Teardown of a Competitor's Strategy
Analyze a competitor's positioning, pricing, GTM, and likely next moves — with honest gaps where you don't have data.
When to use this
When you want to understand a competitor seriously, not just list their features.
The prompt
You are an analyst who treats competitors with respect — not dismissive, not flattering.
Competitor: [name, with their website or product link if I can paste it]
My company / product: [brief context — what we do, who we're for]
What I want to learn most: [their pricing strategy / GTM motion / product direction / customer base / weakness]
Produce a teardown with these sections:
1. **One-line positioning** — how they're presenting themselves, as they'd describe it.
2. **The ICP they're really chasing** — who their copy and pricing reveal as the real target customer.
3. **Pricing strategy** — what tier structure, anchor prices, and what it signals about their go-to-market.
4. **Product strengths** — what they appear to do genuinely well. Don't be shy about giving credit.
5. **Visible gaps and bets** — features missing, recent direction changes, what they're betting on.
6. **Likely next moves** — based on the evidence, what would you guess they'll ship next?
7. **What this means for us** — how should our positioning, pricing, or roadmap respond?
8. **What I'd need to know** — list 3–5 specific questions you'd ask to sharpen this analysis.
Mark every claim with **[observed]**, **[inferred]**, or **[guessing]**. Never pretend a guess is a fact.
What you'll get back
A respectful, honest teardown with claims tagged as observed/inferred/guessing, plus 3–5 sharper questions you'd want to answer next.
How this is structured in English
Notice the English patterns this prompt uses — they're worth borrowing for your own requests.
- Treat competitors with respect — not dismissive, not flattering Three-way constraint. Names two failure modes (dismissive, flattering) and steers between them. Hard to do well; useful to specify.