See how your UX stacks up against competitors.

competitive_benchmark runs the same UX analysis on multiple sites and ranks them. Find out if your signup flow is faster. See if your forms have more friction. Get specific suggestions for what to fix.

Quick Start

{
  "urls": [
    "https://example.com/signup",
    "https://competitor1.com/signup",
    "https://competitor2.com/signup"
  ]
}

What happens:

Each URL is analyzed for UX metrics.
Sites are ranked on each metric.
You see where you win and where you lose.
You get specific recommendations for improvement.

Parameters

Parameter	Type	Required	Default	Description
`urls`	array	Yes	—	URLs to benchmark (2-5 sites)
`metrics`	array	No	All	Specific metrics to compare
`task`	string	No	—	Task to attempt on each site
`persona`	string	No	`first-timer`	Persona to use for analysis

Metrics Compared

Form Friction

Metric	What It Measures
Field Count	Number of required fields
Steps	Multi-page vs single-page
Validation	Inline vs on-submit
Password Rules	Complexity requirements
Optional Fields	Clear marking of optional fields

Cognitive Load

Metric	What It Measures
Text Density	Words per screen
Decision Points	Choices the user must make
Terminology	Industry jargon usage
Visual Hierarchy	Clear information flow
Navigation Clarity	Obvious next steps

Trust Signals

Metric	What It Measures
Security Badges	HTTPS, security certifications
Social Proof	Reviews, testimonials, logos
Privacy Info	Clear data handling policies
Contact Options	Easy-to-find support
Professional Design	Polish and consistency

Performance

Metric	What It Measures
Load Time	Time to interactive
LCP	Largest Contentful Paint
CLS	Cumulative Layout Shift
Input Latency	Time to respond to clicks

Output

{
  "benchmark": {
    "urls": [
      "https://example.com/signup",
      "https://competitor1.com/signup",
      "https://competitor2.com/signup"
    ],
    "task": "Create an account",
    "persona": "first-timer"
  },
  "rankings": {
    "overall": [
      { "url": "competitor2.com", "score": 87 },
      { "url": "example.com", "score": 72 },
      { "url": "competitor1.com", "score": 68 }
    ],
    "form_friction": [
      { "url": "competitor2.com", "score": 95, "fields": 4 },
      { "url": "example.com", "score": 70, "fields": 8 },
      { "url": "competitor1.com", "score": 55, "fields": 12 }
    ],
    "cognitive_load": [
      { "url": "competitor2.com", "score": 90 },
      { "url": "competitor1.com", "score": 75 },
      { "url": "example.com", "score": 65 }
    ],
    "trust_signals": [
      { "url": "example.com", "score": 85 },
      { "url": "competitor1.com", "score": 80 },
      { "url": "competitor2.com", "score": 75 }
    ],
    "performance": [
      { "url": "competitor2.com", "score": 92, "lcp": 1.2 },
      { "url": "example.com", "score": 78, "lcp": 2.1 },
      { "url": "competitor1.com", "score": 65, "lcp": 3.4 }
    ]
  },
  "analysis": {
    "example.com": {
      "strengths": [
        "Strong trust signals (security badges, testimonials)",
        "Professional design quality"
      ],
      "weaknesses": [
        "Form has 8 fields vs competitor's 4",
        "High cognitive load - too much text on signup page",
        "Password validation only shows on submit"
      ],
      "recommendations": [
        {
          "priority": "high",
          "area": "form_friction",
          "issue": "Too many required fields",
          "action": "Defer Company Name and Phone to onboarding, reduce signup to 4 fields",
          "impact": "Estimated 15-25% increase in completion rate"
        },
        {
          "priority": "medium",
          "area": "cognitive_load",
          "issue": "Dense paragraph above form",
          "action": "Replace with 3 bullet points",
          "impact": "Reduced time-to-start"
        }
      ]
    }
  },
  "opportunities": [
    {
      "insight": "Competitor2 wins on simplicity but lacks trust signals - you can beat them by simplifying while keeping your trust advantages",
      "actionable": "Reduce form to 4 fields, keep security badges visible"
    }
  ]
}

Use Cases

1. Conversion Gap Analysis

Your signup converts at 15%. A competitor converts at 25%. Why?

{
  "urls": ["https://yoursite.com/signup", "https://competitor.com/signup"],
  "task": "Create an account",
  "persona": "first-timer"
}

2. Checkout Optimization

Compare checkout experiences side by side.

{
  "urls": [
    "https://yourstore.com/checkout",
    "https://amazon.com/checkout",
    "https://shopify.com/checkout"
  ],
  "task": "Complete purchase"
}

3. Landing Page Effectiveness

Compare landing pages for lead capture.

{
  "urls": [
    "https://yoursite.com",
    "https://competitor1.com",
    "https://competitor2.com"
  ],
  "metrics": ["cognitive_load", "trust_signals"]
}

4. Industry Benchmarking

See how you compare to industry leaders.

{
  "urls": [
    "https://yourbank.com/apply",
    "https://chase.com/apply",
    "https://capitalone.com/apply"
  ],
  "task": "Apply for credit card"
}

Interpreting Results

Score Ranges

Score	Meaning
90-100	Excellent -- industry leading
80-89	Good -- competitive
70-79	Average -- room for improvement
60-69	Below average -- significant gaps
<60	Poor -- major friction

Priority Recommendations

Priority	Meaning	Typical Impact
High	Fix right away	15%+ conversion lift
Medium	Fix soon	5-15% conversion lift
Low	Nice to have	Under 5% conversion lift

Tips

Choose Fair Comparisons

Compare similar user journeys:

Signup to signup (not signup to checkout)
Same industry when possible
Similar target audiences

Use Multiple Personas

// Technical audience
{ "persona": "technical-evaluator" }

// Non-technical
{ "persona": "first-timer" }

Different personas may rank competitors in a different order.

Focus on Actionable Metrics

If you cannot change it, do not benchmark it. Focus on metrics where you can make real improvements.

Related Tools

marketing_compete -- Deep competitive analysis with cognitive journeys (Enterprise)
hunt_bugs -- Find bugs in your own site
empathy_audit -- Accessibility comparison

Last updated: v18.9.0

Tool Competitive Benchmark