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 NoEstimates |  Decision Making Assumption Surfacing |  Agile Bucket System |  Agile Affinity Estimation |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | 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. | Plans often contain assumptions that were never openly stated and remain dangerous precisely because of that. Assumption Surfacing makes these silent premises visible and prioritizes which of them carry the initiative or could sink it. | When a large batch of work needs a fast, rough estimate, it sorts items into predefined size buckets. It sorts work by value, risk, and delivery ability. The result is captured as a Bucketed Backlog, Relative Estimates, and Split Candidates. | 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 | Medium | Low | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | laufend | 45-90 min | 30-90 min | 30-90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 2-12 | 2-8 | 3-12 | 3-12 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Throughput Data, Flow Forecast, Slicing Rules | Assumption List, Critical Assumptions, Learning Plan | Bucketed Backlog, Relative Estimates, Split Candidates | Affinity Size Map, Grouped Estimates, Unclear Items |
Tagsno overlap | EstimationForecastingFlow | AssumptionsRiskDecisionDiscovery | EstimationBacklogRelative sizing | EstimationBacklogRelative sizing |