After Claude Design Launched, Figma Raised Its Full-Year Outlook

When Anthropic released Claude Design in April, one assumption spread quickly through design and tech circles: a prompt-to-interface tool would make interface design platform Figma redundant. Product teams would describe what they wanted and skip the canvas entirely.

Figma’s Q1 2026 results said otherwise.

Figma beat revenue expectations and raised its full-year outlook, Quartz reported on Friday (May 15). The signal underneath the numbers mattered more than the results themselves: Enterprise teams are not leaving Figma because just they have a faster way to generate a screen.

What Claude Design Actually Threatens

Claude Design generates websites, landing pages and interfaces from natural language prompts, PYMNTS reported. No prior design experience is required. The tool does not augment an existing workflow. It replaces the starting point entirely.

That is a genuine shift for certain users. Solo builders, early-stage startups and non-designers who need something functional fast no longer need a designer to get there. The threat is real. It just does not describe most of what Figma’s customers actually do.

Large product organizations do not primarily use Figma to generate screens. They use it to maintain shared design systems, manage version control and manage collaborations across distributed teams. Developer handoff, prototyping and governance sit on top of that. A prompt-to-interface tool solves one upstream problem in a workflow with a dozen others downstream.

Why Enterprise Teams Are Staying

The clearest evidence came not from revenue but from behavior. After Figma began enforcing artificial intelligence (AI) usage limits in March, the vast majority of enterprise customers who hit their cap chose to buy more credits. They did not leave, Fast Company found. Teams inside Figma’s collaboration and handoff infrastructure did not treat a generative AI alternative as a viable exit.

CFO Praveer Melwani said the quarter was driven by seat expansion across entire organizations, not just individual power users. Figma is becoming more entrenched inside product teams, even as generative tools multiply around it. CEO Dylan Field put the thesis plainly: when code is a commodity, design judgment is the competitive edge.

What the Broader Industry Is Actually Sorting Out

Figma’s quarter does not settle the competitive picture. It clarifies where the battle is actually being fought.

Adobe is facing the same structural question from a different position. Adobe Firefly is embedded across Photoshop, Illustrator and Premiere, assisting designers already inside those tools. It assumes a trained designer is in the loop. Claude Design does not. The pressure Adobe faces is not that its tools are being replaced. It is that the population of people who need professional design tools may stop growing if generative AI tools absorb the entry-level use cases first.

Google Stitch is pushing from another angle. It launched with Claude Code integration already built in, targeting developers who want to move directly from code to interface without switching contexts. Microsoft embedded AI design into Designer and has integrated Claude into PowerPoint. The design workflow is being approached from every adjacent layer simultaneously.

What Figma’s earnings results suggest is that the collaboration and governance layer—the part that sits across entire product organizations rather than inside a single creator’s session—is proving more durable than the generation layer. Generating a screen is getting cheaper and faster across every tool. Coordinating what happens to that screen across a product team of thirty people is still Figma’s problem to solve.