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 |  Agile Bucket System |  Facilitation Dot Estimation |  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. | 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 size or effort can only be estimated roughly, Dot Estimation condenses the group's experience into a quick range. It turns individual contributions into a visible selection. The result is captured as an Effort Heatmap, Risk Signals, and Discussion Targets. | 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 | Medium | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | laufend | 30-90 min | 5-20 min | 30-90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 2-12 | 3-12 | 3-20 | 3-12 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Throughput Data, Flow Forecast, Slicing Rules | Bucketed Backlog, Relative Estimates, Split Candidates | Effort Heatmap, Risk Signals, Discussion Targets | Affinity Size Map, Grouped Estimates, Unclear Items |
Tags1 shared | EstimationForecastingFlow | EstimationBacklogRelative sizing | EstimationEffortRisk | EstimationBacklogRelative sizing |