pm-competitor-analysis

Competitor Teardown

Deep dive into competitor features to inform product design decisions.

When to Use

• Have identified competitors and want to understand their features in depth
• Need to find differentiation opportunities before writing PRD
• Want to understand what users love/hate about existing solutions

What This Skill Does

Analyzes competitors on three dimensions:

• Core Features - What functionality do they offer
• Highlight Features - What users love, differentiators
• Pain Points - What users complain about, missing features

Process

Step 1: Identify Competitors

Same-session handoff: If user just completed /pm-market-research in this conversation, use the competitors identified there directly.

New session: Check for docs/prd/research-*.md files first:

• Research exists → Ask: "Found research for [topic] with competitors [list]. Analyze these?"
• No research → Ask: "Do you have specific competitors in mind, or should we use /pm-market-research to identify them first?"
  • User has competitors → Proceed with user-specified list (2-5 competitors)
  • User unsure → Guide to /pm-market-research first

Step 2: Analyze Each Competitor

For each competitor, gather both features and sentiment in parallel:

Features (via WebFetch):

• Official website, docs, feature pages
• Build feature inventory: name, description, category

User Sentiment (via WebSearch):

What to Find	Search Examples
Positive reviews	"[competitor] review", "[competitor] best feature"
Comparisons	"[competitor] vs", "[competitor] alternative"
Complaints	"[competitor] frustrating" reddit, "[competitor] missing feature"
Feature requests	"[competitor] wish it had", "[competitor] feature request"

Extract:

• Highlight features: Features users explicitly praise
• Pain points: Features users complain about or wish existed

Complete one competitor fully before moving to the next.

Step 3: Output Document

Generate docs/prd/competitor-<topic>.md:

# <Topic> Competitor Teardown

## Analysis Scope
- **Purpose**: [Why this analysis]
- **Competitors**: [List of analyzed competitors]

## Competitor Breakdown

### [Competitor A]

**Core Features:**
| Feature | Description | Notes |
|---------|-------------|-------|
| ... | ... | ... |

**Highlight Features:**
- [Feature]: [Why users love it, source]

**Pain Points:**
- [Feature/Gap]: [User complaints, source]

### [Competitor B]
...

## Feature Comparison Matrix
| Feature | Competitor A | Competitor B | Competitor C | Opportunity |
|---------|--------------|--------------|--------------|-------------|
| ... | ✅/❌/⚠️ | ✅/❌/⚠️ | ✅/❌/⚠️ | ... |

Legend: ✅ Well implemented | ⚠️ Partially/poorly implemented | ❌ Missing

## Insights

### Common Weaknesses
- [What all competitors do poorly or miss]

### Differentiation Opportunities
- [Where a new product could win]

### Table Stakes
- [Features that must exist to compete]

After generating the document, suggest: "Ready to define your product? Use /pm-prd to create a PRD based on this analysis."

Key Principles

• Deep over broad: Focus on feature-level detail, not market-level analysis
• User voice matters: Prioritize real user feedback over marketing claims
• Actionable insights: Every finding should inform product decisions
• Match user's language: Output in the same language the user uses in conversation

Handling Edge Cases

• Competitor has no public info: Note the gap, focus on user reviews and community discussions instead.
• No user feedback found: Note as "Limited user feedback available", rely more on feature comparison.
• Too many competitors: Recommend focusing on top 3-5 most relevant ones.
• User abandons mid-process: Save partial analysis to draft file for later resumption.