competitive-teardown by borghei/claude-skills
npx skills add https://github.com/borghei/claude-skills --skill competitive-teardown生产级竞争对手分析框架,涵盖6个情报来源的系统性数据收集、12维评分体系、功能对比矩阵、SWOT分析、定价模型解构、用户体验审计方法和战略行动计划。生成可用于战斗卡片的输出成果和利益相关者演示模板。
| 触发条件 | 拆解范围 |
|---|---|
| 产品战略或路线图会议前 | 全面拆解(2-4个竞争对手) |
| 竞争对手发布主要功能或定价变更 | 聚焦拆解(1个竞争对手,仅更新相关维度) |
| 季度竞争审查 | 更新现有拆解 + 趋势分析 |
| 销售演示前(需要战斗卡片) | 单一竞争对手战斗卡片 |
| 进入新市场细分 | 细分市场现有参与者的全面拆解 |
广告位招租
在这里展示您的产品或服务
触达数万 AI 开发者,精准高效
| 数据点 | 查找位置 | 信号意义 |
|---|---|---|
| 定价层级和价格点 | 定价页面 | 市场定位、目标细分 |
| 各层级功能列表 | 定价 + 功能页面 | 打包策略 |
| 主要行动号召和消息传递 | 首页横幅 | 定位和目标客户画像 |
| 案例研究和客户标识 | 案例研究页面、首页 | 目标细分、社会认同 |
| 集成合作伙伴 | 集成页面 | 生态系统战略 |
| 信任信号 | 页脚、安全页面 | 企业就绪度 |
| 招聘信息 | 招聘页面、LinkedIn | 发展方向、技术栈 |
平台: G2, Capterra, TrustRadius, App Store, Product Hunt
| 类别 | 追踪内容 | 战略价值 |
|---|---|---|
| 赞扬主题 | 用户喜爱什么(前5大主题) | 他们的可防御优势 |
| 抱怨主题 | 用户讨厌什么(前5大主题) | 你的机会 |
| 功能请求 | 用户想要但尚未拥有的功能 | 产品路线图差距 |
| 切换提及 | 用户离开竞争对手的原因 | 竞争性迁移路径 |
| 评分趋势 | 季度环比评分变化 | 改善或下降 |
样本量目标: 每个竞争对手50+条评价以获得可靠主题。
| 信号 | 含义 |
|---|---|
| 大量工程招聘 | 产品投资、规模扩张 |
| AI/ML职位 | 即将推出AI功能 |
| 销售团队扩张 | 向上游市场或地理扩张 |
| 客户成功职位 | 留存关注、企业级业务 |
| 合规/法律职位 | 监管扩张 |
| 招聘减少 | 成本削减、潜在收缩 |
| 指标 | 工具 | 战略价值 |
|---|---|---|
| 前20个自然关键词 | Ahrefs, SEMrush, GSC | 内容战略和目标定位 |
| 域名权威 | Ahrefs, Moz | 品牌实力 |
| 博客发布频率 | 手动检查 | 内容投资水平 |
| 排名页面(产品 vs 博客 vs 文档) | Ahrefs | 流量构成 |
| 平台 | 追踪内容 |
|---|---|
| Twitter/X | 产品公告、客户赞扬、抱怨 |
| 真实评价、对比讨论 | |
| 思想领导力、招聘信号、员工数量 | |
| 社区论坛 | 功能请求、变通方案、高级用户模式 |
| Discord/Slack | 社区规模、参与度 |
| 来源 | 可用数据 |
|---|---|
| Crunchbase | 融资、估值、投资者、员工数量 |
| 员工数量趋势(增长代理指标) | |
| 公开文件(若为上市公司) | 收入、增长率、流失率 |
| 行业报告 | 市场份额估计 |
以1-5分制为每个竞争对手(及你自己的产品)打分,并附上证据说明。
---|---|---|---|---
1 | 功能 | 仅核心功能,存在许多差距 | 覆盖良好 | 全面 + 独特能力
2 | 定价 | 混乱或定价过高 | 市场水平,清晰 | 透明、灵活、公平
3 | 用户体验/设计 | 混乱、摩擦度高 | 功能正常、足够 | 令人愉悦、摩擦最小
4 | 性能 | 缓慢、不可靠 | 可接受 | 快速、高可用性、响应迅速
5 | 文档 | 稀疏、过时 | 覆盖尚可 | 全面、可搜索、附带示例
6 | 支持 | 仅邮件、响应慢 | 聊天 + 邮件,合理的SLA | 24/7,多渠道,快速
