Commonly-used-high-value-skills competitive-teardown
Run a structured competitive analysis on any product or company. Synthesizes data from pricing pages, app store reviews, job postings, SEO signals, and social media into actionable insights: feature matrices, SWOT, positioning maps, UX audits, and a stakeholder presentation template.
git clone https://github.com/seaworld008/Commonly-used-high-value-skills
T=$(mktemp -d) && git clone --depth=1 https://github.com/seaworld008/Commonly-used-high-value-skills "$T" && mkdir -p ~/.claude/skills && cp -r "$T/skills/product-design/competitive-teardown" ~/.claude/skills/seaworld008-commonly-used-high-value-skills-competitive-teardown-149be1 && rm -rf "$T"
skills/product-design/competitive-teardown/SKILL.mdCompetitive Teardown
Tier: POWERFUL
Category: Product Team
Domain: Competitive Intelligence, Product Strategy, Market Analysis
Overview
Run a structured competitive analysis on any product or company. Synthesizes data from pricing pages, app store reviews, job postings, SEO signals, and social media into actionable insights: feature matrices, SWOT, positioning maps, UX audits, and a stakeholder presentation template.
Core Capabilities
- Feature comparison matrix (scored 1-5 across 12 dimensions)
- Pricing model analysis (per-seat, usage-based, flat rate)
- SWOT analysis
- Positioning map (2x2 matrix)
- UX audit (onboarding, key workflows, mobile)
- Content strategy gap analysis
- Action item roadmap (quick wins / medium-term / strategic)
- Stakeholder presentation template
When to Use
- Before a product strategy or roadmap session
- When a competitor launches a major feature or pricing change
- Quarterly competitive review
- Before a sales pitch where you need battle card data
- When entering a new market segment
Data Collection Guide
1. Website Analysis
# Scrape pricing page structure curl -s "https://competitor.com/pricing" | \ python3 -c " import sys from html.parser import HTMLParser class TextExtractor(HTMLParser): def __init__(self): super().__init__() self.text = [] def handle_data(self, data): if data.strip(): self.text.append(data.strip()) p = TextExtractor() p.feed(sys.stdin.read()) print('\n'.join(p.text[:200])) " # Check changelog / release notes curl -s "https://competitor.com/changelog" | grep -i "added\|new\|launched\|improved" # Feature list from sitemap curl -s "https://competitor.com/sitemap.xml" | grep -oP '(?<=<loc>)[^<]+' | head -50
Key things to capture from the website:
- Pricing tiers and price points
- Feature lists per tier
- Primary CTA and messaging
- Case studies / customer logos (signals ICP)
- Integration logos
- Trust signals (certifications, compliance badges)
2. App Store Reviews
# iOS reviews via RSS curl "https://itunes.apple.com/rss/customerreviews/id=[APP_ID]/sortBy=mostRecent/json" | \ python3 -c " import sys, json data = json.load(sys.stdin) entries = data.get('feed', {}).get('entry', []) for e in entries[1:]: # skip first (app metadata) rating = e.get('im:rating', {}).get('label', '?') title = e.get('title', {}).get('label', '') content = e.get('content', {}).get('label', '') print(f'[{rating}] {title}: {content[:200]}') " # Google Play via scraping (use playwright or a reviews API) # Categorize reviews into: praise / feature requests / bugs / UX complaints
Review sentiment categories:
- Praise → what users love (defend / strengthen these)
- Feature requests → unmet needs (opportunity gaps)
- Bugs → quality signals
- UX complaints → friction points you can beat them on
3. Job Postings (Team Size & Tech Stack Signals)
# Search LinkedIn / Greenhouse / Lever / Workable import requests # Example: scrape Greenhouse job board def get_jobs(company_token): r = requests.get(f"https://boards-api.greenhouse.io/v1/boards/{company_token}/jobs") return r.json().get('jobs', []) jobs = get_jobs("competitor-name") departments = {} for job in jobs: dept = job.get('departments', [{}])[0].get('name', 'Unknown') departments[dept] = departments.get(dept, 0) + 1 print("Team breakdown by open roles:") for dept, count in sorted(departments.items(), key=lambda x: -x[1]): print(f" {dept}: {count} open roles")
Signals from job postings:
- Engineering volume → scaling vs. consolidating
- Specific tech mentions → stack (React/Vue, Postgres/Mongo, AWS/GCP)
- Sales/CS ratio → product-led vs. sales-led motion
- Data/ML roles → upcoming AI features
- Compliance roles → regulatory expansion
4. SEO Analysis
