methodatlas
Compare

View methods side by side.

Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.

Criterion
Paper illustration for Dot Estimation.
Facilitation
Dot Estimation
Funnel Analysis workspace showing the question, observations, and next decision.
Growth
Funnel Analysis
Paper illustration for Planning Poker.
Agile
Planning Poker
A/B Testing workspace showing the question, observations, and next decision.
Growth
A/B Testing
Purposedifferent
When size or effort can only be estimated roughly, Dot Estimation condenses the group's experience into a quick range. It turns individual contributions into a visible selection. The result is captured as an Effort Heatmap, Risk Signals, and Discussion Targets.When many visitors or users drop off along the way, the reason behind the number often stays hidden. Funnel Analysis exposes these transitions and makes visible exactly where the path collapses.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 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
LowMediumLowHigh
Timedifferent
5-20 min1-3 h2-5 min je Item1-4 Wochen
Participantsdifferent
3-201-53-91-6
Formatdifferent
WorkshopAsyncWorkshop + asyncAsync
Outputdifferent
Effort Heatmap, Risk Signals, Discussion TargetsFunnel report, Drop-off analysis, Optimization hypothesesRelative Estimates, Assumption Notes, Split CandidatesExperiment results, Decision log, Learning summary
Tagsno overlap
EstimationEffortRisk
AnalyticsConversionGrowth
EstimationAgileRelative sizingTeam
ExperimentsGrowthAnalyticsValidation
Add more methods