7 | 集成 | 0-5个原生集成 | 6-25个集成 | 26+或深度生态系统(API + 市场)
8 | 安全 | 未提及 | 声称拥有SOC2 | SOC2 Type II + ISO 27001 + GDPR
9 | 可扩展性 | 无企业级套餐 | 中端市场就绪 | 企业级(SSO、SCIM、SLA)
10 | 品牌 | 通用、难以记住 | 定位尚可 | 强大、差异化、被认可
11 | 社区 | 无 | 存在论坛或Slack | 活跃、充满活力、用户生成内容
12 | 创新 | 6个月以上无发布 | 季度发布 | 频繁、有意义、沟通良好
| 维度 | 你的产品 | 竞争对手A | 竞争对手B | 竞争对手C |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 功能 | 4 | 3 | 5 | 3 |
| 定价 | 3 | 4 | 3 | 4 |
| ... | ... | ... | ... | ... |
| 总分(/60) | 38 | 35 | 42 | 33 |
| 功能类别 | 你的产品 | 竞争对手A | 竞争对手B | 备注 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 核心功能 | ||||
| 功能1 | 完整 | 完整 | 部分 | 竞争对手B缺乏[具体能力] |
| 功能2 | 完整 | 缺失 | 完整 | 我们的差异化优势 |
| 功能3 | 部分 | 完整 | 完整 | 需要弥补的差距 |
| 平台 | ||||
| 网页应用 | 是 | 是 | 是 | |
| iOS应用 | 是 | 否 | 是 | 竞争对手A的差距 |
| API访问 | 完整 | 有限 | 完整 | |
| 企业级 | ||||
| SSO | 是 | 否 | 是 | |
| 审计日志 | 是 | 是 | 否 | |
| 自定义SLA | 是 | 是 | 是 |
单元格评分: 完整 = 5,部分 = 3,基础 = 2,缺失 = 0
| 属性 | 你的产品 | 竞争对手A | 竞争对手B |
|---|---|---|---|
| 模型类型 | 按席位 | 按使用量 | 固定费率 |
| 免费套餐 | 是(3个用户) | 是(有限) | 否 |
| 入门价格 | $15/用户/月 | $29/月(最多1K事件) | $49/月 |
| 中端价格 | $35/用户/月 | $99/月 | $99/月 |
| 企业级 | 定制 | 定制 | $249/月 |
| 年度折扣 | 20% | 15% | 免费2个月 |
| 试用 | 14天免费 | 7天免费 | 30天退款保证 |
| 定位 | 特征 | 你的策略 |
|---|---|---|
| 价格领导者 | 最低价格,可能暗示较低质量 | 以价值而非功能取胜 |
| 价值领导者 | 最佳功能-价格比 | 以差异化取胜 |
| 高端 | 最高价格,由品牌/功能证明合理 | 以排他性和支持取胜 |
| 颠覆者 | 完全不同的模型(免费、按使用量) | 以可访问性取胜 |
为每个竞争对手生成:
| 象限 | 要点 |
|---|---|
| 优势(他们的优势) | 3-5个要点,每个都锚定于一个数据信号 |
| 劣势(他们的弱点) | 3-5个要点,每个都与评价、缺失功能或抱怨相关 |
| 我们的机会 | 他们的劣势为我们创造了什么机会 |
| 对我们的威胁 | 他们的优势对我们的定位意味着什么 |
证据规则: 每个要点必须引用数据来源(评价引用、定价页面、招聘信息数量、功能对比等)。
| 维度 | 衡量内容 | 评分方法 |
|---|---|---|
| 首次价值实现时间 | 从注册到首次有意义的输出的分钟数 | < 5分钟 = 5,5-15分钟 = 3,> 15分钟 = 1 |
| 激活步骤数 | 实现核心价值前的屏幕/操作数量 | < 3 = 5,3-7 = 3,> 7 = 1 |
| 是否需要信用卡 | 注册时是否需要? | 否 = 5,可选 = 3,需要 = 1 |
| 引导质量 | 向导、工具提示、空状态 | 全面 = 5,基础 = 3,无 = 1 |
| SSO可用性 | Google、Microsoft等 | 是 = 5,否 = 1 |
针对3个最常见的工作流,对比:
| 工作流 | 步骤数(你的) | 步骤数(竞争对手) | 摩擦点 |
|---|---|---|---|
