competitive-analysis

/competitive-analysis -- Competitive Analysis

Analyze the competitive landscape for portfolio companies or acquisition targets using structured frameworks, multi-source data, and financial benchmarking.

Before executing, read _shared/plugin-context.md for Nexus plugin conventions.

Prerequisites

• Nexus MCP (optional): nexus_get_deal, nexus_search_market for deal and market data
• BigData.com MCP (optional): find_companies, bigdata_company_tearsheet for competitor profiles
• Manual fallback: Provide competitor names, financials, and market data manually

When to Use

• Evaluating competitive position of a PE target before investment committee
• Benchmarking a portfolio company against public and private peers
• Supporting the investment thesis section of a deal memo with competitive evidence
• Identifying competitive threats or moat erosion in portfolio company monitoring
• Preparing competitive intelligence for LP reporting on portfolio company progress
• Running a Porter's 5 Forces assessment as part of commercial due diligence

Framework: Porter's 5 Forces

Force	Assessment Dimensions	Risk Level
Rivalry Among Competitors	Market concentration, growth rate, switching costs, differentiation	High if HHI < 1800
Threat of New Entrants	Capital requirements, regulatory barriers, network effects	High if barriers low
Threat of Substitutes	Alternative products, price-performance ratio, buyer switching	Moderate if substitutes exist
Buyer Power	Customer concentration, price sensitivity, backward integration	High if top 3 > 30% revenue
Supplier Power	Supplier concentration, input differentiation, switching costs	High if sole-source

Workflow

Step 1: Define the Competitive Universe

Identify the company's primary market segment and all direct, indirect, and adjacent competitors. Use BigData.com MCP (find_companies) with SIC/NAICS codes to build the initial competitor list. Without MCP, provide competitor names and basic profiles manually.

Step 2: Pull Financial Benchmarks

For each competitor, extract key financial metrics using BigData.com MCP (bigdata_company_tearsheet). Build a comparison matrix: revenue, revenue growth, gross margin, EBITDA margin, headcount, funding/leverage.

Step 3: Run Porter's 5 Forces Assessment

Score each force on a 1-5 scale (1 = favorable, 5 = unfavorable for the target). Document supporting evidence for each score. Aggregate into a competitive intensity score.

Step 4: Build Competitive Feature Matrix

Create a capability comparison table. Score each cell: 3 = Leading, 2 = Parity, 1 = Lagging, 0 = Absent. Highlight defensible differentiation vs. vulnerabilities.

Step 5: Financial Benchmarking

Compare the target's financials against the competitor set. Calculate percentile rankings on key metrics. Flag significant under/outperformance.

Step 6: SWOT Synthesis

Synthesize findings into a structured SWOT. Every item must reference a named competitor or quantified metric -- no generic observations.

Step 7: Produce Report

Generate the structured deliverable for consumption by /deal-memo-writer or /investment-thesis-writer.

Sample Output

COMPETITIVE ANALYSIS -- AcmeTech Industrial SaaS
COMPETITIVE INTENSITY: MODERATE (Porter composite: 2.8/5.0)

PORTER'S 5 FORCES:
  Rivalry:          3.5/5  [HIGH]   -- 4 well-funded competitors
  New Entrants:     2.0/5  [MOD]    -- ERP lock-in raises switching costs
  Substitutes:      1.5/5  [LOW]    -- No credible substitute for MES
  Buyer Power:      3.0/5  [MOD]    -- Top 3 = 28% ARR; multi-year contracts
  Supplier Power:   2.0/5  [LOW]    -- Cloud infra easily substitutable

FINANCIAL BENCHMARKING (FY2025):
  Company         Rev($M)  Growth  GrossMargin  EBITDA%  NRR
  AcmeTech          26.3   22.1%    78.2%        12.4%   115%
  Robovate          41.0   38.0%    72.0%        -18%    118%
  Factori           18.5   15.0%    81.0%         8.0%   108%
  AcmeTech rank    2nd/4   3rd/4    2nd/4         1st/4  2nd/4

SWOT SUMMARY:
  S: 78% gross margin (best-in-class), 95% retention, deep ERP integrations
  W: 22% growth below Robovate (38%), smallest headcount in set
  O: Regulatory mandate pipeline driving demand; white space in mid-market
  T: Robovate's $85M war chest could accelerate enterprise capture

Data Types Reference

interface CompetitorProfile {
  name: string
  ticker?: string
  revenue: number
  revenueGrowth: number
  grossMargin: number
  ebitdaMargin: number
  headcount: number
  fundingStage: string
  lastValuation?: number
}

interface CompetitiveMatrix {
  target: CompetitorProfile
  competitors: CompetitorProfile[]
  porterScores: {
    rivalry: number          // 1-5 scale
    entrantThreat: number
    substituteThreat: number
    buyerPower: number
    supplierPower: number
    overallIntensity: number // weighted average
  }
  featureMatrix: Record<string, Record<string, number>>  // feature -> company -> score
}

Porter's 5 Forces Scoring Guide

Score	Label	Meaning
1.0	Very Favorable	Minimal competitive pressure
2.0	Favorable	Low competitive pressure
3.0	Moderate	Balanced competitive dynamics
4.0	Unfavorable	Significant competitive pressure
5.0	Very Unfavorable	Intense competitive pressure

Feature Matrix Scoring

Score	Label	Description
3	Leading	Best-in-class capability, clear differentiation
2	Parity	Competitive capability, no advantage
1	Lagging	Below competitors, vulnerability
0	Absent	Capability does not exist

Related Skills

• /deal-memo-writer -- Consumes competitive analysis for investment memorandum
• /deal-screener -- Screen deals with competitive positioning as a factor
• /portfolio-analyzer -- Portfolio monitoring with competitive context

Confidence Calibration

Apply three-pass calibration (conservative/neutral/optimistic) per _shared/plugin-context.md SteerConf protocol. Flag data gaps where competitor financials are estimated or unavailable.