# Organic keyword gap (using Ahrefs/Semrush API or free alternatives) # Ubersuggest, SpyFu, or SimilarWeb free tiers # Quick domain overview via Moz free API curl "https://moz.com/api/free/v2/url-metrics?targets[]=competitor.com" \ -H "x-moz-token: YOUR_TOKEN" # Check their blog topics (sitemap) curl "https://competitor.com/sitemap-posts.xml" | \ grep -oP '(?<=<loc>)[^<]+' | \ sed 's|.*/||' | \ tr '-' ' '
SEO signals to capture:
- Top 20 organic keywords (intent: informational / navigational / commercial)
- Domain Authority / backlink count
- Blog publishing cadence and topics
- Which pages rank (product pages vs. blog vs. docs)
5. Social Media Sentiment
# Twitter/X search (via API v2) curl "https://api.twitter.com/2/tweets/search/recent?query=%40competitor+OR+%22competitor+name%22&max_results=100" \ -H "Authorization: Bearer $TWITTER_BEARER_TOKEN" | \ python3 -c " import sys, json data = json.load(sys.stdin) tweets = data.get('data', []) for t in tweets: print(t['text'][:150]) "
Scoring Rubric (12 Dimensions, 1-5)
| # | Dimension | 1 (Weak) | 3 (Average) | 5 (Best-in-class) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Features | Core only, many gaps | Solid coverage | Comprehensive + unique |
| 2 | Pricing | Confusing / overpriced | Market-rate, clear | Transparent, flexible, fair |
| 3 | UX | Confusing, high friction | Functional | Delightful, minimal friction |
| 4 | Performance | Slow, unreliable | Acceptable | Fast, high uptime |
| 5 | Docs | Sparse, outdated | Decent coverage | Comprehensive, searchable |
| 6 | Support | Email only, slow | Chat + email | 24/7, great response |
| 7 | Integrations | 0-5 integrations | 6-25 | 26+ or deep ecosystem |
| 8 | Security | No mentions | SOC2 claimed | SOC2 Type II, ISO 27001 |
| 9 | Scalability | No enterprise tier | Mid-market ready | Enterprise-grade |
| 10 | Brand | Generic, unmemorable | Decent positioning | Strong, differentiated |
| 11 | Community | None | Forum / Slack | Active, vibrant community |
| 12 | Innovation | No recent releases | Quarterly | Frequent, meaningful |
Feature Comparison Matrix Template
## Feature Comparison Matrix | Feature | [YOUR PRODUCT] | [COMPETITOR A] | [COMPETITOR B] | [COMPETITOR C] | |---------|---------------|----------------|----------------|----------------| | **Core Features** | | | | | | [Feature 1] | 5 | 4 | 3 | 2 | | [Feature 2] | 3 | 5 | 4 | 3 | | [Feature 3] | 4 | 3 | 5 | 1 | | **Pricing** | | | | | | Free tier | Yes | No | Limited | Yes | | Starting price | $X/mo | $Y/mo | $Z/mo | $W/mo | | Enterprise | Custom | Custom | No | Custom | | **Platform** | | | | | | Web app | 5 | 5 | 4 | 3 | | Mobile iOS | 4 | 3 | 5 | 2 | | Mobile Android | 4 | 3 | 4 | 2 | | API | 5 | 4 | 3 | 1 | | **TOTAL SCORE** | **XX/60** | **XX/60** | **XX/60** | **XX/60** | ### Score Legend: 5=Best-in-class, 4=Strong, 3=Average, 2=Below average, 1=Weak/Missing
Pricing Analysis Template
## Pricing Analysis ### Model Comparison | Competitor | Model | Entry | Mid | Enterprise | Free Trial | |-----------|-------|-------|-----|------------|------------| | [Yours] | Per-seat | $X | $Y | Custom | 14 days | | [Comp A] | Usage-based | $X | $Y | Custom | 30 days | | [Comp B] | Flat rate | $X | - | Custom | No | | [Comp C] | Freemium | $0 | $Y | Custom | Freemium | ### Pricing Intelligence - **Price leader:** [Competitor] at $X/mo for comparable features - **Value leader:** [Competitor] - most features per dollar - **Premium positioning:** [Competitor] - 2x market price, targets enterprise - **Our position:** [Describe where you sit and why] ### Pricing Opportunity - [e.g., "No competitor offers usage-based pricing — opportunity for SMBs"] - [e.g., "All competitors charge per seat — flat rate could disrupt"] - [e.g., "Freemium tier could capture top-of-funnel the others miss"]
SWOT Analysis Template
## SWOT Analysis: [COMPETITOR NAME] ### Strengths - [e.g., "3x more integrations than any competitor"] - [e.g., "Strong brand recognition in enterprise segment"] - [e.g., "Best-in-class mobile UX (4.8 App Store rating)"] ### Weaknesses - [e.g., "No free tier — losing top-of-funnel to freemium players"] - [e.g., "Pricing complexity confuses buyers (3 pages of pricing)"] - [e.g., "App store reviews cite slow support response"] ### Opportunities (for US) - [e.g., "They have no presence in DACH — our opening"] - [e.g., "Their API is limited — power users frustrated"] - [e.g., "Recent layoffs in engineering suggest slower roadmap"] ### Threats (to Us) - [e.g., "Well-funded — can undercut pricing for 12+ months"] - [e.g., "Strong channel partner network we don't have"] - [e.g., "Announced AI feature launching Q2 — may close our gap"]
Positioning Map