| [主要工作流] | N | N | 具体用户体验问题 |
| [次要工作流] | N | N | 具体用户体验问题 |
| [第三工作流] | N | N | 具体用户体验问题 |
选择与你的市场最相关的两个轴:
| 常见轴对 | 使用时机 |
|---|---|
| 简单/复杂 x 低价/高价 | 通用产品对比 |
| 中小企业/企业 x 窄/广功能 | 市场细分分析 |
| 自助服务/销售驱动 x 点解决方案/平台 | 市场进入策略对比 |
| 技术/非技术 x 垂直/水平 | 受众分析 |
高价 / 企业级
│
│
[竞争对手B] │ [竞争对手C]
│
简单 ───────────────────┼─────────────────── 复杂
│
[你的产品] │ [竞争对手A]
│
│
低价 / 中小企业
| 视野 | 时间范围 | 投入 | 示例 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 速赢 | 0-4周 | 低 | 发布对比页面、更新定价页面、添加缺失的信任徽章 |
| 中期 | 1-3个月 | 中等 | 构建最受请求的集成、改进引导的首次价值实现时间、推出免费套餐 |
| 战略 | 3-12个月 | 高 | 进入新市场细分、构建API v2、获得SOC2 Type II认证 |
为每个行动项评分:
| 因素 | 权重 | 量表 |
|---|---|---|
| 竞争影响 | 40% | 这在多大程度上缩小或扩大了差距? |
| 客户需求 | 30% | 有多少客户/潜在客户请求此功能? |
| 实施投入 | 20% | 构建/执行有多困难? |
| 收入影响 | 10% | 直接收入贡献? |
竞争对手:[名称]
最后更新:[日期]
威胁级别:[低 / 中 / 高 / 严重]
他们的定位:[1句话]
我们针对他们的定位:[1句话]
他们的优势:
- [优势1 附带证据]
- [优势2 附带证据]
- [优势3 附带证据]
我们的优势:
- [优势1 附带证据]
- [优势2 附带证据]
- [优势3 附带证据]
地雷(暴露他们弱点的问题):
- "[竞争对手]如何处理[弱点领域]?"
- "你能展示一下[他们缺乏的功能]吗?"
- "他们的客户对[常见抱怨]怎么说?"
异议处理:
- "他们更便宜" → [带有价值框架的回应]
- "他们有[功能]" → [带有替代方案/路线图的回应]
- "大家都在用他们" → [带有差异化的回应]
定价对比:
[快速对比表格]
客户引述:
"[从该竞争对手切换到你的客户的引述]"
| 幻灯片 | 内容 |
|---|
| 成果 | 格式 | 描述 |
|---|---|---|
| 数据收集报告 | 按来源的结构化笔记 | 按来源类型组织的原始情报 |
| 12维计分卡 | 带证据的评分表格 | 所有维度的数字对比 |
| 功能对比矩阵 | 网格表格 | 逐功能对比及评分 |
| 定价分析 | 对比表格 + 定位图 | 模型对比、层级映射、定位 |
| SWOT分析 | 每个竞争对手的4象限图 | 锚定于数据信号 |
| 用户体验审计 | 评分检查表 | 首次价值实现时间、步骤、摩擦分析 |
| 定位图 | 2x2图表 | 可视化市场定位 |
| 行动计划 | 三视野表格 | 优先排序的竞争应对措施 |
| 战斗卡片 | 单页模板 | 销售就绪的竞争参考 |
| 利益相关者演示 | 7页大纲 | 高管就绪的竞争简报 |
每周安装量
1
仓库
GitHub星标
29
首次出现
今天
安全审计
安装于
zencoder1
amp1
cline1
openclaw1
opencode1
cursor1
Production-grade competitor analysis framework covering systematic data collection across 6 intelligence sources, a 12-dimension scoring rubric, feature comparison matrices, SWOT analysis, pricing model deconstruction, UX audit methodology, and strategic action plans. Produces battle-card-ready output and stakeholder presentation templates.
