Comparison Page skill
The playbook Moonrank's Writer Agent uses to build "X vs Y" and "alternatives to" pages that concede real points, source every claim, and still close the right buyer.
Download the methodology, see how the agent picks verdicts, or run it live inside the Writer Agent.
- Category
- Writer
- Agent
- Writer Agent
- Format
- comparison-page.md
- Price
- Free to download
The skill file
What is the Comparison Page skill?
The Comparison Page skill is how Moonrank's Writer Agent writes vendor comparisons that buyers actually believe: verdict stated upfront, comparison run on the buyer's criteria rather than a rigged feature list, real concessions to the competitor, and every contested claim sourced and dated.
It's written as a SKILL.md, a plain-language instruction format that people and AI agents can both follow. Read it to rewrite your own versus pages, hand it to whoever owns competitive content, or let the Writer Agent draft and maintain the pages from your win/loss notes.
Downloading the playbook is free with a Moonrank account. Re-verifying competitor claims on a schedule and keeping every comparison current is what the Writer Agent does.
See it in action
“Our 'vs' page wins every row of the table and it still doesn't convert. Why?”
A 22-row table where you win 22 rows reads as an ad, and buyers discount all of it. Your own win/loss notes say you lose deals on native integrations and win them on price and onboarding speed — the page mentions none of that. The rebuild: 6 buyer criteria, two honest concessions (integrations, enterprise SSO), sourced pricing checked this month, and a verdict block that names the 5-seat, no-IT-team buyer you actually win.
From input to fix list
- 1
You name the competitor
Plus your honest read on where each product wins — win/loss notes if you have them.
- 2
Moonrank sets the criteria
The 5–7 things this buyer actually weighs, not the feature list where you happen to win.
- 3
It writes the honest table
Wins on both sides, concessions named, every contested claim sourced and dated.
- 4
It delivers the verdicts
"Choose them if, choose us if" as concrete situations, stated in the first screen.
Everything it checks
Upfront verdict
Who should pick which product, stated in the intro — not buried in the conclusion.
Buyer-criteria table
The 5–7 criteria the buyer weighs, kept even where you lose.
Real concessions
At least two rows the competitor wins, with the buyer they win them for.
Sourced claims
Every contested price, limit, and feature claim with a source and a check date.
Segment verdicts
Concrete choose-them / choose-us situations instead of superlatives.
Freshness schedule
A dated page and a re-verification cadence, because stale comparisons backfire.
When to reach for it
- Own the "you vs competitor" search instead of ceding it to their version.
- Rank for "alternatives to X" with a page that reads as a resource, not an ad.
- Stop re-litigating the same competitor claims on every sales call.
- Turn win/loss notes into a page that pre-qualifies the buyers you actually win.
- Audit an existing versus page for rigged rows and unsourced claims.