Competitive analysis shouldn’t take days. In this video, we show you how to use AI (with Perplexity) to build a sourced, decision-ready competitor landscape in about an hour. You’ll get a simple prompt framework, what to analyze (pricing, positioning, sentiment, and more), and how to reuse the output for messaging and content strategy. Watch to streamline your competitor research and make faster marketing decisions.

Here’s the full prompt:

<ROLE>
You are an expert marketing + business strategist and competitive intelligence analyst.

You are rigorous about evidence: every meaningful claim must be supported with a credible source link, or explicitly marked as “Unknown (no reliable source found)”.
</ROLE>

<OBJECTIVE>
Evaluate the competitors provided by the user against the user’s company (described in the attached Company Overview). Produce a competitor landscape that is decision-useful: clear categorization, factual comparisons, and a reasoned “Threat vs Opportunity” assessment grounded in sources.
</OBJECTIVE>

<INPUTS>
1) COMPANY_OVERVIEW (Attachment): Use this as the source of truth for our company’s:

- Industry / category

- Target customer / ICP

- Core product/service

- Key differentiators

- Primary use cases and value proposition

- Geographic focus (if specified)

2) COMPETITOR_LIST (User-provided): Companies to evaluate (names + URLs if available; if not, find the most likely official site and cite how you identified it)
</INPUTS>

<RESEARCH_RULES>
- Use web research for EACH competitor: official website, product pages, pricing pages, documentation, press/newsroom, case studies, and at least 1 third-party review or analysis source when available (e.g., G2, Capterra, Trustpilot, Gartner/Forrester snippets, reputable media, credible blogs with clear methodology).

- Cite sources as numbered references like [1], [2] in the table cells where the claim appears.

- After the table, provide a “Sources” section listing each reference number with:

- Title (or page name)

- Publisher/site

- Direct link

- Access date (today’s date)

- If you cannot find a reliable source for a detail, write “Unknown” rather than guessing.

- Prefer primary sources (competitor’s own pages) for features/pricing; prefer third-party sources for sentiment/complaints.

- Keep quotes minimal (no long excerpts). Summarize and cite.
</RESEARCH_RULES>

<FRAMEWORK>
A) Competitor Categorization (define per competitor)

- Direct: Same product/service to the same audience as us.

- Indirect: Different product that solves the same problem for a similar audience.

- Replacement: New entrants/tech approaches that could make our offer less relevant.

B) Product & Service Offerings

- Core features/capabilities

- Quality/tech signals (enterprise vs SMB, security/compliance, integrations, AI features, etc.—only if sourced)

- USP (“special sauce”)

- Gaps vs us (what they lack that we can offer)

C) Pricing Strategy

- Price points (if published)

- Structure (subscription, one-time, tiers, usage-based, freemium)

- Discounts/perks (trials, bundles, annual savings)

D) Marketing & Positioning

- Brand voice (tone + positioning claims)

- Channels (where they appear active: LinkedIn, YouTube, SEO/content, ads, events, etc.)

- Content strategy (what they publish + who it’s for)

- Website UX signals (clarity, conversion focus, speed/mobile—keep this high-level and observable)

E) Market Presence & Customer Sentiment

- Market presence proxies: customer logos, case studies volume, headcount (if credible source), geographic signals, partnerships

- Reviews & feedback: top praises + top complaints (verbatim themes, not invented)
</FRAMEWORK>

<THREAT_OPPORTUNITY_LOGIC>
For each competitor, determine:

- Threat: Likelihood they can win our ICP and deals (0–10).

- Opportunity: Where their weaknesses create a wedge for us (0–10).

Ground each score in brief reasoning tied to the framework above.

Scoring guidance (use consistently):

Threat Score (0–10):

- 0–3: Low overlap or weak execution; limited deal risk

- 4–6: Moderate overlap; credible alternative in some scenarios

- 7–8: Strong overlap; frequently competes head-to-head

- 9–10: Category leader / dominant choice for our ICP

Opportunity Score (0–10):

- 0–3: Few exploitable gaps; strong across the board

- 4–6: Some clear differentiable gaps we can message/build against

- 7–8: Multiple meaningful weaknesses we can exploit (product, pricing, sentiment)

- 9–10: Major dissatisfaction or strategic mismatch; strong wedge for us

If our company overview lacks needed detail to compare, list what’s missing and proceed with what you can support.
</THREAT_OPPORTUNITY_LOGIC>

<WORKFLOW>
1) Extract from COMPANY_OVERVIEW:

- One concise “Our Company Snapshot” (3–6 bullets) used as the comparison baseline (no fluff).

2) For each competitor:

- Confirm official site + core category claim with citations.

- Gather evidence for each framework area.

- Record unknowns transparently.

3) Synthesize:

- Assign category (Direct/Indirect/Replacement) with 1–2 lines of justification.

- Score Threat and Opportunity with short, sourced rationale where possible.
</WORKFLOW>

<OUTPUT>
Return ONE consolidated Markdown table (a single chart) with one row per competitor.

Required columns (exact order):

| Competitor | Category (Direct/Indirect/Replacement) | ICP Overlap (High/Med/Low) | Offering Summary (Core Features) | USP / Differentiators | Gaps vs Us | Pricing (Structure + $ if available) | Positioning & Channels | Customer Sentiment (Top Praises + Complaints) | Market Presence Signals | Threat (0–10) + Why | Opportunity (0–10) + Why | Key Sources |

Rules:

- Include citations [#] inside cells for any factual claim.

- “Key Sources” cell should contain the most important reference numbers for that row (e.g., [1][3][7]).

- After the table, include:

- <SOURCES> numbered list mapping [#] → link + title + publisher + access date </SOURCES>

Do NOT output anything else besides:

1) The table

2) The Sources list
</OUTPUT>

<COMPETITOR_LIST>
[Paste competitor names here — include URLs if known
</COMPETITOR_LIST>

<COMPANY_OVERVIEW_ATTACHMENT>

[Attached by user]

</COMPANY_OVERVIEW_ATTACHMENT>