Competitor analysis
A founder/indie-hacker skills pack for Claude Code, Cursor, Codex and Gemini CLI: market research, competitor analysis, outcome-based pricing, landing-page copy, MVP spec, cold outreach, growth experiments and fundraising narrative.
npx -y skills add Hayatelin/founder-skills --skill competitor-analysisAssembled from the repository path, not quoted from the project. Check it against their README if it does not work.
One thing to look at
- 0 stars0 stars. Stars are a popularity signal and not a quality one, but at this level it is likely that nobody has read this closely except its author, and you would be relying on your own review.
What its author says it does
Copied from the file, not written here
Maps the competitive landscape, finds positioning gaps, and builds a differentiation table plus a sharp "why we win" angle. Trigger on "who are my competitors", "competitive analysis", "how do I differentiate", "positioning gap", "build a battle card", or "why would anyone switch to us".
SKILL.md
2.2 KB, as published. Nobody here has run it
When to use
When a founder needs to understand who else solves this pain, where the white space is, and how to position so the product looks obviously different (not just better).
Inputs to gather
- Product description and target ICP.
- Any competitors already known (direct, indirect, and "the status quo").
- The 1-2 dimensions customers actually care about most.
Process
- List 5-8 competitors across 3 buckets: direct (same job, same buyer), indirect (different shape, same job), and the real default (spreadsheet, agency, doing nothing). The default is usually the toughest competitor.
- Profile each on: who they serve, pricing model, core promise, visible weakness, and their moat (data, integrations, brand, network effects).
- Plot a 2x2 on the two axes the ICP cares about most; find the empty quadrant.
- Build the differentiation table: rows = features/outcomes that matter, columns = you vs. top 3 rivals. Be honest where they win.
- Write the "why we win" angle — one sentence of earned, defensible difference, not a feature list. Run the moat test: "if OpenAI shipped this, what's left?"
Output
- Landscape map: the 2x2 with every competitor placed and the open quadrant marked.
- Differentiation table (markdown) with an honest ✓ / ✗ / ~ grid.
- "Why we win": one positioning sentence + 3 proof points.
- Battle card: for the top rival — their pitch, their weakness, your counter.
Quality bar & pitfalls
- Good = the differentiation is structural (data, vertical depth, workflow lock-in), not "cleaner UI" or "cheaper" — those get copied in a sprint.
- Treat thin GPT/Claude wrappers as fragile rivals: their moat is zero, attack it.
- Avoid: ignoring the status-quo competitor; a feature table where you win every row (nobody believes it); positioning that any rival could claim word-for-word.