This paper quantitatively compares five demand response (DR) approaches for waterbeds using simulation. The approaches enable privacy by design with a local control and contribute to the planning phase of the electricity network's balancing process. Approaches are assessed by their energy consumption, their ability to shift power consumption to times of high availability, and the effort of realization and configuration. Load steps were identified as a risk for power network stability. A classification of DR methods, based on the position of their contribution within the electricity network's balancing process, is used to distinguish our approach from the DR approaches found in the literature.
