his study aimed to examine the correlations between the agroecological status of farms and their viability in agro-sylvo-pastoral systems located in the savannah areas of West Africa. The methodology is based on farm surveys (to assess agroecological farm status) and on farmers’ focus group discussions (to assess viability at the farm level). Agroecological farm status was established by considering 15 agricultural practices: 4 on by-products recycling; 4 on soil protection; 4 on industrial inputs limitation; 2 on smart use of natural resources; 1 on cropping diversification; An agroecological (Ae) scoring system was used to establish an Ae ranking by farm type. Farm level viability was established by men and women farmers’ focus group discussions: Inventory of viability enhancing and viability-weakening factors; Rating intensity of each viability factor. A scoring system was used to establish Viability ranking by farm type. Four iconic farm types were considered: Small crop-oriented (T1); Medium-size crop-oriented (T2); Large crop-livestock oriented (T3); Livestock-oriented (T4). The findings demonstrate that the viability of agro-sylvo-pastoral systems is not solely dependent on their agroecological status. The ranking of the four farm types, from the first to the last position, is T4, T2, T3, and T1 for agroecology; and T2, T3, T4 and T1 for viability. Our study reveals that T1 farms in Koumbia are not highly agroecological or highly viable. Similarly, farms with the largest cultivated areas (T3) and herds (T4) are not the most agroecological or viable. The best balance between agroecology and viability is struck by T2 farms. We recommend promoting the development of T2 farms that demonstrate the best congruence between agroecology and viability as a model for T1, T3, and T4 farmers. Depending on the agroecological status, one farm could be more or less viable.