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 NoEstimates |  Agile Planning Poker |  Agile Ideal Days |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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 estimating slows a team down more than it helps, it shifts the focus to flow, small slices, and real lead time. It sorts work by value, risk, and delivery ability. The result is captured as Throughput Data, Flow Forecast, and Slicing Rules. | When estimates within the team diverge too much, it puts differing expectations on a common test bench. It separates rough complexity from unspoken assumptions. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Medium | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 30-90 min | laufend | 2-5 min je Item | 15-60 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-12 | 2-12 | 3-9 | 2-9 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Affinity Size Map, Grouped Estimates, Unclear Items | Throughput Data, Flow Forecast, Slicing Rules | Relative Estimates, Assumption Notes, Split Candidates | Ideal Day Estimates, Assumption Notes, Capacity Caveats |
Tags1 shared | EstimationBacklogRelative sizing | EstimationForecastingFlow | EstimationAgileRelative sizingTeam | EstimationEffortAgile |