Competitive Landscape Mapping

CRITICAL STANDARDS - APPLY TO EVERY ANALYSIS

Source File Primacy

When source files (Excel/CSV) are provided:

Extract values DIRECTLY — Do not perform your own calculations; use the numbers as they appear
Maintain consistency — When the same metric appears in multiple places, ensure identical values throughout
Verify calculations — If the prompt asks you to calculate something, verify your result matches related data in the source
Round only as shown — Use the same decimal precision as the source file

Prompt Fidelity

When the prompt specifies exact requirements, follow them verbatim:

Slide Titles & Section Names:

If prompt says "Overview and Competitive Scope" slide — use EXACTLY that title, not a paraphrase
If prompt says within the "Segment Mix" section — use EXACTLY "Segment Mix" as the section header
Never substitute with creative alternatives (e.g., don't use "FY2024 Segment Contribution Analysis" when "Overview and Competitive Scope" was specified)

Chart vs Table:

If prompt says embedded chart — create an actual PowerPoint chart object, NOT a table
If prompt says data labels must display — these go on chart elements (bars, slices, lines), not table cells
Tables and charts are NOT interchangeable — use exactly what's specified

Complete Data Series:

If prompt lists 7 competitors, include ALL 7 — not 5 or 6
If prompt shows data for years 2015-2025, include ALL years — not a subset
If prompt specifies 6 series in a chart (Uber, Lyft, DiDi, Bolt, Grab, Gojek), include ALL 6 — not 4

Exact Values & Phrasing:

If prompt says Revenue: $43.98B (+18% YoY) — display exactly that format
If prompt says surpasses DoorDash 4:1, Lyft 8:1 — use those exact ratios, not "7.6x Lyft"
If prompt gives specific percentages (e.g., "Uber 30%, DiDi 35%"), use exactly those numbers

When in doubt: Re-read the prompt. If it specifies something explicitly, that's not a suggestion — it's a requirement.

Reference Files

This skill includes reference files in the references/ folder. Use them as follows:

references/schemas.md — Table templates for M&A transactions, scenario analysis, and slide structure. Reference when building financial tables or investment scenarios.
references/frameworks.md — 2x2 matrix axis pairs by industry. Reference when choosing positioning visualization dimensions.

Source Quality Hierarchy

When sources conflict, prioritize in this order:

10-Ks / Annual Reports — Audited, highest reliability
Earnings Calls / Investor Presentations — Management commentary, forward guidance
Sell-Side Research — Analyst estimates, useful for private company sizing
Industry Reports (McKinsey, Gartner, etc.) — Market sizing, trends
News Articles — Use only for recent developments, verify against primary sources

Data Comparability

Time periods must match — All competitor metrics from same fiscal year. Flag exceptions: "(FY24)" vs "(H1 2024)"
Metric definitions must match — Same calculation methodology across competitors
Currency normalization — Convert all figures to USD for international comparisons; note exchange rate and date used
Use "-" for missing data — Never leave cells blank; for private companies, use "N/A" or estimates with "[E]" flag
Cite every number — Format: "[Company] [Document] ([Date])"
Source file fidelity — When Excel/CSV files are provided, use values exactly as given; do not recalculate or round differently than shown

Design & Formatting

Slide titles = insights — "Scale leaders pulling away from niche players" not "Competitive Analysis"
Slide titles must fit — One or two lines fine, but no overflow; reduce font size if needed (min 24pt)
Signposts = quantified — "margin below 40%" not "margins decline"
Ratings include actuals — "●●● $160B" not just "●●●"
Slide numbers required — Every slide must have a page number

Presentation-Specific Requirements

Actual embedded charts required — Pie charts, bar charts, and line graphs must be real PowerPoint chart objects (created via pptx skill), NOT text/ASCII representations
Match prompt structure — If prompt specifies slide structure, follow it
Competitor tables — For comprehensive analysis: metrics table + qualitative table per competitor. For rapid assessments: single combined table is acceptable.
Segment financials — Include both Revenue AND EBITDA when available. For private competitors or limited disclosure, revenue-only tables are acceptable; note "[EBITDA not disclosed]"

Visual Reference

Review examples/Toast_Embedded_Payments_Competitive_Landscape_v3.pptx and match its professional quality:

Spacing & Overflow Prevention:

Title-to-content gap — Minimum 0.4" between slide title bottom and first content element
Section header gaps — Minimum 0.25" between section headers and content below
Element buffers — Minimum 0.2" between any two elements (tables, text boxes, charts)
Margin safety — Keep all content at least 0.5" from slide edges
Text overflow — If text doesn't fit, reduce font size or split across slides; never let text clip or overlap

Slide Titles:

