How to write an alternatives page that ranks and stays fair

One agency tracked conversion rates by keyword type across its clients. Pages targeting "[competitor] alternatives" converted at 8.43%. "X vs Y" pages converted at 5.45%. A top-of-funnel example converted at 0.6% (Grow and Convert, agency client data).

That gap is why every SaaS team wants these pages, and why so many are bad. The fix is restraint: fewer claims, each dated and sourced, and an honest line about who should stay put.

Buyers also check your page against an AI answer. G2 reported in 2026 that 51% of software buyers start their research in an AI chatbot (Demand Gen Report). A one-sided page loses to a fair summary from a model that has read your competitor's docs.

Alternatives page or vs page: which to write first#

• "[Competitor] alternatives" is searched by someone using or rejecting that competitor. They want a short list.
• "[You] vs [competitor]" is searched by someone who already knows both names. They're close to a decision.
• "[Competitor A] vs [competitor B]" is searched by someone choosing between two others. You can win it only if you're a credible third option.

I'd start with the alternatives page for the competitor you meet most in sales calls. It has the highest conversion rate in the Grow and Convert data.

If people already search "[you] vs [competitor]", write that page first. Those searchers are further along, and one rival is cheaper to cover than five.

What I'd check first: ask sales which tool new customers left, and the main reason why. That reason becomes your headline. See how these pages fit with use-case, integration and pricing pages in the bottom-of-funnel SaaS pages that bring revenue.

How to write an alternatives page: section by section#

Lead with the reason to leave, not with you. The searcher came for options. A first screen with only your logo and a demo button loses them.

Pick decision factors buyers use. Pricing model, setup time, integrations, data limits, support hours, contract terms. Skip vanity rows like "modern UI" that you can't measure.

Say who should stay. Example: "If you need on-premise hosting, stay with [competitor]. We're cloud only." It costs a few sign-ups you'd have lost anyway, and buys trust from everyone else.

A vs page template you can copy#

A vs page covers one rival, side by side, with a clear verdict by type of buyer.

The verdict goes first because many visitors read only that. Make it useful even to those who pick the other tool.

The trade-off: expect a few hours of research per competitor, plus a quarterly recheck.

Fair comparisons: FTC, false advertising and trademarks#

This is general information, not legal advice. Have a lawyer review strong claims about a named competitor.

The FTC encourages comparisons, with conditions. Its policy statement on comparative advertising "encourages the naming of, or reference to competitors, but requires clarity" (FTC, 1979). Comparative advertising, "when truthful and non-deceptive, is a source of important information to consumers," it says. Comparisons face the same test as any ad: could they mislead?

False advertising claims come from competitors. Section 43(a) of the Lanham Act lets a business sue over false or misleading statements about goods in commercial advertising (15 U.S.C. §1125). The riskiest lines are numbers about the rival: their price, limits, uptime and security. If it's wrong or stale, that's your exposure.

Using their name is usually allowed, within limits. US courts call it nominative use. The Ninth Circuit's test, per the American Bar Association, asks three things. Is the product hard to identify without the name? Do you use only as much of the mark "as is reasonably necessary"? Do you avoid anything that would "suggest sponsorship or endorsement by the trademark holder" (ABA Landslide, 2022)? Circuits apply this differently.

What that means on the page:

• Use the competitor's name in plain text. Don't use their logo or brand colors.
• Don't imply a partnership, endorsement or "official" status.
• Don't say "the only", "the best" or "X times faster" unless you can prove it today.

Make every claim checkable#

A claim is checkable when a reader can click and see what you saw. That protects you legally and helps in search.

Google's guidance on reviews asks writers to do three things (Google Search Central):

• "explain what sets something apart from its competitors"
• "discuss the benefits and drawbacks of something, based on your own original research"
• show "evidence such as visuals, audio, or other links of your own experience"

It's written for product reviews, but fits software comparisons.

How I'd put that into practice:

1. Date every competitor fact. "Starts at $X/month (pricing page, checked [date])."
2. Link the source. Their pricing page, docs, changelog or status page.
3. Separate tested from claimed. "In our test" versus "according to their docs."
4. Add a "last checked" line near the table, and a way to report errors.
5. Recheck every quarter, and whenever a competitor ships a pricing change.

Put one named owner on each page, or the table goes stale.

Alternatives page SEO and AI answers#

Alternatives page SEO follows the search. Put "[competitor] alternatives" in the title, H1 and URL. Cover "[competitor] competitors" and "tools like [competitor]". Link to the page from pricing, integration and problem-focused blog pages.

AI answers read these pages differently. Google says there's no special optimization for AI features. A page must be indexed and eligible for a snippet (Google Search Central). But AI Overviews appear less on commercial searches. Ahrefs found they triggered on 4.3% of commercial keywords against 21.4% of informational ones (Ahrefs, Nov 2025).

Ask ChatGPT for "[competitor] alternatives" and it pulls from pages like yours, review sites and forums. Its answers shift a lot: SparkToro and Gumshoe found less than a 1 in 100 chance of getting the same brand list twice (Search Engine Land, Jan 2026). A clear table with dated facts is easy to quote. A page full of "best-in-class" is not.

For the wider playbook, read how to get cited in Google AI Overviews. Want to know if ChatGPT and Google already mention you for competitor searches? Use the checks in AI search visibility: does ChatGPT or Google AI mention you?

A real example worth studying#

PostHog's "PostHog vs Mixpanel" page is a useful model (PostHog, Jan 2026). It's written by PostHog, so read it as a vendor page. Three things stand out:

• Feature tables grouped by job: product analytics, session replay, feature flags, experiments and more.
• Pricing at several usage levels, not a single headline price.
• A plain case for the competitor. Its FAQ lists reasons to stay with Mixpanel. It also calls Mixpanel "a solid choice" for teams that want "a polished UI optimized for product managers and growth teams."

Copy the moves, not the wording.

How to do this in Kratly#

1. Run the free AI search audit. See whether Google's AI Overviews cite you when buyers search for alternatives to your main competitors.
2. Connect your site and Stripe. Kratly shows sign-ups, paying customers and revenue for each page, including your alternatives and vs pages.
3. Compare pages on revenue. See which competitor pages bring paying customers and which only bring visits.
4. Approve suggested updates. Kratly flags pages with stale or missing facts and suggests changes. You approve each one, and every change is logged and reversible.