Audits & strategy
SEO competitor analysis
I define the scope of the comparison (topics and locations) and select both market competitors and SERP competitors. As input I need the domain, a list of services/products, geographic areas and seasonality (optionally analytics data). I compare visibility, content, intent, architecture, technical signals and links; I deliver a report with conclusions and files ready for the implementation backlog.
About the service
SEO competitor analysis: comparing SERPs, content and links, and setting priorities for action
About the SEO competitor analysis service
A few service details- Defining the scope and the questions
- Selecting market and SERP competitors
- Analysis of the SERP landscape and formats
- Content, intent and gap benchmark
- Assessment of architecture, technical SEO and links
- Report, attachments and implementation backlog
Work process
SEO competitor analysis from scope to a prioritised backlog
I start by clarifying the market, language, topics and locations, so that the comparison is useful for implementation. I then put together the market competitors and the “SERP” competitors and collect comparative data, and we turn the conclusions into a backlog of actions and implementation priorities
- 01/ 03
Scope and data
We establish exactly what we are comparing and from what angle, and I collect basic information from you about the domain, the offer, the geographic areas and seasonality.
- 02/ 03
Competitor comparison
I select market competitors and “SERP” competitors and analyse visibility, topic coverage, keyword gaps, content structure, information architecture and selected technical signals.
- 03/ 03
Conclusions and backlog
I prepare a report with conclusions and working attachments, which we turn into a backlog of actions and an implementation order (fixes, new content, architecture, links)
Competitor analysis in SEO: key steps and strategies
Competitor analysis in SEO is the process of comparing competitors’ visibility and SEO activity in the search results, with the aim of identifying gaps, advantages and priorities for action for the client’s site. I base the work on a list of market competitors and “SERP” competitors for the agreed topics and locations. I then collect comparative data on the visibility and content of the pages, along with samples of search results, to see the differences in topic coverage and in the way intent is answered. The result is a basis for deciding what to optimise first: quick fixes on existing pages, new content, a restructuring of the architecture or link-related work.
As part of the comparative analysis I check, among other things, visibility and topic coverage, keyword gaps, content structure and intent, and the elements of competitors’ landing pages. I also take into account information architecture, internal linking patterns, selected technical signals that affect indexing and page quality, and the external link profile as a benchmark. I analyse the SERP landscape as well — that is, which types of results dominate for the queries and what that means for the choice of content and page format.
Defining the scope and the analytical questions
Defining the scope and the analytical questions means clarifying exactly what we are comparing and from what angle, so that the competitor analysis is useful for implementation. At this stage we establish the market and language, the areas of the offer and the page types to be included in the comparison (e.g. categories or guides). We also clarify the geographic area and whether the priority is growth in informational, transactional or local traffic. These decisions are the starting point for selecting competitors and for the further collection of comparative data.
To get started efficiently, I need input materials from the client that organise the business context and make it possible to narrow the analysis down correctly to the key segments. As a result, the choice of topics and locations is based on the site’s real priorities rather than on random samples of results. If data from internal analytics systems is available, it can be used as a supplement (optional). The required information is provided as a simple data set:
- the address of the domain being analysed,
- a list of key services/products,
- geographic areas,
- information about seasonality,
- (optionally) access to data from internal analytics systems.
Input materials from the client: what is essential?
Input materials from the client are essential for the competitor analysis to be based on the right domain and on the priority segments of the offer and locations. The starting point is the address of the domain being analysed and a list of the key services or products that are to define the scope of the comparison. On top of that I need information about the geographic areas, because they affect the choice of competitors and the sample of search results for the agreed locations. Information about seasonality is an important addition too, as it gives context for interpreting the observations.
Optionally, the materials may include access to data from internal analytics systems, if it is available on the client’s side. Such access makes it possible to set observations from public data against what can be seen within the site, which makes it easier to validate the conclusions. This is particularly important because competitor data is indirect by nature, and search results can differ depending on location, device and personalisation. As a result, the recommendations can be better matched to the site’s real needs and its market context.
Selecting competitors for the comparison: market and SERP
Selecting competitors for the comparison covers both direct (market) competitors and competitors visible in the search results for the agreed topics and locations. In practice this means choosing the domains that compete with your offer commercially and those that take exposure in the SERPs for key queries. This stage closes with a decision on which domains and which segments of the offer or topics go into the analysis. The agreed list directly affects the later scope of the comparisons and the level of detail of the conclusions.