Must fit within slide width — One or two lines is fine, but text must not overflow or clip
If title is too long — Shorten wording or reduce font size (minimum 24pt)
Front-load the insight — Put the key point first, details second

Chart Formatting:

Legend inside layout — Always set include_in_layout=True so legends don't overlap chart area
Legend position — Use RIGHT for pie charts (≤6 items), BOTTOM for line/bar charts (≤4 series)
Too many series — If >6 series, consider splitting into multiple charts or using a table instead
Data labels — For pie charts, show percentages on slices rather than relying solely on legend

Typography (set explicitly, never use defaults):

Slide title: 28-32pt bold
Section headers: 16-20pt bold
Body text: 11-14pt regular
Table text: 10-12pt regular
Sources/footnotes: 8-10pt, gray
Consistency rule: Same element type = same font size throughout deck

Layout:

Clean grid alignment — tables and text blocks align to consistent margins
Generous whitespace — don't crowd slides; let content breathe
Visual hierarchy — most important insight is largest/most prominent
One key message per slide — supporting detail below

Color:

Limited palette — 2-3 colors max (one accent color for emphasis)
Muted tones — avoid bright/saturated colors; use navy, gray, muted blue
Consistent application — same color meanings throughout (e.g., accent for key metrics)

Tables:

Light gray header row with bold text
Alternating row shading (subtle) or clean white with thin borders
Right-align numbers, left-align text
Adequate cell padding — text shouldn't touch borders

Rating visuals:

●●● / ●●○ / ●○○ system with actual metric alongside
Consistent placement in comparative tables

Adapt structure and metrics to fit your industry — but maintain this level of polish.

What's STRICT vs FLEXIBLE

STRICT (Every Time)	FLEXIBLE (Case-by-Case)
Exact titles/sections when prompt specifies	Creative titles when prompt doesn't specify
Chart when prompt says chart; table when prompt says table	Visualization type when prompt doesn't specify
All data points/competitors listed in prompt	Number of competitors when prompt doesn't specify
Exact values/ratios when prompt specifies them	Rounding when prompt doesn't specify precision
Titles fit without overflow	Number of competitor categories
Minimum spacing between elements	Which dimensions to compare
Chart legends inside layout	Number of competitors profiled
No overlapping text/elements	Visualization type (2x2, radar, tier)

WORKFLOW PHASES

Phase 1: Clarify Requirements

Before starting, confirm:

Scope: Single company deep-dive or multi-company comparison?
Output: Presentation or written memo?
Focus areas: Specific competitors, dimensions, or strategic questions?
Investment context: Need scenarios/signposts?
Source files: What data files are provided and what values should be extracted?

Phase 2: Research → Outline → Review → Create

Do NOT create final output until outline is reviewed.

The 10-step Analysis Workflow below (Steps 0-9) is executed during Phase 2. Complete research and outlining before creating final slides or documents.

ANALYSIS WORKFLOW

Step 0: Identify Industry-Defining Metrics

Before diving into analysis, identify 3-5 metrics that matter most for this industry:

Industry	Key Metrics
SaaS	ARR, NRR, CAC payback, LTV/CAC, Rule of 40
Payments	GPV, take rate, attach rate, transaction margin
Marketplaces	GMV, take rate, buyer/seller ratio, repeat rate
Retail	Same-store sales, inventory turns, sales per sq ft
Logistics	Volume, cost per unit, on-time delivery %, capacity utilization

For industries not listed, identify the 3-5 metrics that investors and operators use to benchmark performance.

Use these metrics consistently across all competitor comparisons.

Step 1: Market Context

Market size (current and projected) with source
Growth drivers and headwinds
Key trends reshaping the industry

CORRECT: "The embedded payments market is $80-100B in 2024, growing at 20-25% CAGR (McKinsey 2024)" WRONG: "The market is large and growing rapidly"

Step 2: Industry Economics

Map value flows. Approach varies by industry type:

Vertically-structured — Value chain layers with typical margin at each
Platform/network — Ecosystem participants and value flows between them
Fragmented — Consolidation dynamics and margin differences by scale

Step 3: Target Company Profile

| Metric | Value |
|--------|-------|
| Revenue | $4.96B |
| Growth | +26% YoY |
| Gross Margin | 45% |
| Profitability | $373M Adj. EBITDA |
| Customers | 134K |
| Retention | 92% |
| Market Share | ~15% |

For multi-segment companies, add segment breakdown:

| Segment | Revenue | Rev YoY | Rev % | EBITDA | EBITDA YoY | Margin |
|---------|---------|---------|-------|--------|------------|--------|
| Seg A   | $25.1B  | +26%    | 57%   | $6.5B  | +31%       | 26%    |
| Seg B   | $13.8B  | +31%    | 31%   | $2.5B  | +64%       | 18%    |
| Seg C   | $5.1B   | -2%     | 12%   | -$74M  | -16%       | -1%    |
| Total   | $44.0B  | +18%    | 100%  | $6.5B* | -          | 15%    |

