/competitive-analyzer

name: competitive-analyzer
description: 'Competitive landscape analysis: Porter''s Five Forces, competitor discovery, feature/pricing matrices, positioning maps, moat assessment via WebSearch. Triggers on: "competitive analysis", "competitor comparison", "competitive landscape", "Porter''s Five Forces", "market positioning", "moat assessment", "defensibility analysis".'
metadata:
  version: 1.0.1
  complements: [market-analyzer, tavily, web-fetch]
  category: business
  tags: [competitive-analysis, market, porters-five-forces, positioning]
  difficulty: advanced
  phase: define

Competitive Analyzer

Systematic competitive landscape analysis: discovery, force analysis, feature comparison, pricing, positioning, and defensibility assessment.

When to use this skill vs. others

| Need | Skill | | --------------------------------------------------- | ------------------------------------- | | Analyze competitors, compare features, assess moats | **competitive-analyzer** (this skill) | | Market sizing, TAM/SAM/SOM, demand signals | market-analyzer | | General web research and data gathering | tavily / web-fetch |

Workflow

Phase 1: Competitor Discovery

Identify competitors across three tiers using WebSearch.

**Tier classification:**

• **Direct competitors** — Same solution to the same customer segment. Search: `"[product category] alternatives"`, `"[product] vs"`, `"best [category] tools 2024"`
• **Indirect competitors** — Different solution to the same underlying problem. Search: `"how to [solve problem] without [category]"`, adjacent category leaders
• **Potential competitors** — Adjacent players with capability and incentive to enter. Search: recent funding rounds, platform expansion announcements, acqui-hires

**Discovery sources:**

• Product Hunt: `site:producthunt.com [category]`
• G2: `site:g2.com [category] reviews`
• Capterra: `site:capterra.com [category]`
• Crunchbase: `site:crunchbase.com [category] funding`
• Industry reports and analyst coverage

**Output:** A competitor roster table:

| Competitor | Tier | Founded | Funding | HQ | Est. Revenue | Target Segment | | ---------- | ---- | ------- | ------- | --- | ------------ | -------------- |

Include 5-15 competitors. Fewer than 5 suggests the search was too narrow; more than 15 suggests the scope needs tightening.

Phase 2: Porter's Five Forces Assessment

Score each force 1-5 with supporting evidence. Reference `references/porters-five-forces.md` for scoring rubric and sub-criteria.

**1. Threat of New Entrants (1-5)**

• Capital requirements and startup costs
• Regulatory and compliance barriers
• Technology and IP barriers
• Brand loyalty and switching costs of incumbents
• Access to distribution channels
• Economies of scale advantages

**2. Supplier Power (1-5)**

• Number of available suppliers
• Uniqueness of supplier inputs
• Switching costs between suppliers
• Forward integration threat
• Dependence on key vendors (cloud, APIs, data)

**3. Buyer Power (1-5)**

• Buyer concentration relative to sellers
• Price sensitivity and transparency
• Switching costs for buyers
• Backward integration threat
• Availability of substitute information

**4. Threat of Substitutes (1-5)**

• Availability of alternative solutions
• Performance-to-price ratio of substitutes
• Buyer propensity to switch
• Switching costs to substitutes

**5. Competitive Rivalry (1-5)**

• Number and size distribution of competitors
• Industry growth rate
• Product differentiation level
• Exit barriers
• Fixed cost structure and capacity

**Synthesis:** Calculate overall industry attractiveness (weighted average of forces). Higher scores mean more competitive pressure, lower attractiveness.

Phase 3: Feature & Pricing Matrix

Build a comprehensive comparison. Reference `references/competitive-matrix.md` for structuring methodology.

**Feature comparison table:**

| Feature Category | Feature | Competitor A | Competitor B | Competitor C | Our Product | | ---------------- | --------- | ------------ | ------------ | ------------ | ------------ | | Core | Feature 1 | Full | Partial | None | Full | | Integration | API | REST | GraphQL | None | REST+GraphQL | | Support | SLA | 99.9% | 99.5% | None | 99.95% |

Use: Full / Partial / None / Superior (exceeds category standard)

**Feature analysis:**

• **Table stakes** — Features every competitor offers. Missing any = disqualifier.
• **Differentiators** — Features only 1-2 competitors offer. Potential positioning angles.
• **Gaps** — Features no competitor offers. Potential innovation opportunities.
• **Over-served** — Features with extensive investment but low customer value signal.

**Pricing comparison table:**

| Competitor | Model | Free Tier | Entry Price | Mid Tier | Enterprise | Billing | | ---------- | ------------ | --------- | ----------- | --------------- | ---------- | -------------- | | A | Subscription | Yes | $29/mo | $99/mo | Custom | Monthly/Annual | | B | Usage-based | Trial | $0.01/unit | Volume discount | Custom | Monthly |

**Pricing analysis:**

• Price-to-feature ratio positioning (value vs. premium)
• Pricing model trends in the category
• Customer segment alignment by price point

Phase 4: Positioning Map

Reference `references/positioning-analysis.md` for dimension selection and mapping methodology.

**Step 1: Dimension selection** Select the two dimensions most important to target customers. Common pairs:

• Price vs. Feature richness
• Ease of use vs. Power/flexibility
• SMB-focused vs. Enterprise-focused
• Vertical-specific vs. Horizontal/general

Validate dimension selection against customer research or publicly ava