| Trigger | Teardown Scope |
|---|---|
| Before product strategy or roadmap session | Full teardown (2-4 competitors) |
| Competitor launches major feature or pricing change | Focused teardown (1 competitor, updated dimensions only) |
| Quarterly competitive review | Update existing teardowns + trend analysis |
| Before a sales pitch (battle card needed) | Single-competitor battle card |
| Entering a new market segment | Full teardown of segment incumbents |
| Data Point | Where to Find | What It Signals |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing tiers and price points | Pricing page | Market positioning, target segment |
| Feature lists per tier | Pricing + feature pages | Packaging strategy |
| Primary CTA and messaging | Homepage hero | Positioning and ICP |
| Case studies and customer logos | Case study page, homepage | Target segments, social proof |
| Integration partnerships | Integrations page | Ecosystem strategy |
| Trust signals | Footer, security page | Enterprise readiness |
| Job postings | Careers page, LinkedIn | Growth direction, tech stack |
Platforms: G2, Capterra, TrustRadius, App Store, Product Hunt
| Category | What to Track | Strategic Value |
|---|---|---|
| Praise themes | What users love (top 5 themes) | Their defensible strengths |
| Complaint themes | What users hate (top 5 themes) | Your opportunities |
| Feature requests | What users want but do not have | Product roadmap gaps |
| Switching mentions | Why users left competitors | Competitive migration paths |
| Rating trends | Quarter-over-quarter rating change | Improving or declining |
Sample size target: 50+ reviews per competitor for reliable themes.
| Signal | What It Means |
|---|---|
| High engineering hiring | Product investment, scaling |
| AI/ML roles | AI features coming |
| Sales team expansion | Moving upmarket or expanding geographically |
| Customer success roles | Retention focus, enterprise motion |
| Compliance/legal roles | Regulatory expansion |
| Reduced postings | Cost cutting, potential contraction |
| Metric | Tool | Strategic Value |
|---|---|---|
| Top 20 organic keywords | Ahrefs, SEMrush, GSC | Content strategy and targeting |
| Domain authority | Ahrefs, Moz | Brand strength |
| Blog publishing cadence | Manual check | Content investment level |
| Ranking pages (product vs blog vs docs) | Ahrefs | Traffic composition |
| Platform | What to Track |
|---|---|
| Twitter/X | Product announcements, customer praise, complaints |
| Honest reviews, comparison threads | |
| Thought leadership, hiring signals, employee count | |
| Community forums | Feature requests, workarounds, power user patterns |
| Discord/Slack | Community size, engagement level |
| Source | Data Available |
|---|---|
| Crunchbase | Funding, valuation, investors, employee count |
| Employee count trend (growth proxy) | |
| Public filings (if public) | Revenue, growth rate, churn |
| Industry reports | Market share estimates |
Score each competitor (and your own product) on a 1-5 scale with evidence notes.
