Different components of a timber frame wall were analyzed: insulation, bracing panel, finishing panel and cladding. The performances of some commercial biobased flexible insulation (mix of fibres, cellulose, grass, recycled textile, sheepwool and flax) were compared to mineral glass wool and to an experimental mycelium panel. The bracing panels were made either of an ecological panel constituted of pressed vegetal fibers or a conventional OSB panel. The finishing panels consisted of a commercial clay board or a conventional gypsum board. The cladding consisted either of a new composite panel made from vegetal fibres, biosourced resin and lime; or a conventional spruce cladding. Several characterizations were conducted on insulation and on panels: water absorption, dimensional stability, vapor permeability, sorption-desorption tests, acoustic properties, airflow resistance, resistance to mold. Influence of temperature and humidity on thermal conductivity, and the impact of Florida aging or freeze-thaw cycles on the durability of thermal performances of insulating materials were also determined. Flexible biobased insulation materials exhibited similar performance as mineral glass wool (acoustics, dimensional stability, airflow resistance, etc.). A correlation between airflow resistance and acoustic performance was observed. The acoustic and hygroscopic performances of the clay board were relatively low and comparable to gypsum board. Under severe conditions (inoculation with fungal spores, 4 weeks, 29 ℃, RH ≥ 95%) commercial biobased insulation materials showed limited fungal growth (ranks 1a/5 to 2/5 according to EN ISO 846 and ranks 1/3 to 2/3 according to EN 15101). Mycelium was an exception and showed extreme sensitivity to fungal development (ranks 5/5 and 3/3). On the other side, most of finishing panels (conventional or biobased), showed higher sensibility (ranks 1c/5 to 5/5 according to EN ISO 846 and ranks 1/3 to 3/3 according to EN 15101). The finishing materials will not submit the same conditions of use (temperature, humidity) as the insulation materials and the finishing materials will be eventually associated with other elements (paint, render, coatings…). However these results are rather reassuring for contractors who might be worried about using biobased insulating materials. A correct setting up and normal use is necessary to prevent the risks of fungal development: protection of materials during the building phase, correct ventilation, no setting up of wet materials, replacement of insulation in case of accidental humidification, protection with water-vapor membranes, no capillary rise and compliance with the hygrothermal profile of the building wall in order to drive out the humidity. The thermal conductivity of flax and glass wool was almost unaffected (less than 5%) by either Florida tests (hot and humid) or freeze-thaw tests. This is a positive aspect for the durability of flax performance. It could be potentially similar for other biobased flexible insulating materials. This study refers to a second article were life cycle assessments were performed on the same materials. It showed that the insulation has a limited part of the total ecological impact of the wall. The outer and inner finishing panels and the fastening (screws or metal connectors) had also a significant impact. The vegetal bracing panel had a less impactful production process than conventional OSB, but its distant origin negated its environmental advantage. The study revealed that a clay finishing board can be more ecologically interesting than a conventional gypsum panel only in the case of the use of recycled jute fibers and a production site close to the building site. The greater thickness and higher density increased the impact of the transport. The present study highlights the importance of taking a holistic view of material properties for making informed choices.