businessproduct-management
Competitive Analysis
Structured market research template for identifying competitors, analyzing positioning, comparing features, assessing strengths and weaknesses, and finding market opportunities.
competitive-analysismarket-researchpositioningstrategy
Works well with agents
Works well with skills
$ npx skills add The-AI-Directory-Company/(…) --skill competitive-analysisSKILL.md
Markdown
| 1 | |
| 2 | # Competitive Analysis |
| 3 | |
| 4 | ## Before you start |
| 5 | |
| 6 | Gather the following from the user: |
| 7 | |
| 8 | 1. **What is your product/service?** (One-sentence description and primary value proposition) |
| 9 | 2. **Who are your known competitors?** (Direct and indirect — list at least 3) |
| 10 | 3. **What market segment?** (Enterprise, SMB, consumer, developer tools, etc.) |
| 11 | 4. **What decision are you informing?** (Pricing, positioning, feature roadmap, GTM strategy, fundraising) |
| 12 | 5. **What data sources are available?** (Public websites, G2/Capterra reviews, pricing pages, job postings, SEC filings) |
| 13 | |
| 14 | If the user says "we have no competitors," push back: "Every product competes with something — even if it's spreadsheets, manual processes, or doing nothing. Who are customers using today to solve this problem?" |
| 15 | |
| 16 | ## Competitor identification |
| 17 | |
| 18 | Start by mapping the competitive landscape into three tiers. |
| 19 | |
| 20 | ``` |
| 21 | | Tier | Definition | Example | |
| 22 | |----------|--------------------------------------------------------|-----------------------| |
| 23 | | Direct | Same problem, same customer segment, same approach | Competitor A vs You | |
| 24 | | Indirect | Same problem, different approach or different segment | Spreadsheets, agencies| |
| 25 | | Adjacent | Different problem today, could expand into your space | Platform with overlap | |
| 26 | ``` |
| 27 | |
| 28 | List 3-5 direct competitors, 2-3 indirect, and 1-2 adjacent. For each, capture: |
| 29 | |
| 30 | ``` |
| 31 | | Competitor | Tier | Founded | Funding/Revenue | HQ | Est. Customers | |
| 32 | |---------------|----------|---------|-----------------|----------|----------------| |
| 33 | | Competitor A | Direct | 2019 | $50M Series B | SF, USA | ~5,000 SMBs | |
| 34 | | Competitor B | Direct | 2017 | $120M ARR | London | ~2,000 Ent. | |
| 35 | | Manual process| Indirect | N/A | N/A | N/A | Everyone else | |
| 36 | ``` |
| 37 | |
| 38 | ## Feature comparison matrix |
| 39 | |
| 40 | Compare features that matter for the purchase decision. Use a clear rating system. |
| 41 | |
| 42 | ``` |
| 43 | Rating: Y = Yes | P = Partial | N = No | ? = Unknown |
| 44 | |
| 45 | | Feature | Your Product | Comp A | Comp B | Comp C | |
| 46 | |---------------------|-------------|--------|--------|--------| |
| 47 | | Core feature 1 | Y | Y | P | N | |
| 48 | | Core feature 2 | Y | Y | Y | Y | |
| 49 | | Integration X | P | Y | N | Y | |
| 50 | | Self-serve onboard | Y | N | Y | N | |
| 51 | | Enterprise SSO | N | Y | Y | Y | |
| 52 | | API access | Y | Y | P | N | |
| 53 | ``` |
| 54 | |
| 55 | Weight features by importance to the target buyer. A feature your buyer does not care about is not a competitive advantage. |
| 56 | |
| 57 | ## Positioning analysis |
| 58 | |
| 59 | For each direct competitor, map their positioning using this template. |
| 60 | |
| 61 | ``` |
| 62 | ## [Competitor Name] |
| 63 | |
| 64 | Tagline: [From their homepage] |
| 65 | Target buyer: [Who they sell to — title, company size] |
