Competitor Deep Analysis — Phase 1

Executive Summary

Competitor analysis is the intelligence layer that makes every subsequent phase actionable. Without knowing what the top-ranking competitors do, every recommendation is directionally blind. This phase profiles 3–5 competitors across 9 dimensions in enough depth that all subsequent phases can benchmark findings against real competitor data. Time investment: 45–90 minutes produces data that informs 20+ recommendations across the audit.

2025 competitive landscape shift: AI Overviews appear for 20–35% of local service queries — competitors who are cited by AIO have invisible traffic advantages that traditional ranking data doesn't show. This phase must audit AI visibility, not just organic rankings.

---

Tools for This Phase

Tool	Purpose	Cost
Ahrefs	Organic keywords, DR, referring domains, traffic estimate, top pages	Paid
SEMrush	Keyword gap, backlink audit, traffic analytics, page-level keywords	Paid
Moz	Domain Authority, spam score, top pages	Free/Paid
Google PageSpeed Insights	CWV: mobile score, LCP, INP, CLS per competitor	Free
Google Rich Results Test	Schema types implemented by competitor	Free
Google Search	Local pack positions, SERP features owned, featured snippets	Free
Google Maps / GBP	Review count, rating, GBP completeness, category	Free
ChatGPT / Perplexity / Gemini	AI visibility test — are competitors cited?	Free
BuiltWith	CMS, hosting, technology stack per competitor	Free
Majestic	Trust Flow / Citation Flow ratio, link profile quality	Paid

---

Step 1: Read Project Context

Read {AUDIT_DIR}/intake-data.md — business name, URL, services, location, competitor list.

If competitors not provided in intake, use this 3-search identification protocol:

1. Google: [primary service] [city] → note top 3 local pack + top 3 non-directory organic
2. Google: best [service] [city] → cross-reference, add new names
3. Google: [service] [city] reviews → identify any additional local leaders

Confirm each competitor:

• Actually ranks for target keywords in target city (not a national brand with one page)
• Has a website (not just a GBP listing)
• Competes on primary services (not just adjacent services)

Present findings: "I've identified these top competitors: [list]. Please confirm or swap any."

---

Step 2: Analyze Each Competitor Across All 9 Dimensions

For 3–5 competitors, systematically research each dimension. Do NOT guess — verify with web search, page fetch, and public data tools.

---

Dimension 1: Business Profile

Data Point	How to Find	Comp 1	Comp 2	Comp 3
Business type (independent/chain/franchise)	Website + Google Maps
Domain age	Whois / BuiltWith
Years in business	About page / GBP
Indexed pages (site:[domain])	Google search
Tech stack (CMS)	BuiltWith
Service areas (same/broader/narrower)	Website + GBP
# of locations	Google Maps search
Estimated team size	LinkedIn Company page

---

Dimension 2: Technical SEO Profile

CWV benchmarks (2025 — INP replaced FID March 2024):

Metric	Good	Comp 1	Comp 2	Comp 3	Client
Mobile PSI Score	> 70
LCP (mobile)	< 2.5s
INP (mobile)	< 200ms
CLS (mobile)	< 0.1
TTFB	< 800ms

Additional technical checks per competitor:

• HTTPS: valid SSL? ✅/❌
• Schema types (Google Rich Results Test): list all present
• URL structure: logical hierarchy? Keyword-inclusive slugs?
• Site architecture depth (service pages: 2-3 clicks from homepage = good)
• Mobile responsive: test at 375px viewport

---

Dimension 3: Content Strategy

For each competitor (Ahrefs → Site Explorer → Organic Pages → sort by traffic):

Data Point	Comp 1	Comp 2	Comp 3
Total pages estimated (site: count)
Service pages count
Location pages count
Blog posts count
Publishing frequency (last 10 posts dates)
Word count on top service page
Word count on blog posts
Unique content assets (tools, guides, calculators)
Local content (city guides, neighborhood pages)
FAQPage schema present on service pages
Content freshness (last updated on key pages)

