Verified against Perplexity Pro · 2026-07-09
Build a living competitor-comparison table inside a Space instead of a one-off answer
A recurring competitive-research prompt designed to run inside a Perplexity Space, with fixed comparison columns and per-cell citations so the table can be safely re-run and extended over time.
The prompt
Ready to copy — highlighted parts are example details you can swap.
This question is part of an ongoing competitive research project — treat it as one round of a comparison table that will keep growing across future threads in this Space, not a standalone answer. OUR COMPANY / PRODUCT Northwind Analytics, a mid-market marketing attribution platform COMPETITORS TO COVER THIS ROUND Attribution.io, Ruler Analytics, Dreamdata COMPARISON DIMENSIONS (keep these exact column headers every time this is run again) Starting price, Free tier, Attribution model type, G2 rating, Last major feature launch INDUSTRY CONTEXT B2B marketing attribution software, mid-market segment ($10k-$100k ACV) OUTPUT FORMAT A table: Competitor | Starting price, Free tier, Attribution model type, G2 rating, Last major feature launch — one citation per cell, not one citation covering the whole row. If a cell cannot be filled from a verifiable source, write "not publicly disclosed" rather than estimating a number and presenting it as fact. After the table, one paragraph: what changed about the competitive picture since the last obvious public update from any of these competitors — product launch, pricing change, funding, leadership change — and flag anything time-sensitive as provisional rather than settled.
Customize the highlighted detailsoptional — the prompt above already works
Why this works
Running this inside a Space rather than a one-off thread is the mechanic that makes the table durable: the Space's own instructions and thread history let you fix the comparison dimensions once and re-run the same shape of question in a new thread weeks later without redefining the columns from scratch, which is what turns a snapshot into a genuinely maintained comparison. Requiring one citation per cell instead of one per row closes a specific failure mode of table generation — a single strong source about Competitor A's pricing can otherwise get silently reused to justify a claim about Competitor A's rating or Competitor B's pricing in an adjacent cell, because the model is filling in a grid, not verifying each fact independently. Instructing 'not publicly disclosed' instead of an estimate matters because a competitive table that quietly fills every cell reads as more complete and more certain than the underlying public sourcing actually supports, which is worse for decision-making than an honest gap.
What you get back
Attribution.io | $499/mo | No | Multi-touch, rules-based | 4.4/5 (G2, 210 reviews) | AI-assisted channel grouping, announced May 2026 Ruler Analytics | not publicly disclosed | No | First-touch + multi-touch | 4.6/5 (G2, 95 reviews) | not publicly disclosed Since the last round: Attribution.io shipped AI-assisted channel grouping in May 2026 — treat competitive parity claims about "manual grouping only" as outdated after that date.
Verified against
Perplexity Pro Spaces + Sonar Pro (2026) · 2026-07-09
Changelog
- 2026-07-09 — Initial publish, verified against Perplexity Spaces with Sonar Pro search.
Need this built into your business?
If a prompt isn't enough — what Scult builds, built and maintained for you — that's Scult's day job.
EXPLORE WHAT SCULT BUILDS
