View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
Selected:Smoke TestSAAM (Software Architecture Analysis Method)ATAM (Architecture Tradeoff Analysis Method)Fake Door Test
| Criterion |  Product Discovery Smoke Test |  Architecture SAAM (Software Architecture Analysis Method) |  Architecture ATAM (Architecture Tradeoff Analysis Method) |  Product Discovery Fake Door Test |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When demand only needs to be roughly verified, it tests interest with minimal effort. It measures whether people would take a next step at all. | SAAM helps teams judge an architecture’s suitability for selected tasks and changes. It is particularly useful for examining modifiability and comparing architecture alternatives with clear reasoning. | ATAM helps teams weigh architecture decisions when quality goals compete. The team considers business goals, stakeholder expectations, and technical decisions together. The evaluation shows which risks need further investigation. | 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 | Low | High | High | Medium |
Timedifferent | 1-5 Tage | Preparation, scenario analysis, and findings review; effort depends on scope | Several meetings plus preparation and analysis; total effort depends on scope | 1-5 Tage |
Participantsdifferent | Nutzertraffic | Architecture experts and stakeholders for scenarios and weighting | Evaluation team, architects, and relevant stakeholders | Nutzertraffic |
Formatdifferent | Async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Async |
Outputdifferent | Interest Metrics, Conversion Signal, Learning Note | Domain functions mapped to components and connections, Quality attributes and evaluation criteria, Typical tasks and their effects on the architecture, Reasoned evaluation or comparison of alternatives | Prioritized quality scenarios in a utility tree, Architecture risks with reasoning and assumptions, Sensitivity and trade-off points, Findings report with open investigations | Click Data, Interest Signal, Learning Decision |
Tagsno overlap | ValidationExperimentsDemandGrowth | ArchitectureChangeAnalysisComparisonQuality | ArchitectureQualityRiskTradeoffsStakeholders | ValidationExperimentsDemandDiscovery |