quely focuses on Fibonacci/story points. But honestly, pick one estimation format and stick with it—switching formats between sprints undermines velocity tracking.
Q: How accurate should our estimates be?
Perfect accuracy is impossible and not the goal. Research shows estimates within 25% of actual effort are considered good. Focus on consistency over precision. If you're consistently underestimating by 20%, you can adjust future estimates. If your variance is wildly inconsistent, that's the problem to solve.
Q: Does ISO 27001 compliance matter for estimation tools?
For enterprise organizations, especially in regulated industries (finance, healthcare, government), security certifications matter. Planning Poker Online explicitly mentions ISO 27001 compliance. If your organization requires this, verify certifications directly with vendors.
Final Verdict: Which Tool Planning Poker Online Alternative Is Right for You?
After analyzing user reviews, comparing features, and understanding each tool's strengths and limitations, here's my honest recommendation:
For Distributed Teams: Quely
If your team is spread across multiple time zones, Quely solves your biggest problem:" async estimation. You set a deadline, people estimate on their own schedule, and you discuss outliers asynchronously. Add capacity planning and AI insights, and it's the most complete solution for modern distributed teams.
Trade-off: Right now, it only supports Jira.
For Small Synchronous Teams: Scrumpy
If you're a small team that works synchronously and you don't need advanced features, why pay for them? Scrumpy does simple Planning Poker well, it's free, and there's zero learning curve. That's enough for many small teams.
Trade-off: You'll outgrow Scrumpy as your team scales or your needs evolve. No capacity planning, no AI, minimal async support.
For Teams That Want Flexibility: Agile Poker
If you want to experiment with different estimation methods: Planning Poker one sprint, Magic Estimation the next, Wideband Delphi for complex features, Agile Poker gives you that flexibility in one Jira-native tool.
Trade-off: Complex interface requires training time. Occasional technical issues reported by users.
Ready to Improve Your Estimation Process?
Switching tools won't magically fix bad estimates. But the right tool makes good estimation practices easier to follow consistently.
Start with a clear understanding of what's broken in your current process. Then pick the tool that addresses those specific problems. Run a pilot. Measure results. Adjust based on data.
And remember: no tool is perfect. Every tool has trade-offs. The question isn't "which tool is best?" It's "which tool is best for my specific team, given our constraints and priorities?"
