guia-matthieu/competitive-analysis
Analyze your competitive landscape using Porter's Five Forces and modern frameworks—understand industry dynamics, identify strategic opportunities, and position your business for sustainable advantage. Use when: **Evaluate an industry** before entering or investing; **Understand competitive dynamics** in your market; **Identify strategic opportunities** based on industry structure; **Assess threats** from competitors, new entrants, or substitutes; **Develop positioning strategy** relative to ...
npx skills add https://github.com/guia-matthieu/clawfu-skills --skill competitive-analysis> Analyze your competitive landscape using Porter's Five Forces and modern frameworks—understand industry dynamics, identify strategic opportunities, and position your business for sustainable advantage.
Use this skill when you need to:
This skill is particularly valuable for:
Source: Michael Porter - Harvard Business School (1979-present) + modern competitive intelligence best practices
Core Principle: Industry structure, together with a company's relative position within the industry, are the two basic drivers of company profitability. Understand the five competitive forces to anticipate shifts, shape industry evolution, and find better strategic positions.
> "The essence of strategy formulation is coping with competition."
| Claude Does | You Decide |
|-------------|------------|
| Structures production workflow | Final creative direction |
| Suggests technical approaches | Equipment and tool choices |
| Creates templates and checklists | Quality standards |
| Identifies best practices | Brand/voice decisions |
| Generates script outlines | Final script approval |
When invoked, I will guide you through comprehensive competitive analysis:
Provide information about your competitive situation:
Example prompts:
Information that helps:
Porter's Five Forces determine the competitive structure of an industry and its profitability.
Threat of
New Entrants
↓
Supplier → COMPETITIVE ← Buyer
Power RIVALRY Power
↑
Threat of
Substitutes
| Force | Key Question | High = |
|-------|--------------|--------|
| Rivalry | How intense is competition? | Lower profits |
| New Entrants | How easy to enter? | More competition |
| Supplier Power | Can suppliers dictate terms? | Higher costs |
| Buyer Power | Can customers dictate terms? | Lower prices |
| Substitutes | Are alternatives available? | Less pricing power |
Analyze the intensity of competition among existing players.
| Factor | Questions to Ask |
|--------|------------------|
| Number of competitors | How many significant players exist? |
| Market concentration | Is it dominated by few or fragmented? |
| Industry growth | Growing, stable, or declining? |
| Product differentiation | Are products similar or distinct? |
| Switching costs | How hard is it for customers to switch? |
| Exit barriers | Can companies easily leave? |
| Fixed costs | Do high fixed costs drive price competition? |
| Level | Characteristics | Profit Impact |
|-------|-----------------|---------------|
| Low | Few competitors, differentiated products, high growth | Higher margins |
| Medium | Several competitors, some differentiation, stable growth | Moderate margins |
| High | Many competitors, commodity products, slow/negative growth | Thin margins |
Analyze how easy or difficult it is for new players to enter your market.
| Barrier | Low Threat | High Threat |
|---------|------------|-------------|
| Capital requirements | Low startup costs | High investment needed |
| Economies of scale | Small players viable | Must be large to compete |
| Brand loyalty | Weak brands | Strong incumbent brands |
| Switching costs | Easy to try new | Locked-in customers |
| Distribution access | Open channels | Controlled by incumbents |
| Regulatory | Few requirements | Heavy licensing/compliance |
| Technology/IP | Accessible tech | Patents, proprietary tech |
| Network effects | Weak | Strong winner-take-all |
Analyze the leverage suppliers have over industry participants.
| Factor | Low Power | High Power |
|--------|-----------|------------|
| Number of suppliers | Many alternatives | Few/sole source |
| Uniqueness | Commodity inputs | Proprietary/specialized |
| Switching costs | Easy to change | Expensive/difficult |
| Forward integration | Unlikely | Credible threat |
| Importance to supplier | Major customer | Small customer |
| Substitute inputs | Available | None |
Analyze the leverage customers have over your business.
| Factor | Low Power | High Power |
|--------|-----------|------------|
| Buyer concentration | Many small buyers | Few large buyers |
| Purchase volume | Small orders | Large orders |
| Standardization | Differentiated products | Commodity products |
| Switching costs | High costs to change | Easy to switch |
| Price sensitivity | Value-focused | Price-focused |
| Information | Limited knowledge | Well-informed |
| Backward integration | Unlikely | Credible threat |
Analyze alternatives that meet the same customer need differently.
