# Comparison pages: how to write vs and alternatives pages that win deals (2026)

> Comparison pages win deals with a verdict up front, a fair table and dated rival facts. How to write vs and alternatives pages, plus legal checks and schema.

Canonical: https://www.searchmaxxed.com/research/comparison-pages
Last updated: 2026-10-28

HOW-TO GUIDE

Comparison pages win deals with a verdict up front, a fair table and dated rival facts. How to write vs and alternatives pages, plus legal checks and schema.

BH

Brenden House

Founder of Searchmaxxed. We build agentic SEO and GEO workflows that help businesses rank on Google and get named in ChatGPT, then turn that search into more customers and revenue.

PUBLISHED 28 OCTOBER 2026 UPDATED 28 OCTOBER 2026 18 MIN READ

A comparison page puts your product beside a named rival ("X vs Y") or lists the options for someone leaving one ("X alternatives"). The winners do five things. First, they put the verdict in the first screen. They compare every product on the same criteria, rows the rival wins included. Every rival fact comes from the rival's own page, dated. They say when the rival is the better pick. And they pass a legal read. Built that way, one page ranks for a buying search, gives sales a link to send and hands AI answers facts they can quote.

I'm Brenden House. I run Searchmaxxed, an SEO and AI SEO agency for B2B SaaS and enterprise companies, and comparison pages are part of what we build. This is how we write them, down to the rules we hold our own comparison pages to. Sources checked 27 October 2026 (AEST).

## In summary

- Comparison searches come late. One agency measured comparison and alternatives posts converting at over 7.5% across 95 client articles.
- Fair beats flattering. Show the rows the rival wins, then say who should pick them.
- Every rival fact needs a source and a date, taken from their own page, with "Not published" where they say nothing.
- The law lets you name rivals if you tell the truth. The FTC encourages truthful comparisons; the ACCC says an inaccurate or unfair one misleads.
- AI answers lean on outside lists. Your own page is one source among several, so the plan needs third-party coverage too.

| Page type | Search it targets | Its job |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Head-to-head (vs) page | "your product vs rival" | Help a buyer choose between two |
| Alternatives page | "rival alternatives" | Catch buyers leaving a rival |
| Competitor vs competitor | "rival A vs rival B" | Enter a comparison you weren't in |
| Comparison hub | "compare [category] software" | Link every comparison in one place |

## What is a comparison page?

A comparison page is a page on your own site that sets your product beside one or more named competitors so a buyer can choose. It targets searches with a rival's name in them, such as "Rival vs You", "Rival alternatives" or "Rival competitors". Most B2B SaaS companies run four kinds.

- A vs page, or head-to-head page, compares two products on the same criteria and ends in a verdict.
- An alternatives page lists the options for someone leaving one product.
- A competitor vs competitor page compares two rivals and offers yours as option three, which puts you inside a comparison you weren't part of.
- A comparison hub, often at /compare, links them all.

Vs pages catch a buyer choosing between two names. Alternatives pages reach the buyer one step earlier, when they know what they're leaving but haven't yet decided where they're going next. Both are bottom-of-funnel. The person searching already has a budget, a problem and a shortlist. That's why these pages carry so much weight in the [SaaS SEO work we do](https://www.searchmaxxed.com/industries/saas-seo): few pages sit closer to a demo request.

## Do comparison pages still work in 2026?

Yes. In the published data, comparison pages convert better than most other organic content. What changed is where buyers read them.

The conversion numbers are older but consistent:

| Who measured it | What they found | Date |
| --- | --- | --- |
| [Grow and Convert](https://www.growandconvert.com/seo/competitor-comparison-landing-pages/), a content agency | Comparison and alternatives keywords converted at over 7.5%; vs keywords at over 5%, across 95 client articles | October 2023 |
| [Intergrowth survey](https://intergrowth.com/content-marketing/competitor-comparison-pages/) of 52 marketers | 35.8% said comparison pages performed better than ever in 2024; 49.1% saw no clear change or a mix; 15.1% saw a decline | Updated November 2025 |
| [Greg Kogan's Scalyr case](https://www.gkogan.co/alternative-pages/) | One alternatives page brought 11% of search visitors and 10% of trial sign-ups from search | Older case, still online |

None of these is a forecast for your category, but they agree on the pattern. Someone who types a rival's name next to "alternatives" is close to buying. Someone reading a guide isn't.

