Competitor Customer-Base Analysis
Profile a competitor's installed base — the segments, sizes, and stacks where they're strong and weak — so you attack where they're soft, not where they're entrenched.
Product Marketing - Competitive
Where the competitor is entrenched vs. thin — so you attack the soft segments
3
Soft segments found
Attack the thin spots
Strong: enterprise SaaS.
Thin: mid-market healthcare + finance.
Strong: enterprise SaaS.
Thin: mid-market healthcare + finance.
| Segment | Their base | Read |
|---|---|---|
| Enterprise SaaS | Dense | Entrenched |
| MM healthcare | Sparse | Attack |
| MM finance | Declining | Attack |
Why it lands
Attacking a competitor where they're strongest is the most expensive way to compete. Profiling their base shows they're entrenched in enterprise SaaS but thin in mid-market healthcare and finance — so that's where the displacement budget should go.
Overview
Profile a competitor's customer base using HG technographic data — the firmographic segments, company sizes, and co-installed stacks where they're concentrated — so PMM identifies the segments to attack (where they're weak) versus where they're entrenched.
Use cases
Compete where they're weak
A competitor's installed base isn't uniform. Finding the segments where they're sparse or declining tells PMM and sales where displacement is cheapest and likeliest to land.
Inform the segment strategy
Knowing the competitor's typical buyer environment (co-installed stacks) and concentration shapes which segments to claim and which to cede for now.
View workflow prompt
# Competitor Customer-Base Analysis
## Parameters
- `{{competitor}}` *(required)* — The competitor to profile. Example: `Datadog`
- `{{category}}` *(required)* — Their category. Example: `observability`
## Purpose
Profile {{competitor}}'s installed base in the {{category}} — which firmographic segments, sizes, and co-installed stacks they concentrate in — so PMM attacks the soft segments where they're thin instead of the entrenched ones where they're strong.
## Process
1. **Find the base** — `company_technographic` + `search_companies` to identify accounts running {{competitor}}.
2. **Segment the base** — `company_firmographic` to profile the base by industry, size band, and geo; find where they're concentrated.
3. **Co-install patterns** — `company_technographic` for the stacks that co-occur with {{competitor}} (reveals their typical buyer's environment).
4. **Strong vs. soft** — characterize where they're entrenched (dense, stable base) versus thin (sparse or declining base via `company_install_time_series`).
5. **Attack recommendation** — name the soft segments to target and why.
## Output Format
Markdown with:
- `# Competitor Customer-Base Profile — {{competitor}}`
- `## Base by Segment` (table: segment | concentration | trend)
- `## Co-Installed Stacks` (their typical environment)
- `## Strong vs. Soft` (entrenched vs. thin segments)
- `## Attack Segments` (where to target + why)
- `## Citations`
## Quality Checklist
- Base profile cites `company_technographic`/`company_firmographic`
- Strong/soft calls cite concentration and `company_install_time_series` trend
- Attack segments are the thin ones, with rationale
- No claim of competitor revenue/customer counts that HG doesn't support