Our Pick: Linear for pure dev teams. Shortcut if you need cross-functional flexibility. Skip to verdict →
📋 How We Tested
- Duration: 30+ days across two active engineering sprints (January–February 2026)
- Environment: Production React and Node.js projects, 15-member cross-functional team
- Metrics: App load time, issue creation speed, integration depth, sprint velocity, reporting quality
- Team: 3 senior developers + 1 product manager, 5+ years experience each
Height’s Shutdown: What 2026 Dev Teams Must Know
Height was a genuinely promising AI-first PM tool — flexible task views, built-in team chat, automated workflows. Many engineering teams loved its all-in-one approach. Its shutdown leaves a real gap, and both Linear and Shortcut are well-positioned to fill it depending on your team’s workflow style.
Former Height users: Shortcut’s customizable workflow states map more naturally to how Height organized tasks. Linear is the faster, leaner alternative if your team is engineering-only. For broader alternatives, browse our SaaS Reviews covering ClickUp, Notion, and Jira.
Linear vs Shortcut — Key Stats at a Glance
(shortcut.com ↗)
On paper, pricing looks nearly identical. The differences that matter emerge in speed, flexibility, and integration depth. In our 30-day testing period, we found Linear’s performance advantage was immediately apparent — especially when switching between large backlogs and deeply nested project views.
Want broader context on dev PM pricing models? See our Dev Productivity category for the full landscape.
Linear vs Shortcut Pricing Comparison
| Plan | Linear | Shortcut | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Free | 10 members, 250 issues | 10 users, unlimited issues | Shortcut ✓ |
| Starter / Team | $8/user/mo (annual) | ($8.50/user/mo) (annual) | Linear ✓ |
| Business | $14/user/mo (annual) | $12/user/mo (annual) | Shortcut ✓ |
| Monthly Billing | $12–$18/user/mo | $16/user/mo (Business) | Context-dependent |
| Enterprise | Custom (SSO, SCIM, audit) | Custom | Negotiate both |
Sources: Linear Pricing · (Shortcut Pricing) (verified January 2026)
The real pricing story: Shortcut’s free plan has no issue count cap — Linear’s 250-issue limit fills up in 2–3 months for any active team. At business tier, Shortcut saves a 20-person team roughly $480/year versus Linear. That’s meaningful for early-stage startups watching burn.
Feature Comparison: Linear vs Shortcut 2026
| Feature | Linear | Shortcut |
|---|---|---|
| Issue Tracking | ✓ Excellent | ✓ Excellent |
| Sprint Planning | ✓ Cycles | ✓ Iterations |
| Roadmaps | ✓ | ✓ |
| GitHub Integration | ✓✓ Deep (PR + branch + deploy) | ✓ Standard |
| Custom Workflows | ⊘ Limited / Opinionated | ✓ Fully Customizable |
| AI Assistant | ✓ Basic, integrated | ✓✓ Korey AI Agent |
| Kanban View | ✓ | ✓ |
| Velocity / Cycle-Time Reports | ⊘ Limited | ✓ Built-in |
| Keyboard-First UI | ✓✓ Best-in-class | ✓ Good |
| Mobile App | ✓ | ✓ |
| GitLab / Bitbucket | ✓ | ✓ |
| Slack / Figma / Sentry | ✓ | ✓ |
The gap is clear: Linear dominates on raw speed and GitHub integration depth. Shortcut wins on workflow customization, built-in reporting, and AI capability. Shortcut’s Korey AI agent — which integrates with both Shortcut and GitHub Issues to surface blockers automatically — is the most meaningful 2026 differentiator between these two tools.
Performance Testing: Speed and Workflow Efficiency
Linear — Performance Scores
9/10
9/10
6/10
7/10
7/10
Shortcut — Performance Scores
7.5/10
8/10
8.5/10
8.5/10
8/10
In our 30-day testing period, Linear’s app loaded in 0.38 seconds on average — nearly twice as fast as Shortcut’s 0.72 seconds our benchmark ↓. For a team logging dozens of issues daily, the speed delta compounds into real saved hours per week. Linear’s sub-50ms UI transitions are something you feel immediately.
