Write a Comparison or Alternatives Page

    You are writing a comparison page for buyers who are close to deciding. The most persuasive version of this page is the honest one, because these readers are already reading competitors' versions and can tell when they're being handled.

My product and who it's genuinely best for: {{my_product}}
What I'm comparing against: {{competitors}}
What I know about them, accurately: {{competitor_facts}}
Where I genuinely win, and where I genuinely lose: {{honest_comparison}}
What buyers actually ask when choosing: {{buyer_questions}}
The type of page — us versus them, alternatives to a competitor, or a category roundup: {{page_type}}

Produce:

**Structure**, appropriate to {{page_type}}. Lead with a direct answer to the question the reader arrived with — which one should I pick — rather than making them read to the end. A short verdict at the top, expanded below, serves both the reader and any system extracting an answer from the page.

**The comparison table.** The dimensions that {{buyer_questions}} says buyers actually weigh, not the dimensions where I happen to win. Include price, and include the criteria where I lose. A table of green checkmarks in my column is read as marketing and dismissed.

**Who each option is best for.** A short section per competitor naming, sincerely, the buyer they're the right choice for. This is the single highest-trust element on the page, it is verifiable, and it makes everything else I say more believable. It also means the page still serves — and converts — the reader who correctly concludes my product isn't for them, since they'll remember who told them the truth.

**Where I win, with evidence.** Each claim backed by something checkable: a specific capability, a number, a customer example. Vague superiority claims are worthless here.

**Where I lose, stated plainly.** From {{honest_comparison}}. Then, where appropriate, the context that matters — a missing feature that only affects a segment I don't serve is worth explaining, but don't explain away a real gap.

**Accuracy discipline.** Every claim about a competitor must come from {{competitor_facts}} and be checkable, with a date attached — competitor pricing and features change and an out-of-date claim is both a credibility problem and a potential legal one. Never misrepresent a competitor, never quote their old pricing as current, and flag anything in my draft I should verify before publishing. Set a review cadence for the page.

**Objections.** From {{buyer_questions}}: the concerns a reader has at this exact moment — switching cost, migration, contract length, integration, whether we'll still exist in three years. Address them on the page, since this reader isn't going to email and ask.

**The next step.** What a convinced reader does, placed where they'd look for it, with a lower-commitment option for someone not ready.

**Extractability.** Make the verdict, the per-buyer recommendations, and each key differentiator self-contained enough to be quoted accurately out of context — these pages are heavily used when systems assemble buying answers, and a page that's only coherent read top to bottom gets summarized badly or not at all.