View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Growth Funnel Analysis |  Agile Planning Poker |  Facilitation Dot Estimation |  Growth A/B Testing |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | 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 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 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 | Medium | Low | Low | High |
Timedifferent | 1-3 h | 2-5 min je Item | 5-20 min | 1-4 Wochen |
Participantsdifferent | 1-5 | 3-9 | 3-20 | 1-6 |
Formatdifferent | Async | Workshop + async | Workshop | Async |
Outputdifferent | Funnel report, Drop-off analysis, Optimization hypotheses | Relative Estimates, Assumption Notes, Split Candidates | Effort Heatmap, Risk Signals, Discussion Targets | Experiment results, Decision log, Learning summary |
Tagsno overlap | AnalyticsConversionGrowth | EstimationAgileRelative sizingTeam | EstimationEffortRisk | ExperimentsGrowthAnalyticsValidation |