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 |  Decision Making Wideband Delphi |  Growth A/B Testing |  Product Discovery Assumption Mapping |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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. | A single opinion rarely holds up for planning when the future is genuinely uncertain. It separates options, evaluation criteria, and open risks. The result is captured as an Estimate Range, Assumption Log, and Expert Consensus Notes. | 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 assumptions still sit unordered in the room, it weighs uncertainty against leverage. It makes visible which hypotheses should be checked first. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | High | High | Medium |
Timedifferent | 15-60 min | 1-4 h or multiple rounds | 1-4 Wochen | 45-60 min |
Participantsdifferent | 2-9 | 4-12 Experten | 1-6 | 2-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Ideal Day Estimates, Assumption Notes, Capacity Caveats | Estimate Range, Assumption Log, Expert Consensus Notes | Experiment results, Decision log, Learning summary | Assumption map, Test backlog, Risk ranking |
Tagsno overlap | EstimationEffortAgile | EstimationExpertsForecasting | ExperimentsGrowthAnalyticsValidation | AssumptionsRiskExperimentsValidation |