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 Three-Point Estimation |  Product Discovery Fake Door Test |  Product Discovery MVP Test Matrix |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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. | A single estimate for effort, time, or risk often looks too smooth for the real uncertainty behind it. It separates options, evaluation criteria, and open risks. The result is captured as a Three-Point Estimate, Risk Range, and Assumption Notes. | 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. | When several minimal variants compete to answer the same question, it makes comparing and choosing between them cleaner. It separates problem, assumption, solution, and evidence. The result is captured as a Test Matrix and a Test Plan. |
Complexitysame | Medium | Medium | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | laufend | 10-30 min je Item | 1-5 Tage | 45-75 min |
Participantsdifferent | 2-12 | 1-8 | Nutzertraffic | 2-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Throughput Data, Flow Forecast, Slicing Rules | Three-Point Estimate, Risk Range, Assumption Notes | Click Data, Interest Signal, Learning Decision | Test Matrix, Test Plan |
Tagsno overlap | EstimationForecastingFlow | EstimationUncertaintyForecasting | ValidationExperimentsDemandDiscovery | ExperimentsValidationDiscoveryOptions |