reph

Templates · Strategy & leadership

Competitive analysis template

Compare competitors on features, pricing and positioning

Start with this template →Sign in

Opens on reph with the template ready to start. No account needed; sign in to keep your document.

Use it when

You are setting roadmap, pricing or positioning and need a side by side read of the competitors your buyers actually compare you to

Who it's for

Product managerMarketerExecutive

Filled example

The template filled in for a made-up company, so you can see what good looks like.

Competitive analysis: team wikis, Q4 2026

Author: Owen Price (Product Marketing, Bluefin) · Date: October 21, 2026

Market overview

Team wikis and docs tools are a crowded, consolidating category. Large suites bundle a wiki into their productivity plans, while a handful of focused tools compete on writing experience and structure. Buyers increasingly evaluate on AI features and on how well docs connect to the tools engineers already use. In our Q3 deals, two competitors appeared in more than 70% of evaluations: Brightpage and Corvid.

Competitor profiles

Brightpage

  • Positioning: "The all-in-one workspace": docs, databases and projects in one tool.
  • Strengths: Huge template library, strong brand with startups, flexible databases.
  • Weaknesses: Slow on large pages, weak permissions for regulated teams, no self-hosting.
  • Pricing: Free tier; $10 per user per month; enterprise by quote.

Corvid

  • Positioning: "The wiki for engineering teams."
  • Strengths: Git sync, code-aware search, good API.
  • Weaknesses: Writing experience is spartan; non-engineers find it hard to adopt.
  • Pricing: $8 per user per month; no free tier beyond a 14-day trial.

Feature comparison

Feature Bluefin Brightpage Corvid
Real-time co-editing ✅ ✅ ❌
Git sync ✅ ❌ ✅
Granular page permissions ✅ ❌ ✅
Databases and project boards ❌ ✅ ❌
Self-hosted option ✅ ❌ ✅

Pricing comparison

Tier Bluefin Brightpage Corvid
Free Up to 3 users Unlimited users, limited blocks None
Team $9 per user $10 per user $8 per user
Enterprise Quote, includes SSO Quote, SSO extra Quote

Where we win / lose

We win when: a mixed team of engineers and product people needs one docs tool, permissions matter (fintech, health), and the buyer has felt Brightpage slow down on long specs.

We lose when: the buyer wants docs and project tracking in one tool, or a pure engineering team already lives in Git and accepts Corvid's plainer editor for its lower price.

Recommendations

  1. Lead positioning with "docs engineers and PMs both adopt," backed by co-editing plus Git sync, a pairing neither competitor has.
  2. Do not build databases this year; partner with a project tool instead.
  3. Test a $8 team price for annual plans in engineering-led deals, where Corvid undercuts us.

Sources

  • Brightpage and Corvid pricing pages, checked October 18, 2026.
  • 22 win/loss interviews, July to September 2026.
  • Sales call notes tagged "competitor" in the CRM, Q3 2026.

The template

Show the blank template

Competitive analysis

Author: [your name] · Date: [date]

Market overview

The category as a whole (size, growth, who's consolidating it) before diving into individual players.

Competitor profiles

Competitor A

Positioning first (the story they tell the market), then how they back it up.

  • Positioning:
  • Strengths:
  • Weaknesses:
  • Pricing:

Competitor B

  • Positioning:
  • Strengths:
  • Weaknesses:
  • Pricing:

Feature comparison

Feature Us Competitor A Competitor B
✅ ❌ ✅

Pricing comparison

Tier Us Competitor A Competitor B

Where we win / lose

Specific, not "we have better UX." Name the scenario where a prospect picks us and the scenario where they pick them.

We win when:

We lose when:

Recommendations

What this analysis should change about roadmap, pricing or positioning. An analysis with no recommendation is trivia.

Sources

Where each claim came from (pricing page, docs, win/loss interview, analyst report) and when you checked it, so the next update knows what to re-verify.

Questions

Which competitors should I include?
The two to four that show up in your deals most often, not every company in the category
How often should it be updated?
Every quarter, and whenever a competitor changes pricing or ships a major release
Where do the win and loss scenarios come from?
Win/loss interviews and sales call notes, not your own opinion of the product

Fill it with your agent

Connect Claude to reph over MCP, then paste this. The draft arrives as suggestions you accept or reject section by section. How to connect Claude.

Find my reph doc "Competitive analysis" with search_docs, then read it with read_doc. Draft each competitor profile and the feature and pricing tables from their public pricing pages and docs, our win/loss notes and the sales call notes linked in the doc, citing a source per claim. Leave Recommendations to me. File it with suggest_edit, one replace_section op per section (heading line kept) so each can be accepted alone. Ask each open question (claims you could not confirm publicly) with add_comment quoting that section's heading line, then call request_review with a one-line summary.

Related templates

Board pack

Quarterly board meeting pre-read: metrics, decisions needed, risks, financials, asks

FounderExecutive

Decision memo

Frame a decision, options and a recommendation for sign-off

ExecutiveManagerFounder

OKRs

Objectives and measurable key results for a period

ExecutiveManagerProduct manager

Quarterly plan

Priorities, capacity, milestones and risks for the quarter

ManagerExecutiveProduct manager

Strategy doc

Diagnosis, guiding policy and coherent actions (Rumelt kernel)

ExecutiveFounderManager

SWOT analysis

Strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats

ExecutiveManagerFounder

Start with this template →Sign in