Linear vs Shortcut — Best Use Cases
Choose Linear If Your Team…
- Pure engineering teams (frontend, backend, full-stack squads)
- Teams living in GitHub who want auto-linked PRs, branches, and deploy status
- Startups migrating away from Jira’s bloated UX
- Remote-first teams wanting keyboard-first, zero-friction workflows
- Teams where speed of use is a top-5 priority
Choose Shortcut If Your Team…
- Mixed engineering + product + design cross-functional teams
- Organizations needing customizable workflow states beyond Linear’s opinionated model
- Teams that need built-in velocity and cycle-time reporting (no CSV exports)
- Teams interested in AI-driven project management via the Korey agent
- Former Height users — Shortcut’s flexible structure maps most naturally to Height’s task style
After running our production project tracking through both tools for two weeks each, our team’s verdict was unanimous: Shortcut accommodated the PM’s non-technical workflow far better, while Linear was the near-unanimous preference on the engineering side. The right answer depends entirely on your team composition.
Pros and Cons: Linear vs Shortcut Breakdown
Linear
- Sub-50ms UI interactions — the fastest PM experience in 2026
- Deep GitHub integration: auto-links PRs, branches, commits, and deployment status
- Keyboard-first workflows eliminate mouse dependency for power users
- Minimalist interface reduces cognitive overhead during sprint work
- Cheaper at the starter tier ($8 vs $8.50/user/mo)
- Opinionated workflow — hard to adapt for non-engineering stakeholders
- Free tier caps at 250 issues (fills fast on any active team)
- Reporting options are basic; no built-in velocity or cycle-time charts
- AI features are integrated but not a competitive differentiator vs Korey
- More expensive at Business tier ($14 vs Shortcut’s $12/user/mo)
Shortcut
- Fully customizable workflow states match any team’s development methodology
- Built-in velocity and cycle-time reports — no third-party integrations needed
- Korey AI agent surfaces blockers, integrates with GitHub Issues automatically
- Free tier has no issue count limit — better for high-volume free usage
- More accessible onboarding for non-technical product and design stakeholders
- Slower app performance: 0.72s avg vs Linear’s 0.38s our benchmark ↓
- Some reviewers describe it as feeling “dated” compared to Linear’s polished UX
- GitHub integration is solid but does not auto-monitor deployment status like Linear
- Issue creation workflow averages 3 more seconds end-to-end than Linear
FAQ
Q: Can I migrate from Height to Linear or Shortcut in 2026?
Height shut down on September 24, 2025. If you retained a CSV data export before that date, both Linear and Shortcut support CSV imports for issues and projects. The process is manual — no official Height migration tool exists for either platform. In our experience, Shortcut’s flexible workflow structure maps more naturally to Height’s task organization style, making it the easier target for most former Height teams. Linear works well if you’re simplifying your workflow at the same time as migrating.
Q: What is Linear’s free plan issue limit in 2026?
Linear’s free plan supports up to 10 members and 250 issues total, with core views and GitHub integration included. The 250-issue ceiling is the critical constraint — an active 5-person team will hit this within 2–3 months. Once exceeded, you must upgrade to the Standard plan at $8/user/month (annual billing). Shortcut’s free plan imposes no issue count limit, which is a meaningful advantage for teams testing the free tier on a longer timeline.
Q: Does Shortcut’s Korey AI agent integrate with GitHub?
Yes. Korey is Shortcut’s AI project management agent and integrates with both Shortcut and GitHub Issues natively. It can surface blockers, suggest task assignments, and assist sprint planning directly within the Shortcut interface. As of January 2026, Korey is Shortcut’s primary competitive differentiator versus Linear — and a genuine advantage for teams that want AI assistance beyond basic autocomplete. Note: Korey is not available on the free plan; it requires an active paid subscription.
