View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Delivery MoSCoW |  Product Discovery Opportunity Scoring |  Product Discovery Assumption Mapping |  Product Discovery Fake Door Test |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | 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 opportunities need ranking by their effect, it makes importance and satisfaction directly comparable. It separates problem, assumption, solution, and evidence. The result is captured as an opportunity-score table and top outcomes. | When assumptions still sit unordered in the room, it weighs uncertainty against leverage. It makes visible which hypotheses should be checked first. | When demand is still unclear, it measures interest in a feature before it is built. It separates real behavior from polite agreement and deliberately keeps build effort small. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Medium | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | 30-90 min | 60-120 min | 45-60 min | 1-5 Tage |
Participantsdifferent | 3-12 | 3-6 | 2-8 | Nutzertraffic |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Async |
Outputdifferent | Prioritized Backlog, Release Scope, Tradeoff Notes | Opportunity Score Table, Top Outcomes | Assumption map, Test backlog, Risk ranking | Click Data, Interest Signal, Learning Decision |
Tagsno overlap | PrioritizationScopeDecision | PrioritizationDiscoveryOutcomesNeeds | AssumptionsRiskExperimentsValidation | ValidationExperimentsDemandDiscovery |