Side-by-side comparison · 24 data points
Portfolio & project management solution to view your work across any Jira projects and teams, all in one place.
| Structure by Tempo - Jira Portfolio Management PPM | Capacity Planner - Jira Team & Resource Management | Tempo | |
|---|---|---|
| Tagline | ||
| Description | ||
| Screenshots | — | — |
| Languages | ||
| Platforms | ||
| Developer | ||
| Listed | — | — |
| Last updated | — | — |
Industry professionals leverage Tempo Planner as a centralized workspace to plan current and future work. With Tempo Planner, customers are able to allocate resources towards high-impact initiatives, while ensuring their team's workload is realistic.
| Metric | Structure by Tempo - Jira Portfolio Management PPM | Capacity Planner - Jira Team & Resource Management | Tempo |
|---|---|---|
| Rating | ★ 4.5 ★ | 3.7 ★ |
| Total reviews | ★ 406 | 200 |
| Active installs | 13,551+ | 10,276+ |
| Free plan | — | — |
| Pricing | From $1/yr | From $1/yr |
| Built for Shopify | — | — |
| Pricing tiers | 6 tiers | 6 tiers |
| Listed features | 3 | 3 |
| Featured placements | 1 | — |
Based on the data on this page, Structure by Tempo - Jira Portfolio Management PPM is the stronger choice for most Atlassian Marketplace merchants — 4.5★ vs Capacity Planner - Jira Team & Resource Management | Tempo's 3.7★ is a meaningful gap that usually reflects real product or support quality differences across the user base. Pricing sits in similar territory: Structure by Tempo - Jira Portfolio Management PPM at From $1/yr, Capacity Planner - Jira Team & Resource Management | Tempo at From $1/yr (within ~25% of each other on the entry tier). At this overlap, total cost of ownership comes from how per-tier capacity gates align with your order volume — confirm both apps' upgrade triggers against your projected scale before deciding. Structure by Tempo - Jira Portfolio Management PPM has the larger user base (406 reviews vs 200), which usually maps to broader integration coverage, faster bug-fix cadence, and a deeper bench of community workflow patterns. Capacity Planner - Jira Team & Resource Management | Tempo's smaller cohort can be an advantage for niche workflows where the bigger app has accumulated bloat. Recommended by store size: small/early-stage merchants who need fast install and low risk should default to Structure by Tempo - Jira Portfolio Management PPM; mid-market and enterprise merchants with specific feature requirements should evaluate both — Capacity Planner - Jira Team & Resource Management | Tempo's 200-review base may include the workflow context that matches your specific use case better than Structure by Tempo - Jira Portfolio Management PPM's broader-but-shallower coverage. This verdict is generated from the live marketplace data on this page — rating, review count, pricing tier, and category position all refresh from the canonical Atlassian Marketplace listing every 24 hours. AppRanks does not accept payment to influence comparison outcomes; the methodology is documented on the About page and applies identically to every pair on the site.
Read each app's audit: Structure by Tempo - Jira Portfolio Management PPM audit • Capacity Planner - Jira Team & Resource Management | Tempo audit
Not featured in any section recently.
Both Structure by Tempo - Jira Portfolio Management PPM and Capacity Planner - Jira Team & Resource Management | Tempo offer paid plans only. Structure by Tempo - Jira Portfolio Management PPM starts at From $1/yr; Capacity Planner - Jira Team & Resource Management | Tempo starts at From $1/yr. Compare the per-tier features in the Pricing section above before committing.
Structure by Tempo - Jira Portfolio Management PPM has the higher average rating (4.5★ from 406 reviews) compared to Capacity Planner - Jira Team & Resource Management | Tempo (3.7★ from 200 reviews). Both are tracked daily by AppRanks, so the figures here update each refresh cycle.
It depends on what you're optimizing for. Structure by Tempo - Jira Portfolio Management PPM fits better if you prioritize rating consistency; Capacity Planner - Jira Team & Resource Management | Tempo is the call if you need the larger user base. Read both apps' detail pages on AppRanks for the full feature breakdown, install counts, and recent listing changes.
Both apps are one-click installs from the Atlassian Marketplace marketplace. Structure by Tempo - Jira Portfolio Management PPM has more onboarding documentation maturity (406 reviews vs 200), which usually translates to better-tested setup wizards and quicker time-to-value. AppRanks doesn't measure setup time directly — read the recent reviews on each app's detail page for merchant-reported install experience.
Structure by Tempo - Jira Portfolio Management PPM typically suits early-stage and growth-mode stores based on its review-base composition (406 reviews). Capacity Planner - Jira Team & Resource Management | Tempo aligns more with early-stage and growth-mode stores (200 reviews). Larger review bases generally mean the app has been load-tested at scale — relevant if you're processing high order volume or handling enterprise compliance requirements.
Migration support varies by app and category. Structure by Tempo - Jira Portfolio Management PPM and Capacity Planner - Jira Team & Resource Management | Tempo both publish their export options on their marketplace listing pages (or in their support docs); some apps offer one-click import from competitors, others require CSV. The fastest check: search "import from Capacity Planner - Jira Team & Resource Management | Tempo" in each app's help center. AppRanks does not track migration tooling directly — this is a category-specific capability worth verifying before commitment.