View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Agile Affinity Estimation |  Agile Ideal Days |  Growth A/B Testing |  Product Discovery Assumption Mapping |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When many tasks need to be classified quickly, it sorts them by perceived effort and similarity. It reduces the effort of fine-grained estimation for large volumes. | When effort needs to be thought of as real working time, it offers a simple common denominator for comparison. It sorts work by value, risk, and delivery ability. The result is captured as Ideal Day Estimates, Assumption Notes, and Capacity Caveats. | 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. | When assumptions still sit unordered in the room, it weighs uncertainty against leverage. It makes visible which hypotheses should be checked first. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | High | Medium |
Timedifferent | 30-90 min | 15-60 min | 1-4 Wochen | 45-60 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-12 | 2-9 | 1-6 | 2-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop + async | Async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Affinity Size Map, Grouped Estimates, Unclear Items | Ideal Day Estimates, Assumption Notes, Capacity Caveats | Experiment results, Decision log, Learning summary | Assumption map, Test backlog, Risk ranking |
Tagsno overlap | EstimationBacklogRelative sizing | EstimationEffortAgile | ExperimentsGrowthAnalyticsValidation | AssumptionsRiskExperimentsValidation |