Q: Is Linear better than Jira for software engineering teams?
For most modern software teams, yes. Linear’s speed, GitHub integration depth, and developer-focused UX produce a dramatically better daily-use experience than (Jira). Teams stay on Jira for three main reasons: existing enterprise compliance integrations, Confluence documentation coupling, and organizational inertia. If you’re starting fresh or a team under 100 people with no legacy Jira investment, Linear is almost always the superior engineering PM choice. See our comparison guides for a full Jira alternatives breakdown.
Q: Which tool has better mobile support — Linear or Shortcut?
Both offer iOS and Android apps. In our January 2026 testing, Linear’s mobile app maintained its speed advantage over Shortcut — fast load times, intuitive navigation, and a clean issue view without clutter. Shortcut’s mobile app is fully functional but felt slightly less polished in daily use. For teams tracking issues frequently on mobile, Linear holds a slight edge. That said, neither app replaces the full desktop experience for sprint planning or deep backlog work.
📊 Benchmark Methodology
| Metric | Linear | Shortcut |
|---|---|---|
| App Load Time (avg, warm cache) | 0.38s | 0.72s |
| Issue Creation Time (end-to-end avg) | 8s | 11s |
| Search Response Time (avg, 30 queries) | ~0.1s | ~0.3s |
| GitHub Integration Setup Time | 12 min | 18 min |
| Sprint Planning Flow (team rating) | 8.5/10 | 8.0/10 |
| Reporting Depth (team rating) | 7.0/10 | 8.0/10 |
Limitations: Results based on Standard (Linear) and Team (Shortcut) plans in a 15-person shared workspace. Performance will vary with network conditions, workspace data volume, and browser. Subjective ratings reflect one team’s workflow preferences and should be weighted accordingly.
Final Verdict: Linear vs Shortcut in 2026
After 30+ days of real-world production testing, the Linear vs Shortcut decision comes down to one honest question: is your team primarily engineering, or cross-functional?
Choose Linear if you run a dev-first team that values raw speed, deep GitHub integration, and a focused workflow above everything else. Linear is the best PM tool for pure software teams in 2026 — the keyboard-first UX keeps engineers in flow state rather than fighting their tools. At $8/user/month to start with no credit card required, the risk is zero.
Choose Shortcut if your team spans engineers, product managers, and designers who need workflow flexibility that Linear simply doesn’t offer. Shortcut’s Korey AI agent, built-in velocity reporting, and customizable workflow states justify the slightly higher entry price. At $12/user/month at the Business tier, it also undercuts Linear’s $14 equivalent by a meaningful margin at scale.
Height is not a 2026 option. It shut down September 24, 2025. Former Height users should evaluate both tools above, or consider broader alternatives like (Asana) or Notion for less engineering-centric workflows.
- Engineering-only teams: Linear — unmatched speed, GitHub depth, developer UX
- Mixed product + engineering teams: Shortcut — best flexibility, AI, and reporting
- Teams under 10 users: Test both free plans through a full sprint before committing
- Former Height users: Shortcut maps most naturally to Height’s workflow style
- Budget-conscious teams at Business tier: Shortcut saves ~$480/year for a 20-person team
Also evaluate: (Shortcut) · (Jira) · (Asana)
📚 Sources & References
- Linear Official Pricing Page — January 2026 verified pricing tiers
- (Shortcut Official Pricing Page) — January 2026 verified pricing tiers
- Linear.app — Feature documentation, integration list, product overview
- (Shortcut.com) — Feature documentation, Korey AI agent details
- Stack Overflow Developer Survey 2024 — Developer tooling and PM context
- Height Shutdown — Referenced from industry announcements (September 2025)
- Bytepulse 30-Day Benchmark — Internal production testing, January–February 2026 (see methodology above)
We link only to verified official product pages. News citations appear as text references to prevent broken links over time.
