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 |  Facilitation Expectation Mapping |  Agile Affinity Estimation |  Delivery Monte Carlo Forecasting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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 roles, interfaces, or projects fail because of differing expectations, Expectation Mapping surfaces these differences. It shows what each side takes for granted and where the pictures diverge. | 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. | Helps clarify scope, sequence, and delivery flow in concrete terms. It makes work, boundaries, and order steerable. The result is captured as Forecast Percentiles, Throughput Dataset, and Risk Communication. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | Medium | High |
Timedifferent | laufend | 45-90 min | 30-90 min | 30-90 min Setup, danach laufend |
Participantsdifferent | 2-12 | 3-12 | 3-12 | 1-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Throughput Data, Flow Forecast, Slicing Rules | Expectation Map, Alignment Notes, Agreements | Affinity Size Map, Grouped Estimates, Unclear Items | Forecast Percentiles, Throughput Dataset, Risk Communication |
Tagsno overlap | EstimationForecastingFlow | AlignmentStakeholdersTeam | EstimationBacklogRelative sizing | ForecastingFlowDelivery |