Comparison content that mentions competitors, done honestly

5 days ago
3 min read

Updated: 3 days ago

Introduction

Most businesses will not name a competitor, and the instinct is understandable. It feels like giving them publicity, it invites a response, and there is a worry about legal exposure. So the comparison the buyer is definitely making gets made without you, using whatever information they can assemble elsewhere.

The alternative is to help them make it. Done honestly — acknowledging where an alternative is genuinely better, being specific about who you suit and who you do not — it is disproportionately persuasive, because it is the opposite of what buyers expect from a supplier. Done as thinly disguised advocacy it is transparent, and worse than not doing it at all.

1. Comparison content that mentions competitors works because buyers are comparing anyway

The premise.

The comparison happens with or without you. Participating in it lets you frame the criteria; abstaining means somebody else frames them, frequently badly. Buyers also search for these comparisons explicitly, which means the page has an audience already looking for it.

2. Say honestly who the alternative suits better

The move that establishes credibility.

Naming the situations where a competitor is the better choice is the single most convincing thing in this format. Buyers immediately trust the rest of the assessment more. It costs you the enquiries you would have lost anyway and buys credibility on the ones you keep.

3. Compare on criteria that matter to the buyer

Not the criteria you happen to win on.

Price, timescale, availability, specialism, scale, support. Choosing flattering criteria is obvious to readers, and the content then reads as an advertisement, which it is. Take the criteria from what buyers actually ask about rather than from what you would like them to weigh.

4. Be accurate and be able to evidence it

The requirement that is not optional.

Every factual claim about a competitor must be true, current and supportable. Comparative claims about identifiable businesses can carry legal exposure, and the rules on this vary by jurisdiction.

5. Compare categories where naming is uncomfortable

The alternative structure.

Comparing types of supplier — a national chain against a local firm, a specialist against a generalist, an in-house team against outsourcing — captures most of the benefit and avoids naming anybody. This is also easier to keep accurate, because categories change more slowly than individual businesses.

6. Include yourself honestly in the weaknesses

The credibility test.

Saying you are more expensive, or have longer lead times, or do not handle very small jobs, is what makes the positive claims believable. It also filters out buyers who would not have been satisfied.

7. Answer the comparison questions buyers actually ask

Where to get the material.

Your enquiry conversations contain them: how you compare on price, what makes you different, whether the cheaper option is adequate. Those are the comparisons worth writing.

8. Keep it current

The maintenance requirement.

Competitor prices, services and positioning change. Out-of-date comparative claims are both misleading and damaging, and this content needs a review date rather than being written once.

9. Expect it to reduce some enquiries

The trade to accept deliberately.

Honest comparison sends some buyers to the alternative that suits them better. Those were enquiries you would have lost later, more expensively, and the ones who remain arrive better qualified.

Be careful with the legal position. Comparative advertising, use of competitors' trade marks and claims about identifiable businesses are regulated differently across jurisdictions, and disparagement carries real risk. Where you intend to name competitors directly, this is worth checking before publishing.

Conclusion

Help the buyer make the comparison, because they are making it regardless.

Say honestly where an alternative suits somebody better, compare on the criteria buyers care about rather than the ones you win, make every factual claim accurate and supportable, use category comparisons where naming is uncomfortable, include your own weaknesses so the rest is credible, take the questions from your actual enquiry conversations, keep the content current with a review date, accept that it will send some buyers elsewhere, and check the legal position before naming anybody.