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 Story Points |  Decision Making PERT Estimation |  Architecture ATAM (Architecture Tradeoff Analysis Method) |
|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When teams want to rate complexity rather than hours, it creates a shared, relative scale. It sorts work by value, risk, and delivery ability. The result is captured as Point Estimates, Reference Stories, and Velocity Data. | On complex initiatives, a plain average tends to understate just how uncertain the outcome really is. It separates options, evaluation criteria, and open risks. The result is captured as a PERT Estimate, Expected Value, and Risk Notes. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Medium | High |
Timedifferent | laufend, 1-5 min je Item | 15-45 min | Several meetings plus preparation and analysis; total effort depends on scope |
Participantsdifferent | 3-9 | 1-8 | Evaluation team, architects, and relevant stakeholders |
Formatsame | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Point Estimates, Reference Stories, Velocity Data | PERT Estimate, Expected Value, Risk Notes | Prioritized quality scenarios in a utility tree, Architecture risks with reasoning and assumptions, Sensitivity and trade-off points, Findings report with open investigations |
Tagsno overlap | EstimationAgileMeasurement | EstimationUncertaintyRisk | ArchitectureQualityRiskTradeoffsStakeholders |
Often compared together
Methods with strong topical overlap with the current selection, not yet in the comparison.
