View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Delivery Cost of Delay |  Delivery MoSCoW |  Architecture arc42 |  Architecture C4 Model |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | Helps clarify scope, order, and delivery flow in concrete terms. It makes work, constraints, and sequence manageable. The result is captured as a Cost of Delay table and prioritization sequence. | When a release carries too many demands and priorities are only ever negotiated, MoSCoW creates clear boundaries for the next cut. Must, Should, Could, and Won't make commitment, room for maneuver, and trade-off logic visible to everyone involved. | 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. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | High | Low | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 90-180 min | 30-90 min | 1-2 Tage | 1-4 h |
Participantsdifferent | 3-8 | 3-12 | 1-4 | 1-5 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | CoD Table, Prioritization Sequence | Prioritized Backlog, Release Scope, Tradeoff Notes | Architecture Document, Context View, Runtime View, Deployment View | Context Diagram, Container Diagram, Component Diagram |
Tagsno overlap | PrioritizationDeliveryEconomicsDecision | PrioritizationScopeDecision | ArchitectureDocumentationCommunication | ArchitectureCommunicationVisualization |