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 Discovery Landing Page Test |  Architecture Architecture Decision Record |  Product Discovery Assumption Mapping |  Growth A/B Testing |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When a value proposition first needs to be checked for resonance, it condenses the idea onto a focused entry page. It shows whether language and offering carry interest. | An ADR permanently records an architecture decision with context, trade-offs, and consequence. It creates continuity for later changes because the decision path stays traceable. | When assumptions still sit unordered in the room, it weighs uncertainty against leverage. It makes visible which hypotheses should be checked first. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | Medium | High |
Timedifferent | 1-5 Tage | 15-45 min | 45-60 min | 1-4 Wochen |
Participantsdifferent | Nutzertraffic | 1-3 | 2-8 | 1-6 |
Formatdifferent | Async | Async | Workshop + async | Async |
Outputdifferent | Landing Page, Conversion Data, Learning Summary | ADR File, Decision Log, Rationale | Assumption map, Test backlog, Risk ranking | Experiment results, Decision log, Learning summary |
Tagsno overlap | ValidationConversionMarketing | ArchitectureRationaleDocumentationGovernance | AssumptionsRiskExperimentsValidation | ExperimentsGrowthAnalyticsValidation |