Competitive Alternative Evidence Grid
Compare software alternatives using dated public evidence, plan restrictions and explicit unknowns before writing a defensible comparison.
Read this resource as Markdown
When to use this template
Use this after customer research identifies an actual alternative and before naming that product in a comparison, sales explanation or buying guide. Start with the same buyer task for every offer.
Choose another approach when: You have only a search snippet, need to assess an undocumented enterprise contract, or want to turn a feature not mentioned on a website into proof that the competitor lacks it.
Gather these inputs
- The buyer task and evidence that these alternatives enter a real decision.
- Current vendor documentation, pricing pages and access conditions for each relevant offer.
- A dated record of what you can verify and what would require a product test or vendor clarification.
Copy and adapt the template
Edit the text below and copy it into your own document. Edits stay in this browser field and are not submitted or saved by this page.
Worked example
Illustrative example, not a Crany customer result. Replace every example detail with facts you can verify.
Fictional example: a designer needs a client to acknowledge a website handoff without creating an account. The founder compares Handoff Notes with the fictional Task Ledger, because an interview participant considered both. A dated vendor help article describes a shared link, but does not say whether acknowledgement requires login. The grid records shared-link support as documented and login-free acknowledgement as unknown. Handoff Notes has a tested acknowledgement flow in its limited pilot. The founder can describe that tested pilot behavior with its access restriction. They cannot publish “Task Ledger cannot do this” from the missing documentation. The unresolved question goes to a separate verification step before comparison copy is approved.
How to use it
- Select alternatives from buyer evidence and define a single comparable task.
- Read primary documentation and record the exact offer and conditions for each statement.
- Apply the same evidence standard to your product, then publish only supported comparisons.
Check before using it
- Every named capability has a dated primary reference or an explicitly scoped observation.
- Missing documentation remains unknown rather than becoming a negative feature claim.
- A plan-specific or pilot capability is not generalized to every customer or product version.
What to measure
Track unsupported statements caught before publication, stale references and buyer questions the comparison resolves. Public documentation establishes what the vendor states; it does not independently prove runtime quality, relative performance or purchase preference.
Research and sources
Dunford supports selecting alternatives from real buyer choices and connecting capabilities to value. The evidence ledger is an original verification workflow; it does not supply an independent product review, performance benchmark or endorsement.
- April Dunford: A Quickstart Guide to Positioning — checked 2026-10-24. Author’s 2021 explanation of buyer alternatives, differentiated capabilities, customer value and category expectations; no universal growth or numeric claims adopted.
About Crany
Crany is an AI marketing co-founder in development for software founders and vibe coders, designed to strategize, execute approved marketing and improve based on results. This free resource is usable independently of the product. Join the public waitlist.