top of page

The Difference Between a Proof of Concept and a Minimum Viable Product

the difference between poc and mvp

*The information contained in this article is provided for educational purposes only, and should not be construed as advice on any subject matter.

In software development and innovation, the journey from ideation to execution is often marked by critical phases, each serving a distinct purpose.

Two such phases that are commonly misunderstood or conflated are the Proof of Concept (PoC) and the development of a product, particularly a Minimum Viable Product (MVP). While they share similarities in their pursuit of innovation, understanding their disparities is paramount for steering projects in the right direction.

Defining Proof of Concept (PoC) and Minimum Viable Product (MVP)

At the outset, it's essential to delineate the fundamental characteristics of a PoC and a product. A Proof of Concept is essentially a preliminary project aimed at validating the technical feasibility of a novel idea or concept. It's a concentrated effort focused on demonstrating the core functionalities and technical viability of the proposed solution without delving deeply into user experience considerations. In contrast, a product, typically in the form of an MVP, is a tangible manifestation of the idea, equipped with essential features, and intended for market release. The primary objective of an MVP is to gather user feedback, validate assumptions, and iterate based on real-world usage.

Purpose and Scope

The disparity between a PoC and a product becomes apparent when examining their purpose and scope. A PoC is chiefly concerned with answering fundamental questions surrounding the feasibility of the idea. It aims to ascertain whether the proposed solution addresses a genuine problem, the suitability of chosen technologies, estimated timeframes, budget constraints, and stakeholder feedback. Conversely, a product, particularly an MVP, shifts the focus towards user-centric aspects such as usability, desirability, and market fit. It serves as a vehicle for validating the product's value proposition in the real world and refining features based on user interactions and feedback.

Technical Validation vs. User Validation

Another crucial distinction lies in the validation pursued by each phase. A PoC primarily seeks to validate the technical aspects of the proposed solution. It aims to demonstrate that the core functionalities can be implemented feasibly using chosen technologies. This validation is instrumental in attracting potential investors or stakeholders by showcasing the technical merit of the idea. On the other hand, a product like an MVP prioritizes user validation. It aims to release a functional solution into the market, gather user feedback, and iterate based on insights gleaned from real-world usage. User validation is integral to ensuring that the product resonates with its intended audience and fulfills their needs effectively.

Pros and Cons

Proof of Concept (PoC)


1. Technical Feasibility: Validates the technical viability of the idea, mitigating risks associated with large-scale development.

2. Attracting Investors: Demonstrates the potential of the idea to investors or stakeholders, facilitating fundraising efforts.

3. Iterative Exploration: Allows for experimentation with different technologies, approaches, and concepts before committing to full-scale development.


1. Limited Scope: Focuses primarily on technical aspects, neglecting user experience considerations and market validation.

2. Resource Intensive: Requires significant time, effort, and resources to develop a proof of concept, potentially diverting attention from other critical tasks.

3. Risk of Misinterpretation: This may lead to misinterpretation of the project's scope or potential, especially if stakeholders mistake a PoC for a final product.

Minimum Viable Product (MVP)


1. User Feedback: Enables early engagement with users, allowing for iterative refinement based on real-world usage and feedback.

2. Market Validation: Validates the product's value proposition in the market, reducing the risk of developing features or functionalities that users do not find valuable.

3. Iterative Development: Facilitates an iterative development process, allowing for continuous improvement based on user insights and market trends.


1. Resource Constraints: Limited resources may result in the release of an MVP with fewer features or suboptimal user experience, potentially impacting initial user adoption.

2. High Expectations: Users may have high expectations for the MVP, expecting a fully polished product rather than understanding its experimental nature.

3. Time to Market: Developing and iterating on an MVP can take time, delaying the product's entry into the market and potentially giving competitors an advantage.


In summary, while both a Proof of Concept and a product like an MVP play crucial roles in the journey from ideation to execution, they serve distinct purposes and cater to different aspects of innovation. A PoC lays the groundwork by validating the technical feasibility of an idea. In contrast, a product, particularly an MVP, focuses on delivering a functional solution to users for validation and iterative refinement. Understanding these disparities and considering the pros and cons of each approach is essential for steering projects toward successful outcomes and maximizing their impact in the market.

If you're an angel investor, family office, VC fund manager, or startup enthusiast, explore a diverse range of opportunities from SaaS, EV, BioTech, and more here

Founders and entrepreneurs looking to raise capital? We'd love to see what you're building! Submit a pitch


Commenting has been turned off.
bottom of page