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 Riskiest Assumption Test |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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 an idea hinges on one critical unknown, it prioritizes testing that exact piece of uncertainty first. It separates problem, assumption, solution, and evidence. The result is captured as a prioritized list of assumptions, a test plan, and a result report. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | 1-2 h Setup, laufend | 45–90 min | 1-5 Tage | 1-2 Wochen pro Iteration |
Participantsdifferent | 2-6 | 3-10 | Nutzertraffic | 2-6 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Opportunity Solution Tree, Experiment Backlog, Learning Log | Theme clusters, Insight statements, Opportunity areas | Click Data, Interest Signal, Learning Decision | Prioritized Assumption List, Test Plan, Results Report |
Tagsno overlap | DiscoveryOutcomesExperimentsOpportunity | SynthesisQualitativeRoot cause | ValidationExperimentsDemandDiscovery | ExperimentsValidationDiscoveryAssumptions |