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 Strategy ICE Scoring |  Agile WSJF |  Architecture ATAM (Architecture Tradeoff Analysis Method) |  Delivery Cost of Delay |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When ideas need sorting quickly, it condenses impact, confidence, and effort into one compact score. It connects customer value, product logic, and decision priorities. The result is captured as an ICE table and top-ideas list. | When many tasks compete for the same capacity, it orders work by economic impact. It makes time lost, benefit, and effort comparable together. | 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. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | High | High | High |
Timedifferent | 30-60 min | 45-90 min | Several meetings plus preparation and analysis; total effort depends on scope | 90-180 min |
Participantsdifferent | 2-8 | 3-10 | Evaluation team, architects, and relevant stakeholders | 3-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | ICE Table, Top Idea List | Ranked Backlog, Cost-of-Delay Assumptions | Prioritized quality scenarios in a utility tree, Architecture risks with reasoning and assumptions, Sensitivity and trade-off points, Findings report with open investigations | CoD Table, Prioritization Sequence |
Tagsno overlap | PrioritizationScoringGrowthDecision | LeanEconomicsSequencePrioritization | ArchitectureQualityRiskTradeoffsStakeholders | PrioritizationDeliveryEconomicsDecision |