Competitive Teardown
Fill structured SWOT and Porter's Five Forces teardowns so you can compare rivals before positioning or scoping a product.
Overview
Competitive Teardown is an agent skill most often used in Idea (also Validate scope, Launch distribution) that fills SWOT and Porter's Five Forces templates for rival products.
Install
npx skills add https://github.com/alirezarezvani/claude-skills --skill competitive-teardownWhat is this skill?
- SWOT template with evidence, impact, and exploitability columns per strength and weakness
- Porter's Five Forces worksheet tailored to a product category with rivalry intensity notes
- Opportunity and threat rows with timeframe, likelihood, and mitigation fields
- Repeatable analyst metadata: date, version, and named competitor product
- Two primary templates: SWOT analysis and Porter's Five Forces product application
Adoption & trust: 536 installs on skills.sh; 17.5k GitHub stars; 3/3 security scanners passed (skills.sh audits).
What problem does it solve?
You know competitors exist but lack a consistent framework to capture evidence, threats, and differentiation in one place.
Who is it for?
Indie founders doing first-pass market mapping or refreshing competitor dossiers before a positioning or pricing decision.
Skip if: Deep financial forensics on private companies when you have no public evidence to fill the template cells.
When should I use this skill?
Researching competitors, preparing positioning, or needing a repeatable teardown format before product decisions.
What do I get? / Deliverables
You get completed SWOT and Porter analyses with rated forces and mitigation notes you can feed into positioning, roadmap scope, or launch messaging.
- Completed SWOT table for a named competitor
- Porter Five Forces assessment for your product category
Recommended Skills
Journey fit
Spans multiple journey phases - primary shelf plus alternate fits below.
Competitive teardown belongs on the Idea shelf because you name rivals and forces before you commit build scope or messaging. The skill ships competitor-focused templates (SWOT tables, Porter force assessment)—the competitors subphase is the canonical home for that work.
Where it fits
Populate SWOT rows for two direct rivals using pricing pages and changelog evidence before picking a wedge feature.
Use Porter rivalry and switching-cost notes to decide whether your MVP should integrate with incumbents or replace a workflow outright.
Turn threat mitigations into launch copy angles that answer why buyers should switch now.
How it compares
Structured competitive worksheets for agent fill-in—not automated web scraping or real-time pricing intelligence.
Common Questions / FAQ
Who is competitive-teardown for?
Solo and indie builders who need disciplined competitor analysis without hiring strategy consultants.
When should I use competitive-teardown?
During Idea competitor research, Validate when scoping MVP against rivals, or Launch when refining distribution angles against incumbent positioning.
Is competitive-teardown safe to install?
It is documentation-heavy template guidance; review the Security Audits panel on this page and avoid pasting confidential third-party data you are not allowed to store.
SKILL.md
READMESKILL.md - Competitive Teardown
# Competitive Analysis Templates ## 1. SWOT Analysis Template ### Company/Product: [Competitor Name] **Date:** [Analysis Date] | **Analyst:** [Name] | **Version:** [1.0] #### Strengths (Internal Advantages) | # | Strength | Evidence | Impact | |---|----------|----------|--------| | 1 | [e.g., Strong brand recognition] | [Source/data point] | High/Med/Low | | 2 | | | | | 3 | | | | #### Weaknesses (Internal Limitations) | # | Weakness | Evidence | Exploitability | |---|----------|----------|---------------| | 1 | [e.g., Limited API capabilities] | [Source/data point] | High/Med/Low | | 2 | | | | | 3 | | | | #### Opportunities (External Favorable) | # | Opportunity | Timeframe | Our Advantage | |---|------------|-----------|---------------| | 1 | [e.g., Competitor slow to adopt AI] | Short/Med/Long | [How we capitalize] | | 2 | | | | | 3 | | | | #### Threats (External Unfavorable) | # | Threat | Likelihood | Mitigation | |---|--------|-----------|-----------| | 1 | [e.g., Competitor acquired by larger company] | High/Med/Low | [Our response plan] | | 2 | | | | | 3 | | | | --- ## 2. Porter's Five Forces (Product Application) ### Market: [Your Product Category] #### Force 1: Competitive Rivalry (Intensity: High/Med/Low) - Number of direct competitors: ___ - Market growth rate: ___% annually - Product differentiation level: High/Med/Low - Switching costs for customers: High/Med/Low - Exit barriers: High/Med/Low - **Assessment:** [Summary of competitive rivalry intensity] #### Force 2: Threat of New Entrants (Intensity: High/Med/Low) - Capital requirements: High/Med/Low - Technology barriers: High/Med/Low - Network effects strength: Strong/Moderate/Weak - Regulatory barriers: High/Med/Low - Brand loyalty in market: Strong/Moderate/Weak - **Assessment:** [Summary of new entrant threat] #### Force 3: Threat of Substitutes (Intensity: High/Med/Low) - Alternative solutions: [List substitutes] - Price-performance of substitutes: Better/Same/Worse - Switching costs to substitutes: High/Med/Low - Customer propensity to switch: High/Med/Low - **Assessment:** [Summary of substitute threat] #### Force 4: Bargaining Power of Buyers (Power: High/Med/Low) - Buyer concentration: Concentrated/Fragmented - Price sensitivity: High/Med/Low - Information availability: Full/Partial/Limited - Switching costs: High/Med/Low - Volume of purchases: High/Med/Low - **Assessment:** [Summary of buyer power] #### Force 5: Bargaining Power of Suppliers (Power: High/Med/Low) - Key technology dependencies: [List] - Cloud provider lock-in: High/Med/Low - Talent market tightness: Tight/Balanced/Loose - Data source dependencies: Critical/Important/Optional - **Assessment:** [Summary of supplier power] #### Overall Industry Attractiveness: [Score 1-10] --- ## 3. Competitive Positioning Map ### Axis Definitions - **X-Axis:** [e.g., Ease of Use] (Low to High) - **Y-Axis:** [e.g., Feature Completeness] (Low to High) ### Competitor Positions | Competitor | X Score (1-10) | Y Score (1-10) | Quadrant | |-----------|---------------|---------------|----------| | Your Product | ___ | ___ | ___ | | Competitor A | ___ | ___ | ___ | | Competitor B | ___ | ___ | ___ | | Competitor C | ___ | ___ | ___ | | Competitor D | ___ | ___ | ___ | ### Quadrant Definitions - **Top-Right (Leaders):** High on both axes - market leaders - **Top-Left (Feature-Rich):** High features, lower ease of use - complex tools - **Bottom-Right (Simple):** Easy to use, fewer features - niche players - **Bottom-Left (Laggards):** Low on both axes - disruption candidates ### Positioning Insights - **White space opportunities:** [Areas with no competitor presence] - **Crowded areas:** [Where competition is fiercest] - **Our trajectory:** [Direction we're moving on the map] --- ## 4. Win/Loss Analysis Template ### Deal: [Opportunity Name] **Date:** [Close Date] | **Result:** Won / Lost | **Competitor:** [Name] #### Deal Context - **Deal Size:** $___ - **Sales Cycle:** ___ days - **Segment