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 MoSCoW |  Agile Planning Poker |  Agile Affinity Estimation |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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. | When a release carries too many demands and priorities are only ever negotiated, MoSCoW creates clear boundaries for the next cut. Must, Should, Could, and Won't make commitment, room for maneuver, and trade-off logic visible to everyone involved. | 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 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Low | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | 15-60 min | 30-90 min | 2-5 min je Item | 30-90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 2-9 | 3-12 | 3-9 | 3-12 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Ideal Day Estimates, Assumption Notes, Capacity Caveats | Prioritized Backlog, Release Scope, Tradeoff Notes | Relative Estimates, Assumption Notes, Split Candidates | Affinity Size Map, Grouped Estimates, Unclear Items |
Tagsno overlap | EstimationEffortAgile | PrioritizationScopeDecision | EstimationAgileRelative sizingTeam | EstimationBacklogRelative sizing |