HIGH VALUE | [COMP A] | [YOURS] (feature-rich, | (balanced, expensive) | mid-price) | COMPLEX ────────────┼──────────────── SIMPLE | [COMP B] | [COMP C] (complex, | (simple, cheap) | cheap) | LOW VALUE Axes: X = Complexity (Simple ↔ Complex) Y = Value delivered (Low ↔ High) Bubble size = market share or funding
UX Audit Checklist
## UX Audit: [COMPETITOR] ### Onboarding Flow - [ ] Time to first value (TTFV): _____ minutes - [ ] Steps to activation: _____ - [ ] Email verification required? Yes / No - [ ] Credit card required for trial? Yes / No - [ ] Onboarding checklist / wizard? Yes / No - [ ] Empty state quality: 1-5 ___ ### Key Workflows | Workflow | Steps | Friction Points | Our Score | Their Score | |----------|-------|-----------------|-----------|-------------| | [Core action 1] | X | [notes] | X/5 | X/5 | | [Core action 2] | X | [notes] | X/5 | X/5 | | [Core action 3] | X | [notes] | X/5 | X/5 | ### Mobile Experience - iOS rating: _____ / 5 ([X] reviews) - Android rating: _____ / 5 ([X] reviews) - Mobile feature parity: Full / Partial / Web-only - Top mobile complaint: _____ - Top mobile praise: _____ ### Navigation & IA - [ ] Global search available? - [ ] Keyboard shortcuts? - [ ] Breadcrumbs / clear navigation? - [ ] Help / docs accessible in-app?
Action Items Template
## Action Items from Competitive Teardown ### Quick Wins (0-4 weeks, low effort, high impact) - [ ] [e.g., "Add G2/Capterra badges — competitor displays these prominently"] - [ ] [e.g., "Publish integration page — competitor's ranks for '[product] integrations'"] - [ ] [e.g., "Add comparison landing page targeting '[competitor] alternative' keyword"] ### Medium-Term (1-3 months, moderate effort) - [ ] [e.g., "Launch free tier to capture top-of-funnel competitor is missing"] - [ ] [e.g., "Improve onboarding — competitor's TTFV is 4min vs our 12min"] - [ ] [e.g., "Build [integration] — #1 request in competitor app store reviews"] ### Strategic (3-12 months, high effort) - [ ] [e.g., "Enter DACH market — competitor has no German localization"] - [ ] [e.g., "Build API v2 — power users leaving competitor for API limitations"] - [ ] [e.g., "Achieve SOC2 Type II — competitor uses this as primary enterprise objection handler"]
Stakeholder Presentation Template
# [COMPETITOR NAME] Teardown ## Competitive Intelligence Report — [DATE] --- ### Executive Summary (1 slide) - Overall threat level: LOW / MEDIUM / HIGH / CRITICAL - Their biggest strength vs. us: [1 sentence] - Our biggest opportunity vs. them: [1 sentence] - Recommended priority action: [1 sentence] --- ### Market Position (1 slide) [Insert 2x2 positioning map] --- ### Feature Scorecard (1 slide) [Insert 12-dimension radar chart or table] Overall: [COMPETITOR] = XX/60 | [YOURS] = XX/60 --- ### Pricing Analysis (1 slide) [Insert pricing comparison table] Key insight: [1-2 sentences] --- ### UX Highlights (1 slide) What they do better: [3 bullets] Where we beat them: [3 bullets] --- ### Voice of Customer (1 slide) Top 3 complaints about [COMPETITOR] from reviews: 1. [Quote or paraphrase] 2. [Quote or paraphrase] 3. [Quote or paraphrase] --- ### Our Action Plan (1 slide) Quick wins: [2-3 bullets] Medium-term: [2-3 bullets] Strategic: [1-2 bullets] --- ### Appendix - Raw feature matrix - Full review analysis - Job posting breakdown - SEO keyword comparison
Common Pitfalls
- Recency bias - Pricing pages change; always date-stamp your data
- Feature theater - A competitor may list a feature that barely works; check reviews
- Vanity metrics - "10,000 integrations" via Zapier != 10,000 native integrations
- Ignoring momentum - A weaker competitor growing 3x YoY is a bigger threat than a stronger one shrinking
- Only comparing features - Brand perception and community often matter more than features
- Single-source analysis - Website alone misses the real user experience; always add reviews
Best Practices
- Run teardowns quarterly; competitors move fast
- Assign a DRI (directly responsible individual) for each major competitor
- Build a "battle card" 1-pager per competitor for sales to use
- Track competitor job postings monthly as a leading indicator of product direction
- Screenshot pricing pages — they change and you want the history
- Include a "what we copied from them" section internally — intellectual honesty builds better products