Content depth benchmark (2025 HCS standards):

• Service page < 800 words = substandard
• Service page 1,200–2,000 words = competitive
• Blog post < 1,200 words = thin
• Pillar blog 2,500+ words = authoritative

---

Dimension 4: Keyword Strategy

From Ahrefs/SEMrush → Site Explorer → Organic Keywords:

Data Point	Comp 1	Comp 2	Comp 3
Estimated monthly organic traffic
Total organic keywords ranking
Top 5 keywords by traffic
"Near me" keyword rankings
Featured snippet ownership (count)
PAA (People Also Ask) presence
Question-format content for AIO
Long-tail service + location coverage

---

Dimension 5: Backlink & Authority Profile

Metric	Comp 1	Comp 2	Comp 3	Client	Gap
Domain Rating (DR) — Ahrefs
Domain Authority (DA) — Moz
Trust Flow (TF) — Majestic
Citation Flow (CF) — Majestic
TF:CF ratio (target ≥ 0.5)
Referring domains count
% from niche-relevant sites
Top 3 link sources
Citation directory depth

Link building pattern analysis:

• Where do their links come from? (industry directories / local news / guest posts / partnerships)
• Authoritative niche links client doesn't have?
• Local citation depth (how many directories listed?)

---

Dimension 6: Local SEO Profile

Data Point	Comp 1	Comp 2	Comp 3	Client
GBP star rating
GBP review count
Review velocity (estimated/month)
Local pack position (primary keyword)
GBP categories (primary + secondary)
GBP photos count
GBP posts active?
Q&A section populated?
Services listed in GBP?
NAP consistency (spot-check 3 directories)

GBP completeness benchmarks:

• 100+ photos = 1,065% more website clicks (Google data, 2024)
• Review count ≥ 50 + rating ≥ 4.5 = strong local pack signal
• 4.3+ stars required for local AIO citation (SparkToro 2025)

---

Dimension 7: AI Visibility (2025 Critical)

Test for each competitor across all AI platforms:

AI visibility test protocol:

Queries to test:
1. "Best [service] in [city]" (Google AIO + ChatGPT + Perplexity)
2. "[Competitor name] [city] — what are their services?" (Gemini + Perplexity)
3. "Who should I call for [problem] in [city]?" (ChatGPT + Google AIO)

Platform	Comp 1	Comp 2	Comp 3	Client
Google AIO (main service query)	Cited/Not	Cited/Not	Cited/Not	Cited/Not
ChatGPT (conversational)	Cited/Not	Cited/Not	Cited/Not	Cited/Not
Perplexity (local service)	Cited/Not	Cited/Not	Cited/Not	Cited/Not
Knowledge Panel (branded)	Yes/No	Yes/No	Yes/No	Yes/No
FAQPage schema (AIO trigger)	Yes/No	Yes/No	Yes/No	Yes/No

---

Dimension 8: Social Media Presence

Platform	Comp 1 Followers	Comp 2 Followers	Comp 3 Followers	Client Followers
Facebook
Instagram
YouTube
LinkedIn
TikTok

Qualitative assessment per competitor:

• Primary platform: [Facebook/Instagram/YouTube]
• Posts per month: [X]
• Estimated engagement: [High/Medium/Low]
• Before/after content: ✅/❌
• Reviews amplified on social: ✅/❌
• YouTube: channel size, video quality, embedded on website?

---

Dimension 9: SERP Feature Ownership

For top 10 shared target keywords:

SERP Feature	Comp 1	Comp 2	Comp 3	Client
Local Pack — keywords owned	[X/10]	[X/10]	[X/10]	[X/10]
Featured Snippets — keywords owned	[X]	[X]	[X]	[X]
PAA boxes — questions answered	[X]	[X]	[X]	[X]
Video Carousel	Yes/No	Yes/No	Yes/No	Yes/No
Image Pack	Yes/No	Yes/No	Yes/No	Yes/No
FAQ Rich Results	Yes/No	Yes/No	Yes/No	Yes/No
Knowledge Panel	Yes/No	Yes/No	Yes/No	Yes/No
Sitelinks (branded)	Yes/No	Yes/No	Yes/No	Yes/No

