How I analyse D2C competitors to find a real market opening

My real competition is whatever the customer buys today. That includes the brand I fear, the cheaper marketplace product, the local option, a workaround, or doing nothing. I map those choices before I decide where a new D2C brand could enter.

Competition is not a reason to copy another brand. It is a way to understand the customer decision I am trying to change.

Start with the customer’s real choices

When founders make a competitor list, they often include only the brands they admire or worry about. That list is usually too narrow.

A customer may choose:

• a known brand
• a cheaper marketplace product
• a local or unbranded option
• a service instead of a product
• a do it yourself solution
• doing nothing

If I ignore these options, I do not understand the buying decision. The question is not only, “Who is building something like me?” It is, “What does my customer choose when this problem appears?”

The three competitor groups I look for

I usually start with seven to ten meaningful options. The goal is not to collect the biggest list. The goal is to understand the choices that appear in the customer’s mind.

Choose the right comparison axis

Price is one axis. The second axis should measure what matters in the category.

• speed of result
• ease of use
• quality or durability
• specialist focus
• identity
• occasion
• convenience
• trust

For footwear, the useful measure may be everyday comfort versus performance. For food, it may be daily use versus occasional use. For skincare, it may be general use versus one specific concern.

I want an axis that changes the customer decision, not one that simply makes the chart look clever.

Map the crowded and empty boxes

I put price on one axis and the most important customer measure on the other. Then I place every meaningful option on the chart.

The crowded boxes show where brands are already fighting. If I enter one of those boxes, I may need to spend heavily on advertising just to look similar to everyone else.

The empty box is interesting, but it is not automatically an opportunity. It may be empty because customers do not want that combination, suppliers cannot make it, or the economics do not work.

An empty box is a question, not an answer.

The six parts of a useful competitor teardown

1. The promise

What does the brand say it will help the customer achieve? I record the headline, first visual, customer shown, and problem being addressed.

2. The offer

I check price, pack size, bundles, shipping thresholds, payment options, discounts, and return terms. I do not look only at the displayed price. I take the customer journey to checkout and see what the final offer looks like.

3. The product page

Can a first time visitor understand the product quickly? Are the size, ingredients, materials, instructions, delivery dates, and returns easy to find? What questions remain unanswered?

4. Proof and trust

I look for reviews, demonstrations, customer photos, creator content, guarantees, usage instructions, delivery timelines, and support options. A polished website is not automatically trustworthy. I want to know whether a doubtful customer can find an answer quickly.

5. Acquisition

Where does the brand appear? What does the ad say in the first few seconds? Does it lead to a product page, a collection, a quiz, or an educational page? I do not copy the creative. I study the doubt the brand is paying to address.

6. Customer experience

I study the product page, delivery information, post purchase messages, support options, and replenishment reminders where they are visible. A brand may have strong ads and a weak delivery experience. Another may have average ads and excellent retention. I want to understand the full journey.

How I keep the teardown honest

A competitor analysis becomes dangerous when observation turns into made up certainty. I keep a source beside each row in my notes.

If I cannot cite a price or complaint, I mark the row unknown or delete it.

A chart is useful when it changes my next decision. It is not useful when it only makes a presentation look strategic.

Test the empty box before entering

An empty box can mean an opportunity. It can also mean there is no demand.

I test it by asking:

• Do customers describe this need in their own words?
• Are they already paying for an imperfect alternative?
• Can suppliers make the product consistently?
• Can I explain the difference in one sentence?
• Is there enough margin after delivery, returns, and marketing?
• Can I reach the customer without spending like the largest brand?

If the answers are weak, I do not force myself into the empty box. I choose a different position or return to the customer problem.

What I do after the teardown

I turn the research into four lists:

1. Keep: the minimum standard customers already expect.
2. Avoid: repeated failures I do not want to repeat.
3. Opportunity: a customer need that looks important and underserved.
4. Test: the assumption that could prove the opportunity wrong.

Then I write three sentences:

• My product will be easier to choose because...
• My product will be safer to buy because...
• My product will be harder to abandon because...

If my only answer is “better quality” or “better service,” I have not done enough work. I need to define what better means and how the customer will notice it.

Evidence note: A competitor map is a decision tool, not proof of market size, profitability, or demand. Empty positions need customer validation.

Which competitor or substitute does your customer choose today, and what does that choice tell you about your opening?