TOGAF	TOGAF is easily largest in terms of size weighing in at a hefty 750+ pages.
Zachman	Zachman is smaller but then you would expect it to be since its scope is much narrower. Nevertheless it still weighs in at over 500 pages in eBook form.
PeaF	PeaF is joint smallest with DoDAF in terms of physical pages coming in at a reasonable 330.
DoDAF	Small and in the same order as PeaF comprising only 330 pages
FeaF	Also quite small at 388 pages

TOGAF	Again TOGAF is easily the most complex. This is partly due to its fundamental size but also due to it covering the IT architecture discipline as well as EA.
Zachman	Once more Zachman is less complex than TOGAF, generally due to its scope being much narrower, but still has a reasonable high rating because the Metamodel defined is significantly complex.
PeaF	PeaF is the least complex. This is partly due to it’s inherent pragmatism of distilling things down to the essentials, but also due to it’s small size.
DoDAF	Dodaf is not really complex. It is hard to understand for non-DoD personnel. Language is not conducive to other uses.
FeaF	Rationale for FEA complexity rating is because the framework is about OMB budget and program structure, all this will have to be culled out if you are not an US Govt agency.

TOGAF	TOGAF is least easy to use. Essentially this is a direct result of it being large and complex.
Zachman	Zachman is the next easiest in terms of use but its underlying complexity can get in the way and make things more difficult than they should be.
PeaF	PeaF is the easiest to use. Essentially this is a direct result of it being small and not complex.
DoDAF	DoDaf has complete prescription for everything you need to do to set up EA for DoD.
FeaF	Fea has a complete prescription also, plus the best business perspective.

TOGAF	TOGAF scope is less than PeaF. This is mainly due to the fact that TOGAF was born out of Application and IT Architecture.
Zachman	Zachman has the least EA scope because although it’s Metamodel covers the entire spectrum of the Enterprise from a modeling point of view, its doesn’t address the others areas such as Communication, Governance, Management, or initiating and EA programme of work.
PeaF	PeaF covers the greatest scope of EA. This is mainly due to the fact that this is what it was designed to do and has its roots in.
DoDAF	DoDaf has no business perspective for obvious reasons. Any user wanting Business process would have to copy that part from one of the other frameworks.
FeaF	Fea FSAM provides templates for artifacts and describes input and outputs of each artifact.

0: Non-Existent

1: Poor

2: Inadequate

3: Acceptable

4: Very Good

5: Outstanding

Area	Description	DoDAF	FeaF	Zachman	TOGAF	PeaF
Taxonomy	How well you can use the methodology to classify the various architectural artifacts.	2	2	5	3	3
Toolkit	How useful and complete a usable toolkit is. Things you can use out-of the box.	5	3	2	2	5
Process	How fully the methodology guides you through a step-by-step process for creating an enterprise architecture.	2	3	0	3	3
Reference Model	How useful the methodology is in helping you build a relevant set of reference models.	5	5	0	3
Cultural Guidance	How much the methodology helps you assimilate the mindset of enterprise architecture into your organization and develop a culture in which it is valued and used.	5	3	0	2	5
Maturity Model	How much guidance the methodology gives you in assessing the effectiveness and maturity of different organizations within your enterprise in using enterprise architecture.	2	2	0	2	5
Business Focus	Is the framework focused on business drivers (e.g. increasing agility and value) rather than technology drivers (e.g. reducing the cost of IT)	1	5	3	2	5
Governance	How much help the methodology will be in understanding and creating an effective governance model for enterprise architecture.	0	4	0	2	5
Neutrality	How likely you are to get locked-in to a specific vendor/consulting organization by adopting this methodology. (high rating indicates low lock-in)	4	4	5	3	5
Time to Value	The length of time you will likely be using this methodology before you start to gain business value. (high rating indicates less time)	2	4	2	2	5
EA Focus	EA Focus refers to how focused the framework is on Enterprise Architecture rather than Solution, Application, or Technical Architecture	4	5	5	2	5
Pragmatism	How much s the framework grounded in the real world as compared to a perfect world. (high rating indicates more pragmatic)	2	4	2	2	5
		34	44	24	28	51

Based on A Comparison of the Top Four Enterprise-Architecture Methodologies - Roger Sessions - ObjectWatch, Inc

Scoring on DoDAF and FeaF courtesy of Jim Keller

---

Depending upon an organisations specific priorities on what is more or less important to them, a weighting can be applied which would increase or decrease the score for one area over another. If we wish to compare different weighting schemes we must also scale the scores so that the maximum score is always scaled to 100.

The following sets a baseline where each area is weighted equally and the resulting scores scaled to a maximum of 100.

These are the un-weighted scores scaled to 100

 

Area	DoDAF	FeaF	Zachman	TOGAF	PeaF
Taxonomy	3.9	3.9	9.8	5.9	5.9
Toolkit	9.8	5.9	3.9	3.9	9.8
Process	3.9	5.9		5.9	5.9
Reference Model	9.8	9.8		5.9
Cultural Guidance	9.8	5.9		3.9	9.8
Maturity Model	3.9	3.9		3.9	9.8
Business Focus	2	9.8	5.9	3.9	9.8
Governance		7.8		3.9	9.8
Neutrality	7.8	7.8	9.8	5.9	9.8
Time to Value	3.9	7.8	3.9	3.9	9.8
	7.8	9.8	9.8	3.9	9.8
Pragmatism	3.9	7.8	3.9	3.9	9.8
Total	67	86	47	55	100

---

 

If an organisation places a larger emphasis on Toolkit, Time to Value, EA Focus and Pragmatism...

 

Area	DoDAF	FeaF	Zachman	TOGAF	PeaF
Taxonomy
Toolkit	20	12	8	8	20
Process
Reference Model
Cultural Guidance
Maturity Model	6	6		6	15
Business Focus
Governance
Neutrality
Time to Value	8	16	8	8	20
EA Focus	12	15	15	6	15
Pragmatism	12	24	12	12	30
Total	58	73	43	40	100

---

 

If an organisation places a larger emphasis on Taxonomy, Neutrality and EA Focus...

 

Area	DoDAF	FeaF	Zachman	TOGAF	PeaF
Taxonomy	20	20	50	30	30
Toolkit
Process
Reference Model
Cultural Guidance
Maturity Model
Business Focus
Governance
Neutrality	16	16	20	12	20
Time to Value
EA Focus	24	30	30	12	30
Pragmatism
Total	60	66	100	54	80

---

 

If an organisation places a larger emphasis on Taxonomy, Process and Reference Model...

 

Area	DoDAF	FeaF	Zachman	TOGAF	PeaF
Taxonomy	20	20	50	30	30
Toolkit
Process	20	30		30	30
Reference Model	50	50		30
Cultural Guidance
Maturity Model
Business Focus
Governance
Neutrality
Time to Value
EA Focus
Pragmatism
Total	90	100	50	90	60

We are always happy to hear your views and so if you wish to dispute or discuss any of these ratings, or if you wish to have access to an Excel spreadsheet that will allow you to apply your own weightings and see the results, please send an email to Info@PragmaticEA.com