View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Product Discovery Opportunity Solution Tree |  UX Research Affinity Diagramming |  Product Discovery Fake Door Test |  Product Discovery MVP Test Matrix |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When discovery keeps swinging between goals, ideas, and learning loops, it creates clear steering logic. It connects the desired outcome, opportunities, and experiments into a legible structure. | When research notes, feedback, or observations sit unconnected side by side, affinity diagramming sorts the raw material into solid themes. Many individual points turn into patterns that make decisions and opportunities clearer. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | 1-2 h Setup, laufend | 45–90 min | 1-5 Tage | 45-75 min |
Participantsdifferent | 2-6 | 3-10 | Nutzertraffic | 2-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Opportunity Solution Tree, Experiment Backlog, Learning Log | Theme clusters, Insight statements, Opportunity areas | Click Data, Interest Signal, Learning Decision | Test Matrix, Test Plan |
Tagsno overlap | DiscoveryOutcomesExperimentsOpportunity | SynthesisQualitativeRoot cause | ValidationExperimentsDemandDiscovery | ExperimentsValidationDiscoveryOptions |