View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  UX Research Card Sorting |  Product Discovery Smoke Test |  Innovation Design Sprint |  Growth A/B Testing |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When content only makes sense internally and users can't find the structure again, card sorting exposes their mental order. Terms, groups, and naming are then aligned with the target group's expectations. | When demand only needs to be roughly verified, it tests interest with minimal effort. It measures whether people would take a next step at all. | When the product question is unclear and time pressure is high, the method takes a team from an open idea to a testable solution. It connects problem understanding, decision, and learning in one compact format, lowering the risk of spending a lot of energy on a mere guess. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Low | High | High |
Timedifferent | 20-45 min | 1-5 Tage | 4-5 Tage | 1-4 Wochen |
Participantsdifferent | Based on research question | Nutzertraffic | 5-8 | 1-6 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Async | Workshop | Async |
Outputdifferent | Content groups, Label set, IA hypotheses | Interest Metrics, Conversion Signal, Learning Note | Prototype, Test Findings, Decision Rationale | Experiment results, Decision log, Learning summary |
Tagsno overlap | Information architectureNavigationStructure | ValidationExperimentsDemandGrowth | Design sprintPrototypeValidationInnovation | ExperimentsGrowthAnalyticsValidation |