View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Agile Ideal Days |  Delivery Monte Carlo Forecasting |  Agile Affinity Estimation |  Agile NoEstimates |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When effort needs to be thought of as real working time, it offers a simple common denominator for comparison. It sorts work by value, risk, and delivery ability. The result is captured as Ideal Day Estimates, Assumption Notes, and Capacity Caveats. | Helps clarify scope, sequence, and delivery flow in concrete terms. It makes work, boundaries, and order steerable. The result is captured as Forecast Percentiles, Throughput Dataset, and Risk Communication. | When many tasks need to be classified quickly, it sorts them by perceived effort and similarity. It reduces the effort of fine-grained estimation for large volumes. | When estimating slows a team down more than it helps, it shifts the focus to flow, small slices, and real lead time. It sorts work by value, risk, and delivery ability. The result is captured as Throughput Data, Flow Forecast, and Slicing Rules. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | High | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | 15-60 min | 30-90 min Setup, danach laufend | 30-90 min | laufend |
Participantsdifferent | 2-9 | 1-8 | 3-12 | 2-12 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Ideal Day Estimates, Assumption Notes, Capacity Caveats | Forecast Percentiles, Throughput Dataset, Risk Communication | Affinity Size Map, Grouped Estimates, Unclear Items | Throughput Data, Flow Forecast, Slicing Rules |
Tagsno overlap | EstimationEffortAgile | ForecastingFlowDelivery | EstimationBacklogRelative sizing | EstimationForecastingFlow |