---

Competitor Scorecard

Rate each competitor 1–10 per dimension. Use as benchmark throughout audit:

Dimension	Client	Comp 1	Comp 2	Comp 3
1. Business Profile (maturity, size)
2. Technical SEO + CWV
3. Content Strategy + Depth
4. Keyword Strategy
5. Backlink Authority
6. Local SEO / GBP
7. AI Visibility (AIO, ChatGPT)
8. Social Media Presence
9. SERP Feature Ownership
TOTAL	/90	/90	/90	/90

---

Competitive Intelligence Analysis

Gap Table (Competitor Advantages → Client Action)

Gap	Competitor Advantage	Client Weakness	Difficulty	Priority
[gap 1]	[how top comp does it]	[what client lacks]	Easy/Med/Hard	H/M/L

Exploitable Opportunities (Client Stronger Than Competitors)

Areas where client has competitive advantage — amplify these:

1. [Strength]: [how to amplify aggressively]
2. [Strength]: [how to amplify aggressively]

Competitor Weaknesses to Exploit

Areas where ALL competitors are weak — first-mover advantage available:

1. [weakness]: [specific content/link/local opportunity]
2. [weakness]: [specific content/link/local opportunity]

Threats Assessment

What competitor advantages pose the biggest ranking risk?

Threat	Competitor	Risk Level	Defensive Action
[threat]	[comp name]	Critical/High/Med	[action]

---

Quick Wins from Competitor Research

Items that can be replicated from top competitors in < 30 days:

Win	Competitor Source	Action Required	Effort	Expected Impact
[win 1]	[comp]	[specific action]	[time]	[result]
[win 2]	[comp]	[specific action]	[time]	[result]
[win 3]	[comp]	[specific action]	[time]	[result]

---

Priority Matrix

Action	Impact (1–5)	Feasibility (1–5)	Priority	Effort
Identify 3+ competitors with specific URLs	5	5	25	15 min
Record GBP data (stars, reviews, categories)	5	5	25	20 min
Run CWV comparison (PageSpeed Insights ×4)	5	5	25	20 min
Test AI visibility (ChatGPT + Perplexity)	5	5	25	15 min
Ahrefs DR + traffic comparison	4	4	16	15 min
SERP feature ownership audit	4	4	16	20 min
Schema types audit (Rich Results Test)	4	5	20	15 min
Social media follower comparison	3	5	15	10 min

---

Output

Write complete profiles to {AUDIT_DIR}/competitor-profiles.md with YAML frontmatter:

---
skill: research/competitor-analysis
phase: 1
date: [YYYY-MM-DD]
business: [Business Name]
url: [URL]
score: N/A
competitors_analyzed: [X]
top_competitor: [name]
top_competitor_url: [url]
client_score: [X/90]
top_competitor_score: [X/90]
score_gap: [X]
---

Include:

• All 9 dimension tables (completed with real data — no placeholders)
• Competitor scorecard (client vs. all 3 competitors, /90 total)
• Gap table (top 10 gaps ordered by priority)
• Exploitable opportunities list (client strengths)
• Competitor weaknesses to exploit (first-mover opportunities)
• Threat assessment (risks to defend against)
• Quick wins list (top 5 replicable actions < 30 days)
• AI visibility comparison (AIO + ChatGPT + Perplexity per competitor)

This file is read by ALL 21 subsequent phases — every finding benchmarks against this data. Quality here multiplies throughout the entire audit.

Key consumers:

• All 21 phases — competitor data feeds every benchmark
• research/content-gaps — competitor content strategy informs gap analysis
• research/keyword-gaps — competitor organic keywords drive gap analysis
• cross-cutting/serp-trust-auditor — SERP feature ownership comparison
• cross-cutting/local-impact-auditor — GBP + local SEO competitor comparison