Then there's AI, which changed where buyers read comparisons. Google says a page needs to be indexed and eligible for a snippet to appear in AI Overviews or AI Mode. Beyond that, "There are no additional technical requirements" ([Google Search Central](https://developers.google.com/search/docs/appearance/ai-features)). Both features may also use a "query fan-out", Google says, searching several related subtopics before writing the answer. Ask AI Mode to compare two vendors and you get a blend of pages. Yours needs to be one. Its facts also need to make sense once an engine lifts them out.

## Which comparison pages should you build first?

Build first for the rivals that cost you deals. Search volume comes second. Your CRM and your sales team already know who you lose to, and Search Console shows which of those matchups buyers type into Google.

Here's the order I'd follow:

| Step | Where to look | What it tells you |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 1. Count lost deals by rival | CRM closed-lost reasons, last two or three quarters | Which matchups cost revenue |
| 2. Ask sales | Call notes, security review and procurement questions | Which comparisons buyers raise |
| 3. Filter search queries | Search Console: "vs", "alternative", each rival's name | Which matchups people already search |
| 4. Check the answers | Google, ChatGPT, Gemini and Perplexity | Who shows up today |
| 5. Rank the list | All of the above | Lost revenue first, then demand, then your honest case |

### A worked example: picking the first five pages

Take a B2B SaaS company selling procurement software to finance teams at mid-market and enterprise firms. Say the CRM shows most lost deals going to a category leader, and a smaller share to a fast-growing challenger. Those figures are illustrative, so swap in your own.

| Order | Page | Why it's here |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 1 | Leader alternatives | Catches finance teams already unhappy with the leader |
| 2 | You vs Leader | The matchup sales loses most often |
| 3 | You vs Challenger | The second-biggest source of lost deals |
| 4 | Leader vs Challenger | A search you aren't in yet; you join as option three |
| 5 | Migrating from Leader | Answers the switching questions a team has before it signs |

Page 5 is a switching guide, and it still earns its place. A finance team leaving the leader wants to know how painful the move is, how the data comes across and when the contract ends. Link to it from the vs page. For the wider plan these pages sit inside, see our guide to [SaaS SEO strategy](https://www.searchmaxxed.com/research/saas-seo-strategy).

## What should a comparison page include?

A winning comparison page has nine parts. Verdict first, table second, reasons third. Everything else exists to make a buyer trust those three.

| Section | What it does | Why it matters for search and AI |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Verdict in the first screen | Says who should pick which product | AI answers and snippets lift the first plain answer |
| Who each product suits | Names the buyer situation each one fits | Matches follow-up prompts like "for a team of 50" |
| Comparison table | Same criteria for every product, with sources | Tables are easy for engines to read and quote |
| Deeper sections per criterion | Explains the rows that decide the deal | Covers the long-tail questions in the same search |
| Where the rival wins | Admits their real strengths | Builds trust; buyers check anyway |
| Switching and migration | Effort, data export, contract timing | Answers the question that stalls enterprise deals |
| Proof | Customer quotes, case studies, review scores with sources | Backs each claim beside the claim |
| FAQ | Short answers to the questions sales hears | Each answer stands alone in an AI summary |
| One next step, plus a date | A demo or trial link, and "Prices checked [date]" | Converts, and shows the facts are current |

Two parts get skipped most. First, the "choose them when" section. Our own [Profound alternatives page](https://www.searchmaxxed.com/research/profound-alternatives) tells readers to "keep Profound when its enterprise controls and wider engine coverage match your requirements". It costs us nothing, and it makes every other line on that page easier to believe.

The second is the date, because rivals reprice every quarter. A comparison page with no check date looks current until a buyer spots an old price. After that, nothing on it does.