| Factor | Low Threat | High Threat |
|--------|------------|-------------|
| Price-performance | Worse value | Better value |
| Switching costs | High | Low |
| Buyer propensity | Loyal to current | Open to alternatives |
| Functional similarity | Different experience | Similar outcome |
| Your Category | Potential Substitutes |
|---------------|----------------------|
| Physical stores | E-commerce |
| Air travel | Video conferencing |
| Newspapers | Social media, podcasts |
| Cable TV | Streaming services |
| Taxis | Ride-sharing, bikes, public transit |
| Hotels | Airbnb, corporate housing |
| Consultants | Software, DIY templates |
After analyzing all five forces, determine overall industry attractiveness:
| Profile | Characteristics | Strategic Implication |
|---------|-----------------|----------------------|
| Attractive | Weak forces across the board | Enter/invest, potential for strong profits |
| Moderately Attractive | Mixed forces | Selective entry, focus on positioning |
| Unattractive | Strong forces across the board | Avoid or find niche, low profit potential |
ATTRACTIVE UNATTRACTIVE
(Higher profits) (Lower profits)
| |
Commercial aircraft ←―――――――――――――――→ Fast food
Pharmaceuticals ←―――――――――――――――→ Retail grocers
Enterprise SaaS ←―――――――――――――――→ Commodity trading
Beyond industry forces, analyze specific competitors:
| Dimension | Questions |
|-----------|-----------|
| Overview | Who are they? Size, history, ownership? |
| Products/Services | What do they offer? Key features? |
| Target Market | Who do they serve? Segments? |
| Positioning | How do they position? Messaging? |
| Pricing | Price points? Model? |
| Strengths | What are they great at? |
| Weaknesses | Where do they struggle? |
| Strategy | What's their apparent strategy? |
| Recent Moves | New products, partnerships, hires? |
| Source Type | Examples |
|-------------|----------|
| Public filings | Annual reports, SEC filings, press releases |
| Website/content | Pricing pages, blog, case studies |
| Job postings | Reveals priorities, tech stack, expansion |
| Social media | Company pages, employee posts |
| Reviews | G2, Capterra, Glassdoor, Trustpilot |
| Customer interviews | Win/loss analysis, churned customers |
| Industry reports | Analyst reports, market research |
| Events/conferences | Presentations, booth messaging |
Based on your analysis, consider positioning strategies:
| Strategy | Description | Best When |
|----------|-------------|-----------|
| Cost Leadership | Lowest cost producer | Scale advantages, commodity market |
| Differentiation | Unique value proposition | Can sustain uniqueness |
| Focus (Cost) | Low cost in niche segment | Niche has distinct needs |
| Focus (Differentiation) | Unique value in niche | Niche underserved |
Look for areas where:
Context: Startup considering entering project management software market
Industry Definition: Cloud-based project management software for SMBs
Five Forces Analysis:
| Force | Assessment | Rating |
|-------|------------|--------|
| Rivalry | Extremely high—Asana, Monday, Notion, ClickUp, etc. Constant feature releases, price competition | HIGH |
| New Entrants | Moderate—Low capital requirements but network effects and switching costs protect incumbents | MEDIUM |
| Supplier Power | Low—Cloud infrastructure (AWS, GCP) is commoditized | LOW |
| Buyer Power | High—Many alternatives, low switching costs, free tiers available | HIGH |
| Substitutes | High—Spreadsheets, email, Slack, Trello (freemium) | HIGH |
Overall Industry Attractiveness: LOW - Very competitive with strong buyer power and many substitutes
Strategic Implications:
Recommended Positioning:
Focus on underserved vertical (e.g., "Project management built for creative agencies") where:
Context: Evaluating market entry for premium DTC coffee subscription
Industry Definition: Direct-to-consumer specialty coffee subscription (US market)
Five Forces Analysis:
| Force | Assessment | Rating |
|-------|------------|--------|
| Rivalry | High—Blue Bottle, Trade, Atlas, Driftaway, plus local roasters | HIGH |
| New Entrants | High threat—Low barriers, minimal capital, e-commerce accessible | HIGH |
| Supplier Power | Moderate—Quality beans require relationships, but multiple origins | MEDIUM |
| Buyer Power | High—Many options, easy cancellation, price-sensitive | HIGH |
| Substitutes | Very high—Supermarket coffee, local cafes, instant coffee | VERY HIGH |
Overall Industry Attractiveness: LOW - Highly competitive commodity market
