Competitive Analysis Template: Free Downloadable Worksheet for SaaS Teams
A Competitive Analysis Template That Actually Gets Used
Most competitive analysis templates fail for the same reason: they ask for everything and prioritize nothing. You end up with a 40-tab spreadsheet that takes a week to fill out and gets abandoned after the first quarterly review.
This competitive analysis template is different. It is organized into six focused sections, each designed to answer a specific strategic question. You can fill it out section by section, and each section is useful on its own even if you never complete the rest. The whole worksheet targets SaaS teams running B2B products, though the structure adapts to any software business.
If you want context on the broader process before diving into the template, start with our complete guide to competitive analysis for SaaS. This article focuses on the actual worksheet you will fill in.
How to Use This Template
Each section below includes three things:
- A copy-paste table you can drop into a spreadsheet, Notion doc, or wiki page.
- An explanation of what each field captures and why it matters.
- Example entries so you can see what good looks like.
Work through the sections in order for your first pass. For ongoing updates, jump directly to whichever section needs refreshing. Most SaaS teams find that Sections 1 (Competitor Profile) and 4 (Review Intelligence) change the fastest and need monthly updates, while Sections 2 (Feature Matrix) and 3 (Pricing Comparison) shift quarterly.
Section 1: Competitor Profile
This section answers the foundational question: who are we competing against, and what do they look like?
Every competitor you track gets one row. The goal is to capture enough context that anyone on your team — including new hires — can immediately understand who each player is and why they matter.
| Field | Competitor A | Competitor B | Competitor C |
|---|---|---|---|
| Company name | |||
| Website URL | |||
| One-line description | |||
| Founded year | |||
| Estimated headcount | |||
| Last known funding | |||
| Competitor type | Direct / Indirect / Emerging | Direct / Indirect / Emerging | Direct / Indirect / Emerging |
| Primary target persona | |||
| Geographic focus | |||
| Homepage tagline |
What to fill in and why
One-line description should be your own characterization, not their marketing copy. "Enterprise project management with a heavy integration ecosystem" is more useful than whatever their homepage says.
Competitor type matters because it changes how you respond. Direct competitors demand feature parity analysis. Indirect competitors require positioning differentiation. Emerging competitors require monitoring for pivot signals before they become direct threats.
Primary target persona is the single most important field in this section. If a competitor targets engineering managers at mid-market companies while you target product teams at startups, you are fighting a different battle than if you both target the same buyer. Misreading this leads to wasted competitive energy.
Example entry
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
| Company name | RivalPM |
| Website URL | rivalpm.io |
| One-line description | Mid-market project management with native time tracking and resource planning |
| Founded year | 2021 |
| Estimated headcount | 85-120 (LinkedIn) |
| Last known funding | Series B, $28M (2024) |
| Competitor type | Direct |
| Primary target persona | Operations managers at 50-500 person companies |
| Geographic focus | North America, expanding EU |
| Homepage tagline | "The PM tool your ops team will actually use" |
Section 2: Feature Matrix
This section answers: where do we have feature parity, where do we lead, and where do we lag?
List the features that matter to your buyers across the columns. These should come from three sources: your own feature list, features competitors promote on their marketing pages, and features that users request or praise in reviews. Do not list every checkbox feature — focus on the 15-25 capabilities that actually influence buying decisions.
| Feature | Your Product | Competitor A | Competitor B | Competitor C |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| [Feature 1] | Full / Partial / None | Full / Partial / None | Full / Partial / None | Full / Partial / None |
| [Feature 2] | Full / Partial / None | Full / Partial / None | Full / Partial / None | Full / Partial / None |
| [Feature 3] | Full / Partial / None | Full / Partial / None | Full / Partial / None | Full / Partial / None |
| ... |
Rating definitions
Use a consistent three-level scale so comparisons are meaningful:
- Full: The feature is production-ready, documented, and available on standard plans.
- Partial: The feature exists but is limited — maybe it is in beta, requires an enterprise plan, only covers some use cases, or needs a third-party integration to work.
- None: The feature does not exist or requires a full workaround.
What makes this section valuable
The matrix itself is table stakes. The real insight comes from marking the gaps — cells where competitors have "None" or "Partial" for features that review data shows buyers care about. These gaps are your product roadmap opportunities. For a deeper dive into structuring competitive analysis around frameworks and templates, see our dedicated guide.