---|---|---|---|---
1 | Features | Core only, many gaps | Solid coverage | Comprehensive + unique capabilities
2 | Pricing | Confusing or overpriced | Market-rate, clear | Transparent, flexible, fair
3 | UX / Design | Confusing, high friction | Functional, adequate | Delightful, minimal friction
4 | Performance | Slow, unreliable | Acceptable | Fast, high uptime, responsive
5 | Documentation | Sparse, outdated | Decent coverage | Comprehensive, searchable, with examples
6 | Support | Email only, slow response | Chat + email, reasonable SLA | 24/7, multiple channels, fast
7 | Integrations | 0-5 native integrations | 6-25 integrations | 26+ or deep ecosystem (API + marketplace)
8 | Security | No mentions | SOC2 claimed | SOC2 Type II + ISO 27001 + GDPR
9 | Scalability | No enterprise tier | Mid-market ready | Enterprise-grade (SSO, SCIM, SLA)
10 | Brand | Generic, unmemorable | Decent positioning | Strong, differentiated, recognized
11 | Community | None | Forum or Slack exists | Active, vibrant, user-generated content
12 | Innovation | No releases in 6+ months | Quarterly releases | Frequent, meaningful, well-communicated
| Dimension | Your Product | Competitor A | Competitor B | Competitor C |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Features | 4 | 3 | 5 | 3 |
| Pricing | 3 | 4 | 3 | 4 |
| ... | ... | ... | ... | ... |
| Total (/60) | 38 | 35 | 42 | 33 |
| Feature Category | Your Product | Competitor A | Competitor B | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Core Features | ||||
| Feature 1 | Full | Full | Partial | Comp B lacks [specific capability] |
| Feature 2 | Full | Missing | Full | Our differentiator |
| Feature 3 | Partial | Full | Full | Gap to close |
| Platform | ||||
| Web app | Yes |
Score per cell: Full = 5, Partial = 3, Basic = 2, Missing = 0
| Attribute | Your Product | Competitor A | Competitor B |
|---|---|---|---|
| Model type | Per seat | Usage-based | Flat rate |
| Free tier | Yes (3 users) | Yes (limited) | No |
| Entry price | $15/user/mo | $29/mo (up to 1K events) | $49/mo |
| Mid-tier price | $35/user/mo | $99/mo | $99/mo |
| Enterprise | Custom | Custom | $249/mo |
| Annual discount | 20% | 15% | 2 months free |
| Trial | 14-day free | 7-day free | 30-day money-back |
| Position | Characteristic | Your Strategy |
|---|---|---|
| Price leader | Lowest price, may signal lower quality | Win on value, not features |
| Value leader | Best features-per-dollar ratio | Win on differentiation |
| Premium | Highest price, justified by brand/features | Win on exclusivity and support |
| Disruptor | Radically different model (free, usage-based) | Win on accessibility |
For each competitor, produce:
| Quadrant | Points |
|---|---|
| Strengths (Their advantages) | 3-5 bullets, each anchored to a data signal |
| Weaknesses (Their vulnerabilities) | 3-5 bullets, each tied to reviews, missing features, or complaints |
| Opportunities for Us | What their weaknesses create for us |
| Threats to Us | What their strengths mean for our position |
Evidence rule: Every bullet must cite the data source (review quote, pricing page, job posting count, feature comparison, etc.).
| Dimension | What to Measure | How to Score |
|---|---|---|
| Time to first value (TTFV) | Minutes from signup to first meaningful output | < 5 min = 5, 5-15 min = 3, > 15 min = 1 |
| Steps to activation | Number of screens/actions before core value | < 3 = 5, 3-7 = 3, > 7 = 1 |
| Credit card required | Required at signup? | No = 5, Optional = 3, Required = 1 |
| Onboarding quality | Wizard, tooltips, empty states | Comprehensive = 5, Basic = 3, None = 1 |
| SSO available | Google, Microsoft, etc. | Yes = 5, No = 1 |
For the 3 most common workflows, compare:
| Workflow | Steps (Yours) | Steps (Competitor) | Friction Points |
|---|---|---|---|
| [Primary workflow] | N | N | Specific UX issues |
| [Secondary workflow] | N | N | Specific UX issues |
| [Tertiary workflow] | N | N | Specific UX issues |
Choose the two axes most relevant to your market:
