Here’s What I’d Use in 2026

Zoom vs. Microsoft Teams: What’s different and what’s not

I switched between the two tools regularly, and one thing became clear fast: they treat meetings differently. Zoom treats a meeting as its own moment. Teams treats it as one part of an ongoing workspace.

Both solve the same problem, but that difference changes how work actually flows. The scenarios below are where I saw the biggest gaps, and where you might feel the most tangible difference in your own day-to-day life.

Zoom vs. Microsoft Teams: The differences

• Meeting layout and focus: Zoom keeps the meeting UI simple and centered on video, screen share, and core controls, so the call itself stays front and center. Teams places the meeting inside a chat or channel, with messages and files sitting alongside the call, so it feels like one part of an ongoing workspace.Ease of joining meetings: Zoom makes joining calls quick because the meeting exists independently of any broader account setup. Guests can enter with minimal friction. Teams work smoothly when everyone is within the same Microsoft 365 organization. External participants can join, but their experience may be limited based on the configured guest access
• Browser vs. desktop app experience: Zoom works reliably in the browser for both hosts and guests, which reduces friction for external meetings. Teams supports browser access, too, but the desktop app works better for guests outside the organization. For external calls, Zoom’s browser-first approach was more consistent.
• Collaboration around documents: In Zoom, collaboration is strongest during the call through screen sharing, annotations, reactions, and whiteboards, while follow-up work typically moves into other tools your team already uses.
  In Teams, documents, comments, and follow-ups stay tied to the same chat or channel, making it easy to find shared files after the meeting ends.
• Ecosystem and integrations: Zoom fits comfortably into mixed tool stacks and connects with a wide range of third-party apps without assuming a specific productivity suite. Teams is strongest when paired with Microsoft 365, where meetings, calendars, files, tasks, and notes all connect across Outlook, OneDrive, SharePoint, Planner, and Loop.
• AI assistance and summaries (when enabled): Zoom’s AI features are focused mainly on the meeting itself, helping with summaries, highlights, and action items from individual calls. Teams’ AI, when available through Microsoft 365 licenses, can pull context from chats, emails, documents, and meetings, so insights stretch beyond a single call into the rest of the workspace.
• Recordings and where they live: Zoom stores cloud recordings and transcripts (on supported plans) in its own recording library, which works well if Zoom is your primary meeting tool. Teams stores recordings and transcripts (when enabled) in OneDrive or SharePoint, so they sit alongside other project files and can be managed with the same access controls.
• Large meetings and events: Zoom is often the go-to for webinars and large-scale events. It’s familiar to join, has an easy flow, and gives minimal friction for attendees. Teams offers structured event formats like internal town halls, with built-in registration, Q&A moderation, and attendee analytics.
• External vs. internal workflows: Zoom works well when you’re regularly meeting with people outside your organization; there’s no shared system needed. Teams fits better when most of your collaboration happens internally, with conversations tied to documents, tasks, and ongoing projects.
• Video reliability & quality: Zoom maintains a reputation for stable audio/video performance, especially in mixed-network or external setups. Teams performs well, too, but the experience can vary slightly based on organizational configuration and bandwidth policies.
• Pricing and admin experience: Zoom’s pricing centers around meeting capacity, recording features, and webinar options, making it straightforward for teams that primarily need video calls. Teams’ pricing depends on Microsoft 365 licensing, where meetings are bundled with email, storage, and productivity tools. Admin settings, permissions, and guest access policies also influence how the meeting experience feels.

Zoom and Microsoft Teams: The similarities

Once the major differences are clear, the natural question is: are there baseline gaps I need to worry about?
In regular use, there weren’t. Across core areas, both tools delivered the same outcomes.

• Video calls behave the same at a practical level. For standard meetings like weekly syncs, project reviews, and longer discussions with screen sharing, both Zoom and Teams behaved similarly. Video layouts adjusted smoothly, screen sharing worked without friction, and participant controls stayed easy to manage.
• Hybrid meetings follow the same playbook. In setups with some people in a room and others remote, the flow stays the same. Muting, hand raises, breakout rooms, and managing larger groups work predictably on both platforms.
• Reviewing past meetings works reliably on both. Once recording and transcription are enabled, replaying calls, searching transcripts, and jumping to specific moments feel similar. Where files are stored differs, but the review experience doesn’t.
• Chat and lightweight collaboration work the same in-meeting. During calls, chat, reactions, and quick file sharing behave identically. This matters most in larger meetings, where people can contribute without interrupting.
• Mobile participation is fully usable, not a fallback. Joining from a phone didn’t feel like a compromise on either app. Core controls were easy to reach, audio stayed clear, and video adapted smoothly even when networks changed.
• Larger meetings stay manageable. For bigger sessions, like training calls, team-wide updates, and internal presentations, both tools handled scale well. Speaker controls, muting large groups, and keeping sessions orderly worked as expected.

Now, we know what these chatbots say they can do, but the proof is in the pudding, which is why I tested them on 11 real-world tasks. 

Disclaimer: I share my experience testing the two tools as of January 2026. If you read this after a few months, some features and functionality might have evolved. The companies will be able to give you the most up-to-date information.

Zoom vs. Microsoft Teams: How they performed in real workflows

1. External client meetings

Since much of the work involves external conversations, the comparison starts by looking at how both tools handle first-time joins.

On Zoom, those meetings usually began without friction. I shared the link, the other person entered their name, and we were talking almost immediately. There wasn’t much to think about beyond the conversation itself.

External client joining interface for Zoom

I tried the same flow with Teams. When the other person was already on Microsoft 365, the join experience was smooth. When they weren’t, joining involved a few more steps like choosing how to join, confirming identity, or waiting briefly before getting in.

External client joining interface for Microsoft Teams

Both worked, but the difference showed up in how quickly the call actually began.

Winner: Zoom