A competitive teardown usually means a week of tab-hoarding that produces a doc nobody reads. This compresses it to an hour: you gather the raw signals — their site, pricing, reviews, launches — and Claude structures them into positioning, pricing logic, strengths, and the gaps you can exploit. The output is a decision tool, not a scrapbook.
Who this is for
Product and marketing folks who need a fast, structured read on a competitor — for positioning, a launch, pricing, or a sales objection-handling sheet.
What you'll need
- Sources: the competitor's homepage + pricing page, a handful of recent reviews (G2, Reddit, App Store), and any recent launch/announcement.
- Claude and a Google Drive folder to keep the teardown.
Gather the raw signal · 20 min
Speed-collect, don't analyze yet. Copy their homepage hero and key feature copy, the full pricing page, 8–10 representative reviews (good and bad), and their latest announcement. Dump it all into one doc. Verify the important claims yourself — AI shouldn't be your only source on a competitor.
Structure the teardown · 25 min
Here's raw material on a competitor. Build a structured teardown: 1. POSITIONING — who they say they're for, the core promise, and the worldview behind it (in one line). 2. PRICING — the model, the tiers, and what their packaging reveals about who they actually want as customers. 3. STRENGTHS — what they're genuinely good at, per their own copy AND their reviews. 4. WEAKNESSES — recurring complaints in reviews; where the marketing and the reviews disagree. 5. GAPS WE CAN EXPLOIT — 3 openings where we could win, each tied to specific evidence above. 6. OPEN QUESTIONS — what I should verify before trusting this. Cite which source each claim came from. Flag anything that's inference vs. stated fact. Material: [paste]
Verify and turn into a decision · 15 min
Spot-check the claims that matter — especially anything you'd act on. Then end the doc with a "So what" section: given the gaps, what's the one positioning or product move this argues for? A teardown that doesn't change a decision was a waste of an hour.
Trusting AI on facts. Pricing and feature claims change and get misread. Verify anything load-bearing against the actual source before you act on it.
Mistaking marketing for reality. Their homepage is what they wish were true; the reviews are what customers feel. Weight the reviews.
Stopping at description. A teardown with no "so what" is trivia. The gaps and the recommended move are the whole point.
Do this next
- Turn the gaps into a one-pager for sales or positioning — that's the part the rest of the company will use.
- Re-run it quarterly. Competitors move; a teardown has a shelf life.
- Track one competitor per doc in Drive so you can diff changes over time.