Abstract Earlier research has suggested that the diversification of silvicultural strategies is a cost-efficient tool to ensure multifunctionality in production forests. This study compared the effects of continuous cover forestry and conventional rotation forestry on ecosystem services and biodiversity in boreal forests in Finland. We simulated over 25,000 commercial forest stands for 100 years under continuous cover and rotation forest management. Forests without management were used as a reference. We compared the effects of silvicultural practices over space and time on ecosystem services, biodiversity indicators and multifunctionality. Our results revealed that continuous cover forestry was better than rotation forest management in terms of timber net present value, carbon sequestration, bilberry production, scenic beauty and the number of large trees. It provided higher habitat availability for indicator species dependent on deciduous trees and mature forest structure. Rotation forest management was better than continuous cover forestry in terms of harvested tree biomass, cowberries, mushrooms, and species dependent on high tree volume. In general, multifunctionality was higher in continuous cover forests than in rotation forests. Therefore, continuous cover forests may have a greater potential to produce simultaneously multiple benefits from forests. However, unmanaged forests often provided the highest levels of services and biodiversity making their role indispensable in delivering forest related ecosystem services and, especially, in the maintenance of biodiversity. Continuous cover forestry does not itself guarantee the maintenance of all ecosystem services and biodiversity in commercial forests but it can be an important part of a successful progression towards more sustainable forestry.