---
name: "comparison_page_craft"
description: "Write honest, high-ranking comparison and alternatives pages ('X vs Y', 'X alternatives'): buyer-weighted dimensions, SEO page structure, FTC-safe claims and disclosures, plus fill-in page templates and a worked example. Triggers when drafting competitor comparison pages, alternatives roundups, or comparison landing pages."
---

# Comparison Page Craft

## Purpose
Ship comparison and alternatives pages that rank, get cited by AI answers, and actually convert: honest pages where someone who ends up choosing the competitor would still find the page useful.

## Workflow
1. **Name the question.** One comparison per page. "Should I use [You] or [Competitor]?" or "What are the best alternatives to [Competitor]?" Different questions need different pages and different structures (see templates).
2. **Research from primary sources only.** Pull every fact about the other product from their pricing page, docs, or changelog. Save each claim's source URL and the date you read it. Prices and features change; a stale comparison is a liability.
3. **Pick dimensions the buyer weighs.** Use the dimensions the top three buyer questions point to (cost at scale, deployment model, migration effort, whatever yours are), not the dimensions you win.
4. **Draft from the matching template** in `references/` (alternatives hub or one-on-one vs page).
5. **Run the honesty pass.** For each check that fails, fix the page before shipping:
   - Would a reader who picks the competitor still call the page useful?
   - Did you concede at least two dimensions outright, with no recovery clause?
   - Are competitor strengths named in plain language?
   - Is every factual claim sourced and dated?
   - Is the page dated, with a re-verification schedule (quarterly at minimum)?
   - Is there an explicit scope boundary (situations this comparison does not cover)?
6. **Run the disclosure pass.** Add affiliate/material-connection disclosures where the recommendation appears, in plain language. Check every superlative against the FTC rules below.
7. **Ship with maintenance.** Put the page on a re-verification calendar. Competitor facts change and the page silently rots otherwise.

## Output Contract
Every page ships with:
- **H1** that is the buyer's actual question ("Acme vs Globex: which fits a 50-person team?"), not a clever headline.
- **Answer-first TL;DR** above the fold: 2 to 8 lines, who it is for, the verdict, the decision shortcut. This is what featured snippets and AI answers lift.
- **HTML comparison table**, placed early, with descriptive cells ("Full support with unlimited history" vs "Basic support, 90-day limit"), never just checkmarks. A takeaway paragraph + structured table + per-metric source attribution is the most citation-stable format.
- **"Who should choose what" section** that recommends your product only for the use cases you are best at.
- **Honest alternatives** (for alternatives pages): 4 to 7 genuine options, each with a "best for" label, strengths, weaknesses, pricing snapshot, and ideal user. Your product does not have to be first. A page listing only your product fails quality.
- **FAQ** using the buyers' real wording ("Can I migrate from X?"), with the direct answer in the first sentence.
- **Visible date and sources** ("Last verified: 2026-10-09", links to each competitor's pricing/docs page).

## Operating Rules
1. **No fake wins.** 28 green checkmarks for you and zero for a known category leader reads as manipulation. Prospects have killed deals over disingenuous comparison pages.
2. **Concede without a clawback.** "For teams that need X, the other option is a better fit." A concession followed by a paragraph explaining why it does not really matter is worse than no concession.
3. **One factual error about a competitor costs more than the page.** A wrong price or missing feature handed to their sales team is a gift to them. Source from their site, not second-hand summaries.
4. **Superlatives need substantiation.** Before launch, have a reasonable basis for every objective claim, express or implied. "Best" needs stated criteria. "Cheaper" needs a named tier and an as-of date. You cannot generate substantiation after the claim is live.
5. **Price claims must be real.** Former or strike-through prices count only if the product was openly offered at that price in good faith for a substantial recent period. Competitor price references must reflect prevailing market prices, not outliers. (FTC Guides Against Deceptive Pricing, 16 C.F.R. Part 233.)
6. **Disclose material connections where the recommendation appears.** Affiliate links, commissions, free products, paid placements, employment ties: say so in plain language ("I get commissions for purchases made through links in this post"), next to the link or recommendation, not buried in a footer. A paid ranking boost presented as an objective ranking is deceptive even if you never claim to be unbiased. (FTC Endorsement Guides, revised July 2023.)
7. **Never trash the competition.** Name their strengths honestly. If they publish false claims about you, disprove those specific claims with truths and take the high ground.
8. **One pairing per page.** A page covering you against six competitors serves none of the queries well and reads as a directory.
9. **Build from frustration, not ego.** The strongest differentiation comes from real switch reasons: sales call recordings, churn interviews, support tickets, "why we switched" reviews. A competitor's real gap is usually an expensive experience, not a missing checkbox.
10. **Write plain.** No em dashes, no stacked superlatives, no motivational filler. If a sentence sounds like a press release, rewrite it.