Example row
| Feature | Compttr | RivalPM | PlanStack | OpsBoard |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| AI competitor report generation | Full | None | Partial (manual) | None |
| G2/Capterra data integration | Full | None | None | Partial |
| Automated review sentiment analysis | Full | None | None | None |
| PDF export | Full | Full | Full | Partial |
| Team sharing & collaboration | Full | Full | Full | Full |
Section 3: Pricing Comparison
This section answers: how does our pricing position us in the market, and where are the pressure points?
Pricing is one of the fastest-changing dimensions of the competitive landscape. Competitors adjust tiers, add usage limits, or restructure their model entirely. Track both the numbers and the structure. For a more thorough breakdown of how to build and maintain this analysis, see our competitor pricing matrix template.
| Field | Your Product | Competitor A | Competitor B | Competitor C |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pricing model | Per seat / Usage / Flat | Per seat / Usage / Flat | Per seat / Usage / Flat | Per seat / Usage / Flat |
| Free tier | Yes / No | Yes / No | Yes / No | Yes / No |
| Free tier limits | ||||
| Entry paid plan | $/mo | $/mo | $/mo | $/mo |
| Mid-tier plan | $/mo | $/mo | $/mo | $/mo |
| Enterprise pricing | Published / Contact sales | Published / Contact sales | Published / Contact sales | Published / Contact sales |
| Annual discount | % | % | % | % |
| Key feature gates | ||||
| Recent pricing changes |
What to fill in and why
Key feature gates is the most strategically important field. Which features are locked behind higher tiers? If a competitor gates a feature that your users get for free, that is a sales talking point. If you gate a feature that competitors offer on their free plan, that is a churn risk.
Recent pricing changes track momentum. A competitor that just raised prices is either confident in their value or about to lose price-sensitive customers. A competitor that recently introduced a free tier is trying to expand top-of-funnel. Both signals should inform your strategy.
Example entry
| Field | Compttr | RivalPM |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing model | Per report + subscription | Per seat |
| Free tier | Yes | Yes |
| Free tier limits | 1 report, basic features | 3 users, 5 projects |
| Entry paid plan | $29/mo | $12/seat/mo |
| Mid-tier plan | $79/mo | $24/seat/mo |
| Enterprise pricing | Contact sales | Contact sales |
| Annual discount | 20% | 15% |
| Key feature gates | Competitor chat, PDF export on paid | Time tracking, resource view on mid-tier |
| Recent pricing changes | Launched free tier (Jan 2026) | Raised mid-tier by $4/seat (Q4 2025) |
Section 4: Review Intelligence
This section answers: what do real users love and hate about each competitor?
Review data from platforms like G2, Capterra, and Trustpilot is the closest thing you have to unfiltered customer feedback about your competitors. This section distills hundreds of reviews into actionable patterns.
| Field | Competitor A | Competitor B | Competitor C |
|---|---|---|---|
| G2 rating | /5 | /5 | /5 |
| G2 review count | |||
| Capterra rating | /5 | /5 | /5 |
| Capterra review count | |||
| Trustpilot rating | /5 | /5 | /5 |
| Trustpilot review count | |||
| Rating trend (6 mo) | Rising / Stable / Declining | Rising / Stable / Declining | Rising / Stable / Declining |
| Top 3 praise themes | 1. 2. 3. | 1. 2. 3. | 1. 2. 3. |
| Top 3 complaint themes | 1. 2. 3. | 1. 2. 3. | 1. 2. 3. |
| Standout feature (most praised) | |||
| Biggest weakness (most criticized) | |||
| Review velocity (reviews/month) |
How to extract themes
Reading every review individually does not scale. Instead, use this approach:
- Sort reviews by "Most Recent" rather than "Most Helpful" to avoid survivorship bias.
- Read the 20 most recent reviews on each platform.
- Tally recurring keywords in the "What do you like best?" and "What do you dislike?" sections.
- Group related complaints. "Slow customer support," "tickets take days," and "hard to reach anyone" are all the same theme: support responsiveness.
Alternatively, tools like Compttr automate this entirely — pulling review data from G2, Capterra, and Trustpilot, running sentiment analysis, and surfacing the top praise and complaint themes per competitor. What takes a team hours of manual reading takes about 60 seconds.
