View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Product Discovery Experiment Canvas |  Product Discovery Fake Door Test |  Architecture ATAM (Architecture Tradeoff Analysis Method) |  Product Discovery Test Card |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When experiments become unreadable after the fact, it arranges hypothesis, signal, and learning goal on a single canvas. It separates problem, assumption, solution, and evidence. The result is captured as a Completed Experiment Canvas and a Success Metric. | When demand is still unclear, it measures interest in a feature before it is built. It separates real behavior from polite agreement and deliberately keeps build effort small. | 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. | The Test Card turns a critical assumption into a testable claim and specifies in advance which result counts as success. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Medium | High | Low |
Timedifferent | 30-60 min | 1-5 Tage | Several meetings plus preparation and analysis; total effort depends on scope | 20-35 min |
Participantsdifferent | 1-5 | Nutzertraffic | Evaluation team, architects, and relevant stakeholders | 1-5 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Completed Experiment Canvas, Success Metric | Click Data, Interest Signal, Learning Decision | Prioritized quality scenarios in a utility tree, Architecture risks with reasoning and assumptions, Sensitivity and trade-off points, Findings report with open investigations | Test Card with a pre-set threshold |
Tagsno overlap | ExperimentsValidationDiscoveryHypothesis | ValidationExperimentsDemandDiscovery | ArchitectureQualityRiskTradeoffsStakeholders | ExperimentsValidationDiscoveryHypothesis |