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 |  Product Strategy Impact Mapping |  Growth A/B Testing |  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 a goal needs to be connected to several possible paths, it shows chains of impact instead of feature lists. It connects business goal, behavior change, and measures. | When two variants compete, discussions quickly decide by taste rather than effect. A/B Testing checks behavior under controlled conditions and separates real improvement from chance or expectation effects. | 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 | Medium | High | Medium |
Timedifferent | 1-2 h Setup, laufend | 45-90 min | 1-4 Wochen | 1-5 Tage |
Participantsdifferent | 2-6 | 3-8 | 1-6 | Nutzertraffic |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Async | Async |
Outputdifferent | Opportunity Solution Tree, Experiment Backlog, Learning Log | Impact Map, Outcome Hypotheses, Delivery Options | Experiment results, Decision log, Learning summary | Click Data, Interest Signal, Learning Decision |
Tagsno overlap | DiscoveryOutcomesExperimentsOpportunity | OutcomesStrategyBehaviorPlanning | ExperimentsGrowthAnalyticsValidation | ValidationExperimentsDemandDiscovery |