I'm pretty sure one can also categorify the fact that for ordinary complex representations of finite groups, number of irreducible representations = number of conjugacy classes. As in this closely related question, one has a bijection (which categorifies to a pointwise isomorphism) but not a natural one.

(The two functors I'm thinking of here are contravariant functors from the category of finite groups to the category of $k$-linear categories. The first is $F_1(G) = \mathrm{rep}_{\mathbb{C}}(G)$. The second, $F_2$, takes a finite group $G$ to the $k$-linear category freely generated by the conjugacy classes of $G$. I'd have to think about how to define $F_2$ on morphisms, but I don't think there's any choice of definition of $F_2$ on morphisms that will make $F_1$ and $F_2$ naturally isomorphic, despite the fact that they are pointwise isomorphic.)

I'm pretty sure one can also categorify the fact that for ordinary complex representations of finite groups, number of irreducible representations = number of conjugacy classes. As in this closely related question, one has a bijection (which categorifies to a pointwise isomorphism) but not a natural one.

(The two functors I'm thinking of here are contravariant functors from the category of finite groups to the category of $k$-linear categories. The first is $F_1(G) = \mathrm{rep}_{\mathbb{C}}(G)$. The second, $F_2$, takes a finite group $G$ to the $k$-linear category freely generated by the conjugacy classes of $G$. I'd have to think about how to define $F_2$ on morphisms, but I don't think there's any choice of definition of $F_2$ on morphisms that will make $F_1$ and $F_2$ naturally isomorphic, despite the fact that they are pointwise isomorphic.)