A competitor comparison is useful when it helps you make a decision. A long list of features is less useful if the prices are outdated, the products serve different customers, or nobody can explain where the claims came from.
Use AI competitor research to organize evidence, surface unanswered questions, and develop a comparison you can inspect. In Studio Global, Research supports broader investigation, while Search helps you check focused questions using cited sources. Neither removes the need to review the evidence.
Start with a decision, not a list of brands
Imagine a small agency choosing a client-reporting tool. This is an illustrative scenario, not a customer case study. Its decision might be: “Which option should we trial for reporting to five clients?”
The agency needs to compare reporting exports, client access, setup requirements, and the relevant subscription tier. A feature that only exists on an enterprise plan should not count as available on the plan being evaluated.
Before opening Research, write down the audience, geography, use case, budget constraints, and decision date. Include the current process as an alternative. Sometimes the practical choice is improving an existing setup rather than buying another product.
Give Research a bounded brief
Open Research and adapt this prompt. Replace the bracketed fields with real details before sending it.
Help us choose which client-reporting tools to trial.
Audience: [team and client profile]
Market: [country or region]
Options: [named products] and our current process: [description]
Decision date: [date]
Compare client access, reporting exports, setup requirements,
relevant plan restrictions, and publicly documented pricing.
Use current official product documentation for product claims.
Use independent sources for broader context where available.
Return a comparison table, source links, important limitations,
and questions to ask during a trial. Distinguish documented facts,
your interpretation, and information you could not verify.
Do not invent prices, customer counts, or missing capabilities.
Studio Global's research guide explains how to define scope and revise a report. Keep the first request narrow enough that every comparison criterion matters to the decision.
Build an evidence table
Ask for one row per meaningful claim rather than one vague paragraph per company. The following is an editorial template, not a generated comparison or a claim about a real vendor.
| Criterion | Evidence to capture | Decision question |
|---|---|---|
| Client access | Official description and applicable plan | Can each client see only the intended report? |
| Export format | Documented formats and restrictions | Does the export fit our delivery process? |
| Price | Billing period, currency, tier, and conditions | What would our actual configuration cost? |
| Setup | Documented prerequisites | What must we prepare before a trial? |
Treat “not found” as missing evidence, not proof that a feature does not exist. If sources conflict, preserve the disagreement and ask the vendor rather than choosing the answer you prefer.
Verify the claims that could change your choice
Open citations for decisive facts. Confirm that the cited page supports the specific sentence, refers to the correct product and plan, and remains current. A search snippet is not a substitute for reading the relevant page.
Use Search with citations for follow-ups such as: “Find the official documentation for client access on this plan.” If a page is inaccessible or unclear, label the claim unverified.
Separate vendor statements from independent assessments. A product page is a good source for what a vendor says it offers; it is not independent evidence that the product performs better than every alternative.
Turn the report into a trial plan
Finish with a shortlist, the reason each option qualifies, and the checks still required. Avoid a numerical score if you have not defined what the score measures.
For the agency example, the next step could be testing whether a sample client can access the intended report and whether its export preserves the required fields. Those are observable checks, unlike “easy to use” without a definition.
Do not upload confidential contracts, customer records, or unpublished strategy unless your organization authorizes that use. Use public material or sanitized examples wherever possible.
Your final deliverable should explain what you know, what remains uncertain, and what to test next—not simply declare a winner.