The final scope of the competitor selection is shaped by organisational and analytical factors, which we establish before collecting comparative data. What matters is the number of competitors analysed and the number of markets and languages to be included in the comparison. The level of detail makes a difference too (analysis at the level of the whole domain vs. selected sections), as does whether we rely solely on public data or on internal data as well. Once the list and the segment priorities have been approved, I move on to collecting comparative data for the agreed topics and locations.
- selecting market (direct) competitors,
- selecting “SERP” competitors for the key topics and locations,
- approving the list of domains and the priority segments for analysis,
- establishing whether the comparison covers one or several markets/languages,
- defining the level of detail: domain vs. sections of the site.
Collecting comparative data: what to analyse and how?
Collecting comparative data means obtaining publicly available information about the visibility and content of competitors’ pages, along with samples of search results for the agreed topics and locations. This lets me compare where competitors build exposure in the SERPs and which page types they use depending on the intent behind the query. I collect the data in a layout that matches the previously approved segments, so that the later synthesis translates directly into implementation decisions. In practice this means working with comparative tables and example pages that show the differences in the approach to content, structure and quality signals.
Based on the collected data I carry out comparisons that cover both the topical layer and the page elements and SERP context. The analysis is run as a benchmark, in order to identify gaps and areas where the client’s site can strengthen its topic coverage, content format or structure. This stage produces, among other things, the following comparisons and observations:
- a comparison of visibility and topic coverage, and identification of the areas where the client’s site is missing,
- keyword gap analysis: queries that are shared, unique to the competition and unique to the client,
- an assessment of the match to intent (informational, transactional, local) and of the way paths to conversion are built,
- a review of competitors’ landing pages in terms of layout and the elements that support the user’s decision (e.g. sections, FAQ, trust elements, local elements),
- a comparison of information architecture, including gaps in coverage and potential keyword cannibalisation between topics,
- an internal linking benchmark (e.g. contextual link patterns, topic hubs, siloing),
- a benchmark of technical signals that affect indexing and page quality (including statuses, duplication, pagination, meta, headings, structured data, speed and stability on devices),
- a benchmark of the external link profile (types of sources, topics, diversification and the distribution of links to subpages),
- an analysis of the SERP landscape in terms of the dominant result types and the consequences for content and page format.
Synthesis of conclusions and priorities for optimisation work
The synthesis of conclusions means combining the observations from the comparisons into a list of opportunities, risks and recommendations, and then setting priorities for action for the site. At this stage I determine which elements can deliver the fastest effect and which will require a rebuild of the content or structure. The conclusions are worded in a way that makes it easier to decide “what to optimise first”, distinguishing between fixes on existing pages, creating new content, restructuring the architecture and link-related work. The interpretation takes into account that search results can differ depending on location, device and personalisation, and that competitor data is indirect and needs to be validated on the client’s site.
The output of the synthesis stage is an organised backlog of actions and a complete set of recommendations delivered in the report and the working attachments. The backlog covers priorities such as topics to write or expand, pages to strengthen, technical problems to remove and linking areas to reinforce. In parallel I prepare on-page recommendations, recommendations for changes to structure and linking, a technical checklist in the form of tasks to implement, and guidelines for link building (without numerical promises). We then go through the material at a meeting or workshop, where we refine the tasks for content, development and marketing and decide whether the work ends with the recommendations or also includes implementation or coordination.
- a list of opportunities and gaps (backlog of actions) with priorities,
- on-page optimisation recommendations (including headings, sections, match to intent, E-E-A-T elements, FAQ, meta),
- recommendations for optimising structure and linking (including categories, topic clusters, linking rules, eliminating keyword cannibalisation),
- technical recommendations in the form of a checklist of tasks to implement,
- link building recommendations in the form of guidelines (directions, types of target pages, topics, diversification, minimum quality rules),
- report + working attachments (comparative tables, list of topics/keywords, examples of pages and elements to implement),
- a walkthrough and refinement of the implementation at a meeting/workshop, and a decision on possible implementation/coordination.
Testimonials
What clients and the industry say
Feedback from clients and industry people I have worked with on SEO projects.
I had the chance to work with Kuba at Kulturalnie o SEO, an event I organise. Kuba did a great job as a speaker and received high marks from the audience. He showed professionalism and broad knowledge. In other projects at Vestigio, Kuba shows enormous commitment, a willingness to explore and implement new ideas, and excellent organisation of his work.
01 / 08
You talk to me, not a salesperson
Tell me what you want to achieve. I’ll reply personally
I work as a freelancer: the same person reads your message, prepares the quote and then runs the project. No sales team in between.