Configurational comparative methods (CCMs) and logic regression methods (LRMs) are two families of exploratory methods that employ very different techniques to analyze data generated by causal structures featuring conjunctural causation and equifinality. Aiming for the same by different means carries a substantive synergy potential, which, however, remains untapped so far because representatives of the two frameworks know little of each other. The purpose of this article is to change that. We first level the field for readers from both backgrounds by providing brief introductions to the basic ideas behind CCMs and LRMs. Then, we carve out the strengths and weaknesses of the two method families by benchmarking their performance when applied to binary data under a variety of different discovery contexts. It turns out that CCMs and LRMs have complementary strengths and weaknesses. This creates various promising avenues for cross-validation.
Keywords: Coincidence Analysis; INUS causation; component causation; conjunctural causation; cross-validation; equifinality; multi-method research.