| 66 | Primary value: [Their #1 claimed benefit] |
| 67 | Pricing model: [Free tier? Per seat? Usage-based?] |
| 68 | Key message: [Core narrative from marketing — "the X for Y" or "unlike Z, we..."] |
| 69 | Differentiator: [What they emphasize as unique] |
| 70 | Weakness signal: [Complaints from reviews, missing features, churn patterns] |
| 71 | ``` |
| 72 | |
| 73 | ## Strengths and weaknesses assessment |
| 74 | |
| 75 | Use a structured SWOT-style analysis per competitor. Focus on observable evidence, not speculation. |
| 76 | |
| 77 | ``` |
| 78 | ## [Competitor Name] — Assessment |
| 79 | |
| 80 | Strengths (what they do well): |
| 81 | - [Evidence-backed strength — cite source: G2 review, pricing page, job posting] |
| 82 | - [Evidence-backed strength] |
| 83 | |
| 84 | Weaknesses (where they fall short): |
| 85 | - [Evidence-backed weakness — cite source] |
| 86 | - [Evidence-backed weakness] |
| 87 | |
| 88 | Opportunities for you (gaps they leave open): |
| 89 | - [Specific gap you can exploit] |
| 90 | |
| 91 | Threats from them (risks to your position): |
| 92 | - [Specific risk — e.g., they're hiring for your feature area] |
| 93 | ``` |
| 94 | |
| 95 | ## Opportunity mapping |
| 96 | |
| 97 | Synthesize the analysis into actionable opportunities ranked by impact and feasibility. |
| 98 | |
| 99 | ``` |
| 100 | | Opportunity | Evidence | Impact | Effort | |
| 101 | |--------------------------------------|---------------------------------------|--------|--------| |
| 102 | | Underserved SMB segment | Comp A/B focus on enterprise only | High | Medium | |
| 103 | | No competitor offers self-serve | All require demo/sales call | High | Low | |
| 104 | | Integration gap with [Tool X] | Top-requested in G2 reviews | Medium | Low | |
| 105 | | Price point gap at $X-Y/month | Comp A is $100+, no mid-tier option | High | Medium | |
| 106 | ``` |
| 107 | |
| 108 | ## Quality checklist |
| 109 | |
| 110 | Before delivering the analysis, verify: |
| 111 | |
| 112 | - [ ] At least 3 direct competitors are profiled with evidence, not just names |
| 113 | - [ ] Feature comparison is weighted by buyer importance, not just feature count |
| 114 | - [ ] Positioning analysis uses actual competitor messaging, not your interpretation |
| 115 | - [ ] Weaknesses cite observable evidence (reviews, missing features), not assumptions |
| 116 | - [ ] Opportunities are ranked by impact and effort |
| 117 | - [ ] The analysis answers the specific decision the user needs to make |
| 118 | - [ ] Sources are noted (pricing pages, review sites, job boards, press releases) |
| 119 | |
| 120 | ## Common mistakes |
| 121 | |
| 122 | - **Listing features without weighting.** Having 50 features vs. a competitor's 30 means nothing if the buyer only cares about 5. Weight the comparison by what drives purchase decisions. |
| 123 | - **Relying on competitor marketing copy as truth.** Their homepage says "enterprise-grade security." Their G2 reviews say "no SOC 2." Use third-party evidence, not self-reported claims. |
| 124 | - **Ignoring indirect competitors.** The biggest competitor for most products is "do nothing" or "use a spreadsheet." Include the status quo in your analysis. |
| 125 | - **Analysis without actionable recommendations.** A competitive matrix that doesn't lead to "so we should do X" is an academic exercise. End with ranked opportunities tied to decisions. |
| 126 | - **One-time snapshot instead of ongoing tracking.** Competitors change pricing, ship features, and pivot positioning. Schedule quarterly updates to the analysis. |
| 127 |