View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Architecture ATAM (Architecture Tradeoff Analysis Method) |  Agile WSJF |  Architecture arc42 |  Architecture Architecture Decision Record |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | ATAM helps teams weigh architecture decisions when quality goals compete. The team considers business goals, stakeholder expectations, and technical decisions together. The evaluation shows which risks need further investigation. | When many tasks compete for the same capacity, it orders work by economic impact. It makes time lost, benefit, and effort comparable together. | 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. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | High | High | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | Several meetings plus preparation and analysis; total effort depends on scope | 45-90 min | 1-2 Tage | 15-45 min |
Participantsdifferent | Evaluation team, architects, and relevant stakeholders | 3-10 | 1-4 | 1-3 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop + async | Async |
Outputdifferent | Prioritized quality scenarios in a utility tree, Architecture risks with reasoning and assumptions, Sensitivity and trade-off points, Findings report with open investigations | Ranked Backlog, Cost-of-Delay Assumptions | Architecture Document, Context View, Runtime View, Deployment View | ADR File, Decision Log, Rationale |
Tagsno overlap | ArchitectureQualityRiskTradeoffsStakeholders | LeanEconomicsSequencePrioritization | ArchitectureDocumentationCommunication | ArchitectureRationaleDocumentationGovernance |