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 |  Agile NoEstimates |  Growth A/B Testing |  Product Discovery Smoke Test |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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 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. | 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. | When demand only needs to be roughly verified, it tests interest with minimal effort. It measures whether people would take a next step at all. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Medium | High | Low |
Timedifferent | 15-60 min | laufend | 1-4 Wochen | 1-5 Tage |
Participantsdifferent | 2-9 | 2-12 | 1-6 | Nutzertraffic |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Async | Async |
Outputdifferent | Ideal Day Estimates, Assumption Notes, Capacity Caveats | Throughput Data, Flow Forecast, Slicing Rules | Experiment results, Decision log, Learning summary | Interest Metrics, Conversion Signal, Learning Note |
Tagsno overlap | EstimationEffortAgile | EstimationForecastingFlow | ExperimentsGrowthAnalyticsValidation | ValidationExperimentsDemandGrowth |