*Note corporate costs if applicable

Step 4: Competitor Mapping

Group competitors using the framework that fits:

By business model — Platform vs. vertical vs. horizontal
By segment — Enterprise vs. SMB vs. consumer
By posture — Direct vs. adjacent vs. emerging
By origin — Incumbents vs. disruptors vs. new entrants

Step 5: Positioning Visualization

Visualization	Best For
2x2 Matrix	Two dominant competitive factors
Radar/Spider	Multi-factor comparison
Tier Diagram	Natural clustering/strategic groups
Value Chain Map	Vertical industries
Ecosystem Map	Platform markets

Step 6: Competitor Deep Dives

Table 1 — Metrics:

| Metric | Value |
|--------|-------|
| Revenue | $X.XB |
| Growth | +XX% YoY |
| Gross Margin | XX% |
| Market Cap | $X.XB |
| Profitability | $XXXM EBITDA |
| Customers | XXK |
| Retention | XX% |
| Market Share | ~XX% |

Table 2 — Qualitative:

| Category | Assessment |
|----------|------------|
| Business | What they do (1 sentence) |
| Strengths | 2-3 bullets |
| Weaknesses | 2-3 bullets |
| Strategy | Current priorities |

Step 7: Comparative Analysis

| Dimension | Company A | Company B | Company C |
|-----------|-----------|-----------|-----------|
| Scale | ●●● $160B | ●●○ $45B | ●○○ $8B |
| Growth | ●●○ +26% | ●●● +35% | ●●○ +22% |
| Margins | ●●○ 7.5% | ●○○ 3.2% | ●●● 15% |

Step 8: Strategic Context

M&A transactions (multiples, strategic rationale)
Partnership and integration trends
Capital raising patterns
Regulatory developments

Step 9: Synthesis

Competitive Moat Assessment: Evaluate each competitor's durable advantages using these categories:

Moat Type	What to Assess
Network Effects	Strength of user/supplier flywheel; cross-side vs. same-side effects
Switching Costs	Technical integration depth, contractual lock-in, behavioral habits
Scale Economies	Unit cost advantages at volume; minimum efficient scale
Intangible Assets	Brand value, proprietary data, regulatory licenses, patents

Rate each as Strong / Moderate / Weak with supporting evidence.

Required Synthesis Elements:

Durable advantages (hard to replicate) — map to moat categories above
Structural vulnerabilities (hard to fix)
Current state vs. trajectory

For investment contexts:

| Scenario | Probability | Key Driver |
|----------|-------------|------------|
| Bull | 30% | Market share gains, margin expansion |
| Base | 50% | Current trajectory continues |
| Bear | 20% | Competitive pressure, margin compression |

QUALITY CHECKLIST

Before finalizing, verify:

Prompt Fidelity:

✅ Slide titles match prompt exactly (not paraphrased)
✅ Section names match prompt exactly
✅ Charts used where prompt says "chart"; tables where prompt says "table"
✅ All competitors/data points included (if prompt lists 7, include 7)
✅ All years/periods included (if prompt shows 2015-2025, include all)
✅ Exact values and formats used as specified in prompt
✅ Commentary uses exact phrasing when prompt specifies it

Source File & Data Consistency:

✅ All values from source files extracted directly (not recalculated)
✅ Same metric shows identical value across all slides
✅ Calculated percentages match source data or related figures
✅ Numbers use same decimal precision as source

Layout & Spacing:

✅ Minimum 0.4" gap between slide title and first content element
✅ No text or elements overlapping
✅ All content within 0.5" margin from slide edges
✅ Text fits within containers (no clipping or overflow)
✅ Slide titles fit within slide width (1-2 lines, no overflow)

Charts:

✅ Legends set to include_in_layout=True (no overlap with chart)
✅ Legend position appropriate (RIGHT for pie, BOTTOM for line/bar)
✅ No more than 6 series per chart; if more, split or use table

Typography:

✅ Font sizes explicitly set (not default)
✅ Same element type uses same font size across all slides
✅ Titles 28-32pt, headers 16-20pt, body 11-14pt, sources 8-10pt

Data & Sources:

✅ Every number has a source citation
✅ All competitor metrics from same fiscal period (flag exceptions)
✅ Same metric definitions across all competitors

Presentation Format:

✅ Slide titles state insights, not topics
✅ All slides have page numbers
✅ Charts are actual embedded PowerPoint objects (not ASCII/text)
✅ Segment tables include EBITDA where available; revenue-only acceptable for private companies

competitive-analysis