View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  UX Research Tree Testing |  Product Discovery Concierge MVP |  Product Discovery Fake Door Test |  Product Discovery MVP Test Matrix |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When a navigation exists but search paths still fail, tree testing checks findability without visual distraction. The method shows whether labels, levels, and paths really lead to the intended destination. | When an idea can first fail or grow through genuine hands-on support, it relies on manual work instead of automation. It shows whether user value holds up even under manual execution. | 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. | When several minimal variants compete to answer the same question, it makes comparing and choosing between them cleaner. It separates problem, assumption, solution, and evidence. The result is captured as a Test Matrix and a Test Plan. |
Complexitysame | Medium | Medium | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | 1-2 Tage | 1-4 Wochen | 1-5 Tage | 45-75 min |
Participantsdifferent | Based on research question | 3-10 Kunden | Nutzertraffic | 2-8 |
Formatdifferent | Async | Workshop + async | Async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Findability Metrics, Path Analysis, Revised IA | Concierge Learnings, Service Blueprint, MVP Risks | Click Data, Interest Signal, Learning Decision | Test Matrix, Test Plan |
Tagsno overlap | Information architectureNavigationFindability | MVPValidationServiceDiscovery | ValidationExperimentsDemandDiscovery | ExperimentsValidationDiscoveryOptions |