Microsoft Teams vs Slack
They differ on 3 of the 12 things buyers in this category actually ask about. Here is where, and what each one asks you to give up.
Microsoft Teams
$4/seatChat and meetings bundled into Microsoft 365, so the marginal cost is often zero.
Strongest argument
Already paid for if you licence Microsoft 365 — often the cheapest viable option
Biggest objection
Threading is awkward enough that conversations fragment across chats and channels
The client is heavy, and channel/thread structure frustrates teams used to Slack.
Slack
$8.75/seatThe default team chat tool, with the deepest app directory of any.
Strongest argument
2,600+ integrations — almost anything you run already posts into it
Biggest objection
The free plan hides messages older than 90 days, which quietly makes history unusable
Per-seat price climbs steeply once you need compliance exports and unlimited history.
The differences that matter
Where they actually diverge
Only the rows where the two disagree. Everything they both do is listed below.
Cost
What each costs at 50 people
List price only. It ignores add-ons, seat minimums and the cost of the move itself — all of which routinely dwarf the difference below.
Prices are unverified estimates — useful for comparing orders of magnitude, not for budgeting. Confirm the current figure with the vendor before you commit to anything.
Common ground
What both of them do
These will not help you choose — which is exactly why they are worth knowing about before a vendor pitches one as a differentiator.
- Conversation modelChannels with threads
- External guestsYes
- Retention and export controlsYes
- SAML single sign-onYes
- SOC 2Yes
- Self-hostableNo
- Open sourceNo
- Public APIYes
- Native mobile appsYes
In full
Every pro and con, both sides
Microsoft Teams
- Already paid for if you licence Microsoft 365 — often the cheapest viable option
- Meetings, chat and files in one product, with real PSTN dial-in
- Compliance, retention and eDiscovery that satisfy regulated buyers
- Threading is awkward enough that conversations fragment across chats and channels
- Desktop client performance is a recurring complaint on older hardware
- External collaboration works but is noticeably clumsier than Slack Connect
Slack
- 2,600+ integrations — almost anything you run already posts into it
- Huddles turn a thread into a call without a scheduling step
- Search and retention controls that hold up at enterprise scale
- The free plan hides messages older than 90 days, which quietly makes history unusable
- Business+ pricing roughly doubles the bill the moment you need SAML or data exports
- Guest and connect seats add up fast when you work with agencies or clients
Questions
Microsoft Teams vs Slack, answered
Microsoft Teams or Slack — which is better?
Neither, in the abstract. Microsoft Teams suits you if already paid for if you licence Microsoft 365 — often the cheapest viable option matters most; Slack if 2,600+ integrations — almost anything you run already posts into it does. The honest trade-offs are: Microsoft Teams — The client is heavy, and channel/thread structure frustrates teams used to Slack. Slack — Per-seat price climbs steeply once you need compliance exports and unlimited history.
Is Microsoft Teams cheaper than Slack?
Microsoft Teams is cheaper at 50 people — $4/seat/mo against $8.75/seat/mo, roughly $2,400 against $5,250 a year. That gap of about $2,850 is rarely the whole story though — add-ons, seat minimums and the cost of migrating routinely outweigh it.
Can we migrate from Microsoft Teams to Slack?
Usually yes, and the difficulty depends on history, integrations and headcount far more than on the two products. Data export quality is the thing to check first: ask both vendors what you can take with you before you commit to either. Our questionnaire produces a scoped estimate for the move.
What else should we consider besides Microsoft Teams and Slack?
In team communication the other credible options are Discord, Mattermost, Zulip. Narrowing to two before you have written down your requirements is the most common way to end up with the wrong one.
Do not stop at two