Example entry
| Field | RivalPM |
|---|---|
| G2 rating | 4.3/5 |
| G2 review count | 847 |
| Capterra rating | 4.1/5 |
| Capterra review count | 1,204 |
| Trustpilot rating | 3.8/5 |
| Trustpilot review count | 312 |
| Rating trend (6 mo) | Declining (was 4.5 on G2 six months ago) |
| Top 3 praise themes | 1. Intuitive drag-and-drop UI 2. Native time tracking 3. Responsive mobile app |
| Top 3 complaint themes | 1. Reporting is shallow 2. Integrations break after updates 3. Customer support slow for non-enterprise |
| Standout feature | Drag-and-drop project views |
| Biggest weakness | Reporting and analytics |
| Review velocity | ~40 new reviews/month across platforms |
Section 5: Positioning Map
This section answers: where does each competitor sit in the market, and where is the white space?
A positioning map plots competitors on two axes that matter to buyers. The specific axes depend on your market, but common pairs include:
- Ease of use vs. Feature depth
- Price vs. Target company size
- Automation vs. Customization
- Vertical focus vs. Horizontal breadth
Pick the two dimensions where you believe differentiation is highest.
| Competitor | Axis 1 (e.g., Ease of Use: 1-10) | Axis 2 (e.g., Feature Depth: 1-10) | Positioning Statement |
|---|---|---|---|
| Your Product | |||
| Competitor A | |||
| Competitor B | |||
| Competitor C | |||
| White space | Describe the underserved quadrant |
Why this section matters
The positioning map reveals two things. First, clusters — groups of competitors occupying similar positions, which means that quadrant is crowded and differentiation is harder. Second, white space — areas where no competitor is positioned strongly, which may represent an opportunity or may indicate that buyers do not value that combination.
The positioning statement should be one sentence summarizing how each competitor wants to be perceived. Pull this from their homepage, their G2 category description, or the opening line of their "About" page.
Section 6: Strategic Summary
This section answers: given everything above, what should we actually do?
This is the most important section and the one most teams skip. Without a synthesis layer, the template is just data. The strategic summary turns data into decisions.
| Question | Your Answer |
|---|---|
| What are our 3 strongest competitive advantages? | 1. 2. 3. |
| What are our 3 biggest competitive vulnerabilities? | 1. 2. 3. |
| Which competitor is the biggest threat in the next 12 months? Why? | |
| Which competitor is losing momentum? What evidence supports this? | |
| What is the #1 unmet need across competitor reviews? | |
| What positioning adjustment should we make? | |
| What feature should we prioritize based on competitive gaps? | |
| What pricing change (if any) does the data support? | |
| What is one thing sales should say differently based on this analysis? |
How to fill this in well
Each answer should reference specific data from the previous sections. "We think we're strong at onboarding" is an opinion. "We are strong at onboarding — our G2 praise themes center on 'easy setup' while two of three direct competitors have 'steep learning curve' as a top complaint" is evidence-based competitive intelligence.
Review this summary monthly. If your answers have not changed in three months, either the market is unusually stable or you are not updating your data.
Putting It All Together
The six sections build on each other:
- Competitor Profile establishes who you are tracking.
- Feature Matrix shows where you overlap and differ.
- Pricing Comparison reveals market positioning through economics.
- Review Intelligence surfaces what real users think.
- Positioning Map visualizes the competitive landscape.
- Strategic Summary converts everything into action items.
For your first pass, expect to spend 2-4 hours per competitor filling this out manually. That time drops significantly on subsequent updates because the structure is already in place and you are only refreshing data that changed.
If you want to skip the manual data-gathering step entirely, automated competitive intelligence tools can generate reports from G2, Capterra, and Trustpilot data in minutes. You provide a product URL and get review intelligence, feature comparisons, and strategic recommendations — which you can then plug directly into Sections 2, 4, and 6 of this worksheet.
Try It With Your Own Competitors
Copy the tables above into your preferred tool. Start with your top three competitors and fill out Section 1 and Section 4 first — those two alone will surface insights most teams have never formalized.
Then expand from there. A partially filled competitive analysis template that gets updated monthly is worth infinitely more than a comprehensive one that collects dust.
Ready to automate the data-gathering part? Try Compttr with your own competitors and get a complete competitive report in about 60 seconds.