View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Growth A/B Testing |  Growth Pirate Metrics AARRR |  Architecture Architecture Decision Record |  Architecture arc42 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When two variants compete, discussions quickly decide by taste rather than effect. A/B Testing checks behavior under controlled conditions and separates real improvement from chance or expectation effects. | For products with complex usage paths, overall growth alone is too coarse to reveal bottlenecks. Pirate Metrics breaks the relationship with the product into consecutive stages and shows where the funnel actually leaks. | An ADR permanently records an architecture decision with context, trade-offs, and consequence. It creates continuity for later changes because the decision path stays traceable. | arc42 structures architecture knowledge so teams can document system, decisions, and risks consistently. The template builds a living understanding of the architecture instead of scattered notes. |
Complexitydifferent | High | Medium | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 1-4 Wochen | 1-2 h Setup, laufend | 15-45 min | 1-2 Tage |
Participantsdifferent | 1-6 | 2-8 | 1-3 | 1-4 |
Formatdifferent | Async | Workshop + async | Async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Experiment results, Decision log, Learning summary | AARRR funnel, Metric baseline, Experiment backlog | ADR File, Decision Log, Rationale | Architecture Document, Context View, Runtime View, Deployment View |
Tagsno overlap | ExperimentsGrowthAnalyticsValidation | GrowthMetricsExperiments | ArchitectureRationaleDocumentationGovernance | ArchitectureDocumentationCommunication |