What should you compare during competitor website analysis?

During competitor website analysis, compare the factors that influence visibility, relevance, authority and conversion performance: technical SEO, keyword coverage, content quality, backlinks, internal linking, user experience and conversion paths. Assess each competitor against your own website using the same criteria, rather than judging isolated features. This makes it easier to distinguish genuine performance gaps from differences caused by market focus, brand demand or resources.

Start by defining a consistent comparison set. Select websites that compete with your organisation in organic search, not just businesses that sell similar products or services. A company may be a commercial competitor but have little visibility for the searches you want to target. Review competitors that appear repeatedly for your priority topics, product terms and informational queries. It is also useful to separate direct commercial competitors from sites that compete for attention, such as publishers, directories or specialist resources.

Record the same observations for your own website and each comparison site. A structured worksheet or SEO platform can help you capture URLs, page types, ranking themes, technical issues, referring domains, internal links and conversion elements. Avoid relying on a single page or one search result. Look for patterns across important sections of each website.

Compare technical SEO foundations. Technical performance affects how effectively search engines can access, understand and evaluate a website. Review whether important pages are indexable, whether the site has a logical crawl path and whether its canonical signals, XML sitemap and robots directives are correctly configured. Check for pages that are excluded unintentionally, duplicated unnecessarily or difficult to discover through internal links.

• Compare site architecture, URL structure and the depth of important pages from the main navigation.
• Check how consistently page titles, meta descriptions, headings and image alternative text are implemented.
• Review page speed and Core Web Vitals alongside mobile usability, rather than treating performance as a desktop-only issue.
• Assess structured data where it is relevant to the page type and supported by search engines.
• Look for broken links, redirect chains, soft four-hundred errors, duplicate pages and outdated URL variants.
• Compare how clearly each site communicates its purpose, organisation and topical relationships to both users and crawlers.

The objective is not to copy every technical feature a competitor uses. A competitor may rank despite technical weaknesses because of stronger authority, better content or greater brand demand. Use technical comparisons to identify barriers on your own site and opportunities to make valuable pages easier to crawl, render and understand.

Compare keyword visibility and search intent. Analyse the subjects and queries for which each website appears, then group them by intent. Commercial searches may indicate a need for product or service pages, while informational searches may require guides, explanations or comparison content. Also identify navigational, local and transactional intent where relevant to your business model.

Look beyond the total number of ranking keywords. Examine which pages rank, the search intent they satisfy, the consistency of their visibility and the terms that generate qualified traffic. A competitor may have broad visibility but little relevance to your target customers. Another may rank for a smaller set of highly valuable topics because its content aligns closely with user needs.

• Compare topic coverage rather than isolated keyword lists.
• Identify valuable subjects covered by competitors but missing from your website.
• Find topics where your site has a page but does not address the intent as clearly or completely.
• Review whether competitors use dedicated pages for distinct intents or rely on one broad page for several unrelated needs.
• Check the wording of titles and headings to understand how pages are positioned in search results.

Be careful with apparent keyword gaps. A term may have limited commercial value, may be too broad for your audience or may require a type of content that does not support your objectives. Validate opportunities against relevance, intent, business value and your ability to produce genuinely useful content.

Compare content quality, depth and coverage. Content analysis should assess how well a page answers the underlying need, not simply how long it is. Review the accuracy, originality, clarity and practical usefulness of competing pages. Consider whether the content gives a complete answer, explains important limitations, uses appropriate examples and reflects real subject knowledge.

Assess the content structure as well as the written copy. Compare the use of headings, summaries, definitions, tables, checklists, diagrams, demonstrations and supporting evidence. Check whether the page makes the next step clear without forcing the reader to search elsewhere for essential information. Where appropriate, evaluate author information, editorial review, source references and visible maintenance details as signals of trust.

Content gaps can take several forms. A competitor may cover a topic that you have not addressed, explain a familiar topic more clearly, answer important follow-up questions or provide a more useful format. You may also find that a competitor has several weak pages targeting similar subjects, creating an opportunity to consolidate your own coverage into a clearer, more authoritative resource.