## How do you build a fair comparison table?

A fair comparison table uses the same criteria for every product, shows a row the rival wins and dates every source. Ticks for you and crosses for them sell nothing, because enterprise buyers check the rival's site in the next tab.

Use real evaluation criteria. In B2B SaaS that's usually the pricing model, SSO and SAML, security reports such as SOC 2, data residency, integrations, implementation time and support terms. The cells should look like this:

| Criterion | Your product | Rival | Source and date |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Pricing model | Per seat, billed annually | Not published; quote on request | Both pricing pages, checked 27 Oct 2026 |
| SSO and SAML | All plans | Enterprise plan only | Both pricing pages |
| Native integrations | 40, each named | 200+, as they state | Both integration directories |
| Data residency options | US, EU, Australia | US, EU | Both security pages |

I invented these values to show the format. Look at row three. The rival has five times the integrations and the table admits it, so the next section can explain why your 40 cover the buyer's stack. Rig that row and the argument dies before you make it.

Four cell rules keep the table honest. Write "Not published" when the rival doesn't say. Quote the rival's own wording for anything they claim about themselves. Swap bare ticks for words, since "Enterprise plan only" tells the buyer far more than a tick. Keep cells short enough for a phone.

## How do you source competitor facts for a comparison page?

Take each fact about a rival from the rival's own current page. Record the URL, the date and the exact wording, then give the page an owner who checks it again. That habit protects you legally, stops sales quoting stale prices and gives AI answers something solid to cite.

Here's our ledger, one row per claim:

| Field | What goes in it | Example |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Claim | The fact as it appears on your page | "SSO on Enterprise plan only" |
| Source URL | The rival's own page for that fact | Their pricing page |
| Publisher type | Brand, third party or official | Brand |
| Date checked | Day and time zone | 27 Oct 2026 (AEST) |
| Exact excerpt | The words on the source page | "SAML SSO available on Enterprise" |
| Next check | When someone looks again | End of next quarter |

Our own comparison pages follow four rules:

1. A rival's page is the source for that rival's facts and nothing else, never for a claim about another company or the market.
2. No source, no claim. If a rival doesn't publish a price, the cell says "Not published".
3. Describe what they publish, without adjectives. "200+ integrations, as they state" beats "a bloated integration list".
4. Say who wrote it. On every shortlist we publish, I say near the top that it's my own selection and that I run Searchmaxxed.

Stale facts are the most common failure. In September 2026, writer Nathan Ojaokomo found a vendor's comparison page quoting Ahrefs at US$99 and up ([source](https://nathanojaokomo.com/blog/write-saas-comparison-pages)). Ahrefs' own pricing page showed its Lite plan at US$129 a month. He suggests a quarterly review in most categories and monthly in fast ones, and I'd add a check date beside every price.

## Is it legal to name competitors on a comparison page?

Yes, in both the US and Australia, as long as every claim is true, fair and provable. Both regulators allow honest comparisons. This is general information, not legal advice, so have counsel review each page before it goes live.

In the US, the Federal Trade Commission set out its view in a 1979 [Statement of Policy Regarding Comparative Advertising](https://www.ftc.gov/legal-library/browse/statement-policy-regarding-comparative-advertising). It still sits at 16 CFR 14.15. The policy "encourages the naming of, or reference to competitors", and it "requires clarity, and, if necessary, disclosure to avoid deception of the consumer". Even disparaging advertising "is permissible so long as it is truthful and not deceptive".

Australia puts it more bluntly. The ACCC's guidance on [false or misleading claims](https://www.accc.gov.au/consumers/advertising-and-promotions/false-or-misleading-claims) says comparative advertising "can be misleading if: the comparison is inaccurate, or it doesn't compare products fairly". Then: "A business must be able to prove any claim they advertise." Intent doesn't save you either. "It makes no difference whether a business intends to mislead or not."

