It does not really compare with Matrix as the underlying concepts are very different.
Matrix is a federated protocol with multiple central server. Everyone can setup a server and connect it to the network of other servers. But clients still connect to servers. Jami is a decentralized (similar to p2p protocols, e.g. torrent) protocol. It does not use centralized servers (at least for the message transport). In detail, it is a bit more complex than that and I can recommend the blog posts on the jami website for a better explanation.
Due to the technical differences I believe the goals are quite different. Hence, Jami does not support the Matrix concept of bridges, its rather a closed network. But be aware that the bridge concept also has drawbacks as for example the E2E encryption between protocols is kind of impossible (at least at the moment and as far as I know).
Jami offers E2E encryption. I would also say due to the decentralized concept it is with respect to privacy and security better than other protocols. But that might be debatable.
What it does not have yet is a group chat feature but I believe the Jami team (so also @AmarOk1412) are working on it. Since it is a p2p protocol it also does not natively support offline messages. Although with the group feature there might be options for offline messages as well. I could even imagine a very basic bridging concept to other protocols using the group feature.