| Common Axis Pairs | When to Use |
|---|---|
| Simple / Complex x Low Price / High Price | General product comparison |
| SMB / Enterprise x Narrow / Broad Features | Market segment analysis |
| Self-Serve / Sales-Led x Point Solution / Platform | Go-to-market comparison |
| Technical / Non-Technical x Niche / Horizontal | Audience analysis |
High Price / Enterprise
│
│
[Competitor B] │ [Competitor C]
│
Simple ─────────────────┼─────────────────── Complex
│
[YOUR PRODUCT] │ [Competitor A]
│
│
Low Price / SMB
| Horizon | Timeframe | Effort | Examples |
|---|---|---|---|
| Quick wins | 0-4 weeks | Low | Publish comparison pages, update pricing page, add missing trust badges |
| Medium-term | 1-3 months | Moderate | Build top-requested integration, improve onboarding TTFV, launch free tier |
| Strategic | 3-12 months | High | Enter new market segment, build API v2, achieve SOC2 Type II |
For each action item, score:
| Factor | Weight | Scale |
|---|---|---|
| Competitive impact | 40% | How much does this close or widen a gap? |
| Customer demand | 30% | How many customers/prospects request this? |
| Implementation effort | 20% | How hard is this to build/execute? |
| Revenue impact | 10% | Direct revenue contribution? |
COMPETITOR: [Name]
LAST UPDATED: [Date]
THREAT LEVEL: [LOW / MEDIUM / HIGH / CRITICAL]
THEIR POSITIONING: [1 sentence]
OUR POSITIONING AGAINST THEM: [1 sentence]
WHERE THEY WIN:
- [Strength 1 with evidence]
- [Strength 2 with evidence]
- [Strength 3 with evidence]
WHERE WE WIN:
- [Advantage 1 with evidence]
- [Advantage 2 with evidence]
- [Advantage 3 with evidence]
LANDMINES (questions that expose their weaknesses):
- "How does [competitor] handle [weakness area]?"
- "Can you show me [feature they lack]?"
- "What do their customers say about [common complaint]?"
OBJECTION HANDLING:
- "They're cheaper" → [Response with value framing]
- "They have [feature]" → [Response with alternative/roadmap]
- "Everyone uses them" → [Response with differentiation]
PRICING COMPARISON:
[Quick comparison table]
CUSTOMER QUOTE:
"[Quote from a customer who switched from this competitor to you]"
| Slide | Content |
|---|---|
| 1. Executive Summary | Threat level, top strength, top opportunity, recommended action |
| 2. Market Position | 2x2 positioning map with all players |
| 3. Feature Scorecard | 12-dimension scores, total comparison |
| 4. Pricing Analysis | Pricing comparison table + key pricing insight |
| 5. UX Comparison | Where they win (3 bullets) vs where we win (3 bullets) |
| 6. Voice of Customer | Top 3 competitor complaints from reviews (quoted) |
| 7. Action Plan | Quick wins, medium-term, strategic priorities |
| Artifact | Format | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Data Collection Report | Structured notes per source | Raw intelligence organized by source type |
| 12-Dimension Scorecard | Scored table with evidence | Numeric comparison across all dimensions |
| Feature Comparison Matrix | Grid table | Feature-by-feature comparison with scoring |
| Pricing Analysis | Comparison table + position map | Model comparison, tier mapping, positioning |
| SWOT Analysis | Per-competitor 4-quadrant | Anchored to data signals |
| UX Audit | Scored checklist | TTFV, steps, friction analysis |
| Positioning Map | 2x2 diagram | Visual market position |
| Action Plan | Three-horizon table | Prioritized competitive responses |
| Battle Card | One-page template |
Weekly Installs
1
Repository
GitHub Stars
29
First Seen
Today
Security Audits
Gen Agent Trust HubPassSocketPassSnykWarn
Installed on
zencoder1
amp1
cline1
openclaw1
opencode1
cursor1
站立会议模板:敏捷开发每日站会指南与工具(含远程团队异步模板)
10,500 周安装
| Yes |
| Yes |
| iOS app | Yes | No | Yes | Comp A gap |
| API access | Full | Limited | Full |
| Enterprise |
| SSO | Yes | No | Yes |
| Audit logs | Yes | Yes | No |
| Custom SLA | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Sales-ready competitive reference |
| Stakeholder Presentation | 7-slide outline | Executive-ready competitive briefing |