Using a rival's brand name to identify them falls under what US trade mark law calls nominative fair use. The [International Trademark Association](https://www.inta.org/fact-sheets/fair-use-of-trademarks-intended-for-a-non-legal-audience/) says it "generally applies to comparative advertising", though their logo or any hint of partnership raises other questions. Leave those to counsel.

Run this checklist before the legal read so counsel gets a clean page:

| Check before launch | Why it matters |
| --- | --- |
| Every rival fact traces to a dated row in your ledger | You can prove the claim |
| Like compared with like, such as enterprise tier against enterprise tier | An unfair match misleads |
| "Fastest" or "most secure" has test data behind it | Superlatives need proof on request |
| Rival names in plain text, no logos | No hint of endorsement or partnership |
| Switching quotes are real, approved and on file | Testimonials count as claims |
| A check date on the page and an owner for the next review | Facts age every quarter |

The ledger makes this quick. Counsel checks each claim against its excerpt in minutes, without researching the page again.

## What schema markup should a comparison page use?

Use structured data that describes what's visible on the page, and nothing more. For most comparison pages that's Article or WebPage, BreadcrumbList and FAQPage for a visible FAQ, with ItemList on alternatives pages. Google's [structured data policies](https://developers.google.com/search/docs/appearance/structured-data/sd-policies) rule out marking up content readers can't see, or misleading content like fake reviews.

| Schema type | Use it on a comparison page? | Why |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Article or WebPage | Yes | Describes the page, its author and its dates |
| BreadcrumbList | Yes | Shows where the page sits under /compare |
| FAQPage | Yes, for a visible FAQ | Rich results now go only to well-known government and health sites, but the markup still describes the questions |
| ItemList | Yes, on alternatives pages | Marks the ordered list of options |
| SoftwareApplication or Product | Your own product only | Describe facts that appear on the page |
| Review or AggregateRating about yourself | Skip | Google won't give stars to reviews a business controls about itself |

Google narrowed FAQ rich results in August 2023, according to its [FAQPage documentation](https://developers.google.com/search/docs/appearance/structured-data/faqpage), and the self-serving rule comes from its [review snippet guidelines](https://developers.google.com/search/docs/appearance/structured-data/review-snippet). Where "the entity that's being reviewed controls the reviews about itself", its Organization markup can't earn the star feature.

Schema won't make a weak comparison rank. It helps engines read a good one. Google's AI features guidance puts the rule in one line: make sure "your structured data matches the visible text on the page".

## How do AI answers use comparison pages?

AI answers build a comparison from several sources at once, then quote the facts they can lift cleanly. Your page is one source. Third-party lists, review sites and other publishers often count for more in the answer, because they aren't the vendor selling the product.

We've measured how concentrated those sources get. Across 900 ChatGPT answers about Australian agencies, a single third-party "best agencies" site was cited in 168 of them. The next three were a second listicle, Semrush's agency directory and Clutch. If you want to be recommended, the job is getting onto the handful of pages the model already trusts.

That test covered agencies. Software buyers ask the same shape of question: "What's the best procurement platform for a 2,000-person company?" So the plan has two halves.

1. Your own pages, written to be quoted. Put the verdict in the first two sentences, name both products in full, and keep prices and limits in a dated table.
2. The outside pages engines already trust: third-party comparison lists, review sites, analyst pages and editorial coverage. Getting onto those takes digital PR and links, which a vs page can't do on its own.

Then test it like a buyer. Take 10 to 20 comparison prompts your sales team hears and run each in ChatGPT, Gemini, Perplexity and Google's AI Overviews. Run them more than once, since answers change between runs, and note which brands each answer names and which pages it cites. Repeat monthly. Judge the trend over a quarter. Our [B2B SEO strategy guide](https://www.searchmaxxed.com/research/b2b-seo-strategy) shows where this fits in the rest of your search plan.

