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 Opportunity Interview |  Product Discovery Fake Door 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 opportunities are still hidden behind signals of need, it structures conversations around needs and obstacles. It looks for patterns that lead to new product opportunities. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | 1-2 h Setup, laufend | 45–90 min | 30-60 min je Interview | 1-5 Tage |
Participantsdifferent | 2-6 | 3-10 | 5-12 Interviews | Nutzertraffic |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop + async | Async |
Outputdifferent | Opportunity Solution Tree, Experiment Backlog, Learning Log | Theme clusters, Insight statements, Opportunity areas | Interview Notes, Opportunity Themes, Customer Quotes | Click Data, Interest Signal, Learning Decision |
Tagsno overlap | DiscoveryOutcomesExperimentsOpportunity | SynthesisQualitativeRoot cause | DiscoveryInterviewsOpportunityCustomer | ValidationExperimentsDemandDiscovery |