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 C4 Model |  Growth A/B Testing |  Product Strategy ICE Scoring |  Product Discovery Assumption Mapping |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | The C4 Model makes a system legible across several resolution levels, from context down to code. It suits situations where different audiences need to understand the same architecture from different altitudes. | 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 ideas need sorting quickly, it condenses impact, confidence, and effort into one compact score. It connects customer value, product logic, and decision priorities. The result is captured as an ICE table and top-ideas list. | When assumptions still sit unordered in the room, it weighs uncertainty against leverage. It makes visible which hypotheses should be checked first. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | High | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | 1-4 h | 1-4 Wochen | 30-60 min | 45-60 min |
Participantsdifferent | 1-5 | 1-6 | 2-8 | 2-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Context Diagram, Container Diagram, Component Diagram | Experiment results, Decision log, Learning summary | ICE Table, Top Idea List | Assumption map, Test backlog, Risk ranking |
Tagsno overlap | ArchitectureCommunicationVisualization | ExperimentsGrowthAnalyticsValidation | PrioritizationScoringGrowthDecision | AssumptionsRiskExperimentsValidation |