Competitor Mapper

Skill: competitor-mapper

Purpose

Understand what the user is actually competing against — not just other apps, but also spreadsheets, habits, free alternatives, and human services. The goal is not an exhaustive list but a strategic map: who owns the space, where the gaps are, and whether this idea can occupy a position that incumbents can't easily copy.

Input

• Idea slug
• memory/ideas/<slug>/idea.md (app concept, key features, differentiator)
• memory/market_insights/<niche>-*-<YYYY>-<MM>.md (trend analysis files — use all available platform files for this niche)

Using Market Insights

Trend analysis files are a primary research source for competitor mapping. Extract the following:

If no market_insights files exist, note this as a gap and rely on direct research only.

Competitor Categories

Process

Step 1 — Research Checklist by Category

Direct competitors (find 3–8)

Search these sources in order:

1. App Store / Play Store category browse: Search the primary category and 2–3 keyword variations. Record the top 10 results for each search.
2. "Best X apps" articles: Search Google for best [category] apps 2026. The top 3 listicle results typically capture the market leaders.
3. Product Hunt: Search the category. Sort by most upvoted. Focus on launches from the past 18 months (recent entrants).
4. Market insights (Apps file): If <niche>-apps-*.md exists, extract any competitors named in the narrative.
5. Market insights (Reddit file): If <niche>-reddit-*.md exists, extract apps users mention by name in discussions.
6. AlternativeTo.net: Search the closest existing app. Lists adjacent competitors you may have missed.

For each direct competitor, record:

• Name, platform(s), pricing model and price
• Estimated user base (from App Store ratings count × 50–100, or from market_insights narrative)
• App Store rating (stars + review count)
• Last updated date (stale = opportunity)
• Top 3 features
• Top 3 complaints (from review mining — see Step 3)

Indirect competitors (find 2–5)

Ask: "What else might someone use to solve the same underlying problem, even if the approach is completely different?"

Sources:

• Reddit threads where users describe their current workflow for this problem
• "How to [solve problem]" search results — the solutions that appear ARE the indirect competition
• Market insights narratives that describe alternative approaches to the same pain

Substitutes (find 2–4)

Ask: "What is the user doing RIGHT NOW, before they know this app exists?"

Common substitute categories:

• Manual process: Spreadsheet, notes app, pen-and-paper, calendar reminders
• Human service: Coach, therapist, accountant, personal trainer
• Social workaround: Group chat, Facebook group, Discord server
• Inaction: Doing nothing (this is the strongest competitor for low-urgency problems)

Record the estimated cost and friction of each substitute — this is the switching-cost baseline the app must beat.

Emerging threats (find 1–3)

Sources:

• Product Hunt launches in the past 6 months
• YC / startup accelerator demo day lists
• Apple WWDC / Google I/O feature announcements that could obviate the app
• If trend_velocity = "rising-fast" in market_insights, note that new entrants are likely

Flag any emerging competitor that has raised funding — they have resources to move fast.

Step 2 — App Store Search Methodology

The App Store is the most important research surface for B2C apps. Use this systematic approach:

1. Primary keyword search: The most obvious term a user would search (e.g., "habit tracker").
2. Problem keyword search: The problem statement (e.g., "build better habits").
3. Audience keyword search: The target user + need (e.g., "ADHD planner").
4. Adjacent keyword search: Related but broader terms (e.g., "daily routine", "productivity").

For each search, record:

• Number of results that are clearly relevant (not spam/unrelated)
• Rating and review count of the top 3 results
• Whether the top result has > 50K ratings (signals an entrenched incumbent)
• Date of last update for top 5 results (stale apps = opportunity to displace)

Step 3 — Review Mining for Positioning Gaps

Competitor reviews are the richest source of positioning gaps. Mine them systematically:

1-star reviews (frustration signals)

These reveal what users hate about existing solutions. Look for patterns:

• Bugs and reliability complaints (opportunity: "the one that actually works")
• Missing features that users expected (opportunity: build the feature they want)
• Pricing complaints (opportunity: better value or different model)
• Privacy/data concerns (opportunity: privacy-first positioning)
• UX complexity complaints (opportunity: simpler alternative)

3-star reviews (unmet expectation signals)

These are often more valuable than 1-star reviews. 3-star reviewers liked the app enough to keep using it but something important is missing:

• "Great app BUT..." — the "but" is the positioning gap
• "Would be perfect IF..." — the "if" is the feature opportunity
• "Works for X but not for Y" — the "Y" is the underserved segment

5-star reviews (what's defensible)

Read competitor 5-star reviews to understand what they do well. These strengths are hard to compete against directly — don't try. Instead, find the orthogonal angle that the incumbent's strength doesn't cover.

Mining process

For each direct competitor (top 3–5):

1. Read the 20 most recent 1-star reviews
2. Read the 20 most recent 3-star reviews
3. Read 10 recent 5-star reviews
4. Categorize complaints into themes (max 5 themes per competitor)
5. Identify the most common complaint shared across 2+ competitors — this is the strongest gap signal

Step 4 — Positioning Gap Analysis

A positioning gap is a real user need that no current competitor serves well. Classify each gap:

Prioritize philosophy gaps and trust gaps — these are the hardest for incumbents to copy and the most defensible for an indie developer.

Step 5 — Market Saturation Scoring

Saturation reflects how crowded the space is and how difficult it will be to get noticed.

Total score (5–15 points):

Output

Write to memory/ideas/<slug>/competitors.json:

{
  "direct_competitors": [
    {
      "name": "",
      "platform": "",
      "estimated_users": "",
      "app_store_rating": 0,
      "review_count": 0,
      "last_updated": "",
      "pricing": "",
      "pricing_model": "",
      "top_features": [],
      "top_complaints": [],
      "complaint_themes": [],
      "distribution_channels_observed": []
    }
  ],
  "indirect_competitors": [
    {
      "name": "",
      "approach": "",
      "why_users_choose_it": ""
    }
  ],
  "substitutes": [
    {
      "description": "",
      "cost": "",
      "friction_level": "low | medium | high",
      "switching_cost_to_app": ""
    }
  ],
  "emerging_threats": [
    {
      "name": "",
      "stage": "beta | launched | announced",
      "funded": false,
      "threat_level": "low | medium | high",
      "notes": ""
    }
  ],
  "review_mining_summary": {
    "most_common_complaint_across_competitors": "",
    "strongest_gap_signal": "",
    "competitors_mined": 0
  },
  "positioning_gaps": [
    {
      "gap_type": "audience | feature | experience | price | philosophy | platform | trust",
      "description": "",
      "defensibility": "low | medium | high",
      "evidence": ""
    }
  ],
  "saturation_score": {
    "direct_competitor_count": 0,
    "incumbent_dominance": 0,
    "funding_in_space": 0,
    "keyword_saturation": 0,
    "content_saturation": 0,
    "total": 0
  },
  "market_saturation": "low | medium | high",
  "differentiation_opportunities": [],
  "market_insights_sources_used": []
}

Notes

• The most_common_complaint_across_competitors from review mining is one of the highest-signal data points in the entire validation system. If the same complaint appears in 3+ competitor review sets, it's a validated pain point — the market is telling you what to build.
• distribution_channels_observed for each competitor helps downstream skills (distribution-analysis, cac-modeler) understand which channels actually work in this category.
• If market_insights show trend_velocity = "rising-fast", note in emerging_threats that the competitor landscape will shift quickly. Rising markets attract builders.
• Substitutes with friction_level = "low" are the hardest to displace — if doing nothing or using a spreadsheet is easy enough, the app must provide dramatically more value to justify the download.