Comparing tools for Merging and Migrating Jira Instances

As an Atlassian Partner, one of the tasks we commonly help organizations with is migrating Jira projects between two instances. Migrations are challenging to do well without leveraging some of the excellent configuration management tools from the Marketplace. The focus of this post is to compare Configuration Manager for Jira by Botron and Project Configurator for Jira by Adaptavist.

Our comparison comes from the perspective of merging or splitting instances in complex enterprise environments. We are not comparing the tools ability to promote configurations from Staging to Production, or any other use case.

Configuration Manager for Jira
Project Configurator for Jira
Conflict Handling on Import❌❌Both apps require you to go back and fix things in the source system. There are some minor exceptions to this, but a lack of error handling mid import is one of the truly most frustrating things in doing this work. Both vendors say they have improved tooling coming in this area. In reality, how a given app interacts with your specific dataset is critical.
Pre-import Change Impact Explanation✅✅We believe the Configuration Manager for Jira UI is easier to understand, but both do produce workable reports.
Rollback on Failed Import✅❌Configuration Manager for Jira will undo changes if the import fails partway into the process. Project Configurator used to have this functionality, but it was removed in 2015. There are technical reasons against doing this, especially when using these tools for their primary purpose of moving a configuration between environments. But for migration testing, it is a huge time saver.
Post Import Audit Log✅✅We believe the Configuration Manager for Jira UI is easier to understand, but both do produce workable reports. Project Configurator for Jira does not have an audit log of all runs that historically occurred.
JSD Support❌✅Supposed to be coming to Configuration Manager for Jira shortly, it partially works today but is not officially supported.
Can upgrade content during migration in one step✅❌E.g. Source system is Jira 7.2, and the destination system is 7.6 We’re not suggesting this is a good idea to do, but sometimes you have to do what you have to do.
Rest API✅⚠Project Configurator is scriptable via REST endpoints, and basic documentation on aspects of this can be found here. I believe they are coming with the improved documentation listed above.
Premade automated import and export scripts❌✅Project Configurator has some pre-made import and export scripts in their docs. In our use, we ended up doing most everything in Postman / Insomnia (REST API apps), so we didn’t end up using the scripts anyways.
Supports third-party Apps✅✅You can see a list of apps Configuration Manager for Jira supports at and a list which Project Configurator for Jira supports at Both vendors said they plan to have more integrations coming.
Extensive Documentation✅✅Adaptavist said that they are putting significant effort into improving the docs since acquiring the app.
High-quality support✅✅Both teams have been excellent to work within the past. Adaptavist SLA is 24 hours to first response, 48 hours thereafter.
Professional Services option✅✅Both companies can be hired to do the work for you if you don’t have the bandwidth in-house.
Price (2k User)6500$845 (Price is going up to $2000)If you only intend to use the software for a one-time migration, Botron offers it at a price of 10% of the annual cost per week, or 20% of the annual cost per month. Project Configurator only requires a license on the system where you are performing the import.
Marketplace Rating4 Stars – 46 reviews3.5 Stars – 32 Reviews
Active Installation16972500


We believe that neither tool has a huge advantage on the other. We tend to use both, and the main deciding factor comes down to how they interact with a customer’s data. The small idiosyncrasies and bugs the apps have truly made the biggest difference.

Note: This was originally published in July 2018, both vendors have updated features and prices since then.


  • Both vendors were given pre-release copies of the above table to offer their opinion and correct any inaccuracies/mistakes we made.
  • We’re on great terms with both vendors and benefit financially from doing business with them.