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 Planning Poker |  Agile Affinity Estimation |  Agile Story Splitting |  Agile Scrum |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When estimates within the team diverge too much, it puts differing expectations on a common test bench. It separates rough complexity from unspoken assumptions. | When many tasks need to be classified quickly, it sorts them by perceived effort and similarity. It reduces the effort of fine-grained estimation for large volumes. | When a story becomes too large for a clean flow, it breaks scope down along value and risk. It shapes the work into a form that ships earlier and is easier to verify. | When a team needs to work in a fixed delivery rhythm, it stabilizes cadence, responsibility, and feedback loops. It makes collaboration reliable across sprint boundaries. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Medium | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | 2-5 min je Item | 30-90 min | 30-60 min | 1-4 Wochen je Sprint, laufend |
Participantsdifferent | 3-9 | 3-12 | 2-6 | 3-10 (Scrum Team) |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Relative Estimates, Assumption Notes, Split Candidates | Affinity Size Map, Grouped Estimates, Unclear Items | Smaller Stories, Acceptance Criteria, Split Rationale | Product Backlog, Sprint Backlog, Increment, Sprint Goal |
Tagsno overlap | EstimationAgileRelative sizingTeam | EstimationBacklogRelative sizing | BacklogIterationDelivery | AgileIterationCadence |