competitive-analyzer

Skill: Competitive Analyzer

Before building, map. This skill transforms "I know competitors exist" into an actionable grid that reveals real gaps — the unresolved frustrations that existing alternatives systematically create for your ICP.

Output feeds directly into positioning-statement and product-pricing-model.

When to Use

• After /solo:build discover (problem validated, now look at the market)
• Before positioning-statement (positioning is defined against alternatives, not in a vacuum)
• When someone says "but [X] already does that"

---

Process

Step 1: Identify Alternatives (Not "Competitors")

Key distinction: Founders think in terms of direct competitors. Users think in terms of alternatives — what they would do instead of your product, including doing nothing, using Excel, or cobbling together a manual workflow.

Four categories to map:

Category	Description	Example
Direct competitors	Do exactly the same thing	Identifiable products
Functional substitutes	Solve the same problem differently	"We use Notion for that"
Upstream alternatives	Avoid the problem rather than solve it	"We don't have that process yet"
The status quo	Change nothing, keep hacking it together	Excel, email, sticky notes

Discovery method (standalone):

1. G2/Capterra/Product Hunt reviews for the problem terms
2. Reddit: [problem] subreddit → see what people recommend
3. "vs" and "alternatives" pages: [obvious solution] alternatives
4. 1-3 star reviews of existing products — the real gold mine

With ~~search connected: automated queries across all these channels.

Target: 5 to 8 alternatives (more = analysis that loses depth).

---

Step 2: Comparison Grid

For each alternative, score on 5 key dimensions. Dimensions vary by domain — propose the most relevant ones and confirm before filling in.

Generic starting dimensions:

Dimension	What to evaluate
Ease of adoption	Setup time, learning curve, onboarding friction
Functional depth	Does it truly cover the full use case end-to-end
Price / accessibility	Pricing model, real cost at actual usage
Integrations	Fits into existing workflow
Support / community	Docs, support quality, active user base

Output format:

## Comparison Grid: [Domain]

| Alternative | Ease | Depth | Price | Integrations | Support | Summary |
|-------------|------|-------|-------|-------------|---------|---------|
| [Competitor A] | ⭐⭐⭐ | ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐ | 💰💰💰 | ⭐⭐ | ⭐⭐⭐ | Strong on depth, weak on adoption |
| [Competitor B] | ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐ | ⭐⭐ | 💰 | ⭐⭐⭐⭐ | ⭐⭐⭐⭐ | Easy but shallow |
| Status quo (manual) | ⭐⭐⭐⭐ | ⭐ | Free | — | — | Always the most underestimated alternative |
| **[Your product]** | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | *What you want to claim* |

---

Step 3: Value Matrix

The grid says what, the matrix says why it matters. Identify the factors the industry competes on by default, and find what nobody does.

## Value Matrix

### What everyone does (table stakes)
— No differentiation possible here
- [Factor 1]
- [Factor 2]

### What some do well (current differentiators)
— Your product must pick a side
- [Factor A] → [Competitor X] dominates
- [Factor B] → [Competitor Y] dominates

### What nobody really does (the gap)
— Positioning opportunity
- [Gap 1]: [why it matters to the ICP]
- [Gap 2]: [why it matters to the ICP]

### What you can eliminate
— What competitors offer but your ICP doesn't need
- [Unnecessary feature / complexity]

---

Step 4: Frustration Analysis

The real gold mine. Not what products do — what users say when things don't work.

Sources:

• 1-3 star reviews on G2, Capterra, App Store
• Reddit posts "I switched from X because..."
• Competitor "vs" pages
• Negative Product Hunt comments

## Recurring Frustrations

### [Competitor A]
- "Too complex to set up" (x[N] mentions)
- "[Feature Y] doesn't work as expected" (x[N])

### [Competitor B]
- "Pricing explodes at scale" (x[N])
- "No integration with [tool]" (x[N])

### Status quo
- "Losing time on [manual task]" (x[N])
- "Too many human errors" (x[N])

### Cross-cutting themes (unresolved by anyone)
1. [Theme 1] — present in X/Y alternatives → real opportunity
2. [Theme 2]

---

Step 5: Positioning Synthesis

## Synthesis: Where to Position

**The market competes on:** [2-3 dominant factors]

**The unaddressed gap:** [What nobody does well for the target ICP]

**Suggested positioning:**
"For [specific ICP], who are tired of [main frustration],
[product name] is the [category] that [addresses the gap],
unlike [alternatives] which [common limitation]."

**Risks:** [What could invalidate this positioning]

Direct brief for positioning-statement.

---

Save

data/1-Projets/[project]/competitive-analysis-[date].md

Integration Points

• /solo:build validate: called as the second validation step
• positioning-statement: consumes the synthesis and value matrix
• product-pricing-model: uses the competitive price grid to calibrate pricing
• landing-page-builder: frustrations become objections to address in the FAQ

References

• references/feature-gap-matrix.md: grid template + scoring guide
• references/alternatives-audit.md: method for extracting frustrations from reviews