## How do you know your comparison pages are working?

Judge comparison pages by pipeline first, then by rankings and AI citations. A vs page in third place that starts ten demos a month beats one in first place that starts none. Track these five signals each month:

| Signal | Where to find it | What good looks like |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Rankings for the matchup | Search Console, filtered for "vs" and "alternatives" | Page one for each page's target searches |
| Demo requests and trial starts | GA4 key events by landing page | Higher conversion than your blog average |
| Pipeline influenced | CRM: contacts who viewed the page before an opportunity | Opportunities you can trace to the page |
| Sales use | Ask reps, or track the link in your sales tool | Reps send it during evaluations |
| AI citations | Your monthly prompt test | Your page or your name in comparison answers |

Most teams miss sales use. If reps won't send the page to a prospect, it probably reads like an ad, so ask them what they'd change and fix it.

## What mistakes stop comparison pages from working?

Most comparison pages fail for one of six reasons, and you can fix every one before launch:

| Mistake | What the buyer sees |
| --- | --- |
| The rigged table | Ticks for you, crosses for them; trust gone by row three |
| Stale facts | Last year's price, so nothing else looks current |
| The feature dump | Fifty rows, no verdict, all the work left to them |
| Skipping the rival's strength | The thing they were already worried about, ignored |
| Orphan pages | A page they never find from your navigation, product or pricing pages |
| Stopping at one | Every other lost matchup left open |

## Who should build your comparison pages?

You have three realistic options: your product marketing team, a specialist SaaS writer, or an SEO agency that builds and ranks the whole page set. It's my own view, and I run Searchmaxxed, so I put it first.

| Option | Best for | What you still own | Watch for |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Searchmaxxed (Agentic Search Engineering) | A full comparison, industry and integration page set, plus links and digital PR | Product facts and final sign-off | Monthly scope suits ongoing work, not one page |
| Your product marketing team | One or two pages, with deep product knowledge | Everything, including SEO and upkeep | Pages slipping out of date between launches |
| A specialist SaaS writer | Well-written pages with editorial judgement | Ranking, schema, links and the quarterly review | Pages that read well but never reach page one |

Your own team knows the product best, so their input matters whoever writes. The harder question comes later. Who keeps twenty pages ranked, current and cited?

## Where does Searchmaxxed fit?

Searchmaxxed is an SEO and AI SEO agency for enterprise, B2B SaaS, venture-backed, manufacturing and public-sector companies. We do technical SEO, content, link building, digital PR, GEO, AEO and LLM SEO. The aim: rank in Google, and have ChatGPT, Gemini, Perplexity and Google's AI answers name you for the searches that bring pipeline. Comparison searches sit closest to a sale.

Packages differ by monthly output:

| Package | Who it suits | What it includes |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Growth System | A company growing in one or two markets | 30 page releases a month, work on up to 4 existing pages, one qualified link action, AI visibility tracking |
| Agentic Search Engineering | A competitive or national category | 50 page releases a month, net-new comparison, industry and integration page families, digital PR and link campaigns, AI answer tracking across ChatGPT, Gemini, Perplexity and AI Overviews |
| Custom & Enterprise | Several products, several markets or a large site | Dedicated engineering, custom reporting and original first-party research |

A page release is an approved new page or a substantial rebuild of one. Every managed package includes ongoing audits, a 90-day plan in weekly releases, the build work itself and a monthly decision memo. You own the site, repository, content and data from day one, and you work with the people doing it, with no account managers between.

Here's how we do it. We build on a website you own, our Agentic Website. AI agents pull your Search Console and GA4 data, read the Google results and check what AI answers say about you and your rivals. That feeds the Managed Search Loop, which shows which comparison page, fix or link should bring in the most demos next. We build it, check the live page and measure what changed. Off your site, the Off-Page Source Layer builds the links, digital PR and mentions that AI answers draw on.

So the ledger, the fair table, the schema and the re-checks all run inside the same weekly releases, with nothing waiting for a content sprint.

Searchmaxxed's work has generated more than A$10 million in revenue through search for its clients.