Competitor Landscape:
| Competitor | Positioning | Strength | Weakness |
|------------|-------------|----------|----------|
| Blue Bottle | Premium, artisanal | Brand, quality | Price, accessibility |
| Trade Coffee | Discovery, variety | Selection, tech | Generic brand |
| Atlas Coffee | World exploration | Unique experience | Niche appeal |
| Local roasters | Authentic, local | Community, freshness | Scale, convenience |
Positioning Gap Identified:
Recommended Positioning:
"Autopilot premium" - Ultra-convenient premium coffee for busy professionals
INDUSTRY: ____________________
DATE: ____________________
FORCE 1: COMPETITIVE RIVALRY
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
Key competitors:
1. ____________________
2. ____________________
3. ____________________
Assessment:
□ Number of competitors: Few / Several / Many
□ Industry growth: High / Stable / Declining
□ Product differentiation: High / Moderate / Low
□ Exit barriers: Low / Moderate / High
□ Fixed costs: Low / Moderate / High
RIVALRY INTENSITY: □ Low □ Medium □ High
FORCE 2: THREAT OF NEW ENTRANTS
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
Barriers to entry:
□ Capital requirements: High / Moderate / Low
□ Economies of scale: Strong / Moderate / Weak
□ Brand loyalty: Strong / Moderate / Weak
□ Switching costs: High / Moderate / Low
□ Distribution access: Difficult / Moderate / Easy
□ Regulatory barriers: High / Moderate / Low
ENTRY THREAT: □ Low □ Medium □ High
FORCE 3: SUPPLIER POWER
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
Key suppliers/inputs:
1. ____________________
2. ____________________
Assessment:
□ Number of suppliers: Many / Several / Few
□ Uniqueness of inputs: Commodity / Specialized / Unique
□ Switching costs: Low / Moderate / High
□ Forward integration threat: Low / Moderate / High
SUPPLIER POWER: □ Low □ Medium □ High
FORCE 4: BUYER POWER
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
Key buyer segments:
1. ____________________
2. ____________________
Assessment:
□ Buyer concentration: Fragmented / Moderate / Concentrated
□ Purchase volume: Small / Moderate / Large
□ Product differentiation: High / Moderate / Low
□ Switching costs: High / Moderate / Low
□ Price sensitivity: Low / Moderate / High
BUYER POWER: □ Low □ Medium □ High
FORCE 5: THREAT OF SUBSTITUTES
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
Key substitutes:
1. ____________________
2. ____________________
Assessment:
□ Price-performance of substitutes: Poor / Comparable / Better
□ Switching costs: High / Moderate / Low
□ Buyer willingness to switch: Low / Moderate / High
SUBSTITUTE THREAT: □ Low □ Medium □ High
OVERALL INDUSTRY ATTRACTIVENESS
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
□ Attractive (weak forces)
□ Moderately attractive (mixed forces)
□ Unattractive (strong forces)
KEY STRATEGIC IMPLICATIONS:
1. ____________________
2. ____________________
3. ____________________
COMPETITOR: ____________________
LAST UPDATED: ____________________
OVERVIEW
━━━━━━━━
Company type: ____________________
Founded: ____________________
Size (employees/revenue): ____________________
Funding/ownership: ____________________
PRODUCT/SERVICE
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
Core offering: ____________________
Key features: ____________________
Pricing: ____________________
Target market: ____________________
POSITIONING
━━━━━━━━━━━
Tagline/messaging: ____________________
Key differentiator: ____________________
Brand perception: ____________________
SWOT SUMMARY
━━━━━━━━━━━━
Strengths:
• ____________________
• ____________________
Weaknesses:
• ____________________
• ____________________
RECENT ACTIVITY
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
□ New product launches: ____________________
□ Partnerships: ____________________
□ Key hires: ____________________
□ Funding/acquisitions: ____________________
STRATEGIC IMPLICATIONS FOR US
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
Opportunity: ____________________
Threat: ____________________
Action: ____________________
Before deep analysis, quick gut-check:
If most answers are "yes," expect a challenging competitive environment.
Primary Sources:
Additional Resources:
Take guia-matthieu/competitive-analysis from the repository into ~/.claude/skills for personal
use, or into .claude/skills inside a project.
The agent identifies a skill by the name field in its header. Two skills with the
same name cannot sit side by side — one of them will be ignored.