Compare backlinks and external authority. Review the quality and relevance of the websites linking to competing pages, not just the volume of links. Consider whether links come from respected industry publications, professional organisations, useful directories, partners, research sources or naturally referenced resources. Identify the pages that attract links and the reasons they appear to earn them.

Useful backlink comparisons include:

• Referring domains linked to important commercial and informational pages.
• Link relevance to the competitor, the topic and the surrounding content.
• Anchor text patterns and whether they appear natural and descriptive.
• Content formats that attract citations, such as original research, detailed resources, tools or clear explanations.
• Unlinked mentions, partnerships and industry relationships that may represent legitimate outreach opportunities.

Do not treat competitor backlink profiles as a list to replicate. Links that are irrelevant, manipulative or acquired solely for ranking purposes can create risk and rarely improve user value. Use the comparison to understand authority differences and develop assets or relationships that deserve attention, citation or referral traffic.

Compare internal linking and site architecture. Internal links distribute authority, help users move between related pages and clarify the importance of content. Review how competitors connect guides to service pages, category pages to individual offerings and supporting articles to core resources. Check whether important pages receive links from relevant, prominent locations or are buried in the site structure.

Compare anchor text for clarity and usefulness, but avoid forcing exact-match phrases into every link. Look for contextual links that help users continue their research or take an appropriate action. Also review navigation, breadcrumbs, related-content modules and footer links. A well-organised competitor may perform better because its pages form a coherent topic structure, even when individual pieces of content are not substantially stronger.

Compare user experience and conversion paths. SEO performance should be considered alongside what happens after a visitor reaches the page. Assess whether competitors provide a clear, consistent experience on mobile and desktop. Review readability, visual hierarchy, page layout, intrusive elements, accessibility basics, trust information and the ease of finding key details.

Map the route from an organic landing page to a meaningful conversion. Compare the clarity and prominence of calls to action, enquiry forms, contact options, product information, pricing guidance and supporting proof. Consider whether the call to action matches the visitor’s intent. An informational visitor may need a related guide or an email enquiry option, while a high-intent visitor may expect a direct route to a service or consultation.

Do not copy a competitor’s design without understanding its purpose. Instead, identify friction on your own pages: unclear next steps, repetitive forms, missing reassurance, slow-loading elements or content that does not support a decision. These observations can lead to improvements that benefit both organic visitors and conversion performance.

Compare trust and credibility signals. Examine how each website demonstrates expertise and accountability. Relevant signals may include clear business information, contact details, author or reviewer details, qualifications, case evidence, policies, customer support information and transparent explanations of products or services. The appropriate signals depend on the subject and the potential impact of the information.

Trust should support the substance of a page rather than replace it. A polished design or collection of badges cannot compensate for inaccurate, vague or unsupported content. Compare whether the competitor makes claims that are explained and evidenced, and whether your own pages give readers enough information to evaluate those claims.

Separate observations from conclusions. A competitor’s strong ranking does not prove that every visible feature causes performance. Record what you can observe, such as page structure, content coverage, links or technical implementation, then state possible explanations separately. Search visibility can also be influenced by brand recognition, historical authority, location, personalisation, seasonality and changes in search results.

For each finding, note the evidence, the likely effect, the level of confidence and the recommended action. Prioritise changes that combine clear business relevance with a realistic opportunity to improve. For example, fixing indexation on an important service page may take precedence over producing a new article, while improving a weak conversion path may be more valuable than pursuing a low-intent keyword gap.

Finally, turn the comparison into a prioritised action list. Group findings into technical fixes, content improvements, internal linking, authority development and user experience or conversion work. Assign an owner, define the intended outcome and establish how progress will be assessed through visibility, qualified organic traffic, engagement, enquiries or other relevant measures. Revisit the analysis periodically, because competitor content, search intent and technical implementations change over time. The most useful comparison is not a static audit of another website; it is a repeatable process for identifying, validating and acting on gaps in your own SEO system.