## Is Searchmaxxed right for you?

We suit marketing and growth leaders at B2B SaaS and enterprise companies who lose deals to several named rivals. The fit is a team that wants the whole comparison set built, ranked and kept current. We're the wrong call for one page this week.

| Searchmaxxed is a good fit if | Look elsewhere if |
| --- | --- |
| You lose deals to three or more named competitors | You compete with one rival and need one page |
| You want vs, alternatives, integration and industry pages built as one set | You want a single article from a freelance writer |
| You want the pages ranked in Google and cited in AI answers | You only want to monitor AI mentions; a tracking tool costs less |
| You want to own your site, repository, content and data | You're shopping for the cheapest retainer |
| You can give us product facts and someone to sign off claims | Nobody inside can confirm product facts or arrange legal review |

If you're in the right-hand column, a good writer or your own product marketing team will serve you better. If you're in the left, [our SaaS SEO service](https://www.searchmaxxed.com/industries/saas-seo) shows how comparison pages fit beside the rest of the work.

## Frequently asked questions

### How many comparison pages should a SaaS company have?

Start with three to five, built for the rivals you lose the most deals to. Add more as those rank and convert. Five current, well-sourced pages beat thirty stale ones.

### What's the difference between a comparison page and an alternatives page?

A comparison page puts two products head to head, such as "Product A vs Product B". An alternatives page lists several options for someone leaving one product, so it reaches buyers before they've settled on two names.

### Is it legal to mention competitors on your website?

Yes, in the US and Australia, if every claim is true, fair and provable. The FTC encourages truthful comparisons. The ACCC says a comparison misleads if it's inaccurate or unfair, so have counsel review each page before launch.

### Should you show competitor prices on a comparison page?

Yes, when the rival publishes them, with the source and the date you checked. Write "Not published" when they don't, and re-check every quarter, because one stale price undercuts every other fact on the page.

### Should comparison pages be blog posts or landing pages?

Either works. A landing page suits a vs page that sales sends to prospects. An editorial post suits alternatives and competitor-vs-competitor pages, where a neutral tone matters more. A hybrid works too.

### Can you rank for a competitor's brand name?

Yes. Searches like "Rival alternatives" and "You vs Rival" are open to any page that answers them well. The rival's own site often ranks too, so yours needs the fairer table and the clearer verdict.

### Do comparison pages help with AI search?

Yes. AI answers can pull facts from comparison pages, and a plain verdict, a clear table and dated facts make those facts easy to lift. They also lean on third-party lists, so pair your own pages with outside coverage.

## What should you do next?

Pull your closed-lost deals from the last two quarters and list the three rivals you lose to most. Search each matchup in Google and ChatGPT, and note who answers. If you'd like us to build and rank that comparison set for you, [let's talk pricing](https://www.searchmaxxed.com/contact).

REFERENCES

1. [Grow and Convert](https://www.growandconvert.com/seo/competitor-comparison-landing-pages/)
2. [Intergrowth survey](https://intergrowth.com/content-marketing/competitor-comparison-pages/)
3. [Greg Kogan's Scalyr case](https://www.gkogan.co/alternative-pages/)
4. [Google Search Central](https://developers.google.com/search/docs/appearance/ai-features)
5. [source](https://nathanojaokomo.com/blog/write-saas-comparison-pages)
6. [Statement of Policy Regarding Comparative Advertising](https://www.ftc.gov/legal-library/browse/statement-policy-regarding-comparative-advertising)
7. [false or misleading claims](https://www.accc.gov.au/consumers/advertising-and-promotions/false-or-misleading-claims)
8. [International Trademark Association](https://www.inta.org/fact-sheets/fair-use-of-trademarks-intended-for-a-non-legal-audience/)
9. [structured data policies](https://developers.google.com/search/docs/appearance/structured-data/sd-policies)
10. [FAQPage documentation](https://developers.google.com/search/docs/appearance/structured-data/faqpage)
11. [review snippet guidelines](https://developers.google.com/search/docs/appearance/structured-data/review-snippet)

[Get an AI visibility audit](https://www.searchmaxxed.com/contact)

See where buyers find someone else across Google and AI answers.

See where you are invisible →

## Let's make you the answer.

## Related

- [Research](https://www.searchmaxxed.com/research)
- [Searchmaxxed](https://www.searchmaxxed.com/)