Lumen Ledger
Competitive landscape slide with four rivals in a table
A competitive landscape slide is judged on whether the rivals get the same treatment as the company presenting it, because an investor reads the row about the presenter first and the rest with suspicion. This one belongs to Lumen Ledger, a fictional bookkeeping tool, and gives all five providers the same four columns.
What is on the slide
- Columns
- Provider, price a month, target size, integrations, support hours. Every row carries the same four facts.
- Ledgerly and Countwise
- Ledgerly: $39 a month, 1 to 5 staff, 14 integrations, email only. Countwise: $79 a month, 5 to 20 staff, 32 integrations, 9 to 5 weekdays.
- Tallyhouse and Booksmith
- Tallyhouse: $149 a month, 20 to 80 staff, 58 integrations, 7am to 7pm weekdays. Booksmith: $210 a month, 80 staff and up, 90 integrations, 24 hours over 5 days.
- Lumen Ledger
- $96 a month, 5 to 40 staff, 41 integrations, 7am to 9pm seven days. The row sits last and is formatted the same as the other four.
When this is the right slide
A five row landscape table suits a competitive slide when every provider can be described with the same four checkable facts and the audience wants the market before the argument.
What to swap it for
Grouping: Competitor Scatter 2x2. Swap to the competitor scatter when the point is position on two axes and the gap in the market, which a table can only imply through the order of its rows.
What this slide shows
A small eyebrow reads COMPETITIVE LANDSCAPE above the headline Five bookkeeping tools, priced and sized. Below sits a five column table with a header row and five provider rows. The columns are Provider, Price a month, Target size, Integrations and Support hours. Ledgerly is $39 a month for one to five staff with 14 integrations and email only support. Countwise is $79 for five to twenty staff with 32 integrations and support from nine to five on weekdays. Tallyhouse is $149 for twenty to eighty staff with 58 integrations and support from 7am to 7pm on weekdays. Booksmith is $210 for eighty staff and up with 90 integrations and support 24 hours a day, five days a week. Lumen Ledger closes the table at $96 for five to forty staff with 41 integrations and support from 7am to 9pm, seven days. The first column renders as a row header, so the provider names stay readable when the table is projected.
When this is the right slide
Use it in a pitch, a board paper or a market review, where the audience needs to see the shape of a market rather than a head to head on features. Four to six rows is the useful range, and every row needs the same columns. It is the wrong slide when the argument is about position on two dimensions, such as price against range, because a table lists and a matrix places: a scatter with quadrants shows a gap that a table only implies. It is also wrong when a column would have to carry an opinion. Strengths and weaknesses columns are common in templates and almost always turn into a vendor writing the case against its rivals, which an experienced investor discounts on sight. It also reads poorly when the rivals serve genuinely different buyers, since a shared set of columns then forces false equivalence between products that never meet in a shortlist.
How to adapt it
First, choose columns a reader could check without asking anyone. Published prices, stated target sizes, counted integrations and advertised support hours all pass that test. Second, put the company presenting last and format its row identically, so the audience reads the market before the claim. Third, keep the table to five rows and four facts. A landscape with nine competitors belongs in a written appendix, and the slide should carry the four or five that a buyer actually shortlists against. If the pitch needs a position rather than a list, follow this slide with a two axis matrix, using the same providers so the two slides agree. Keep the figures on one date and say which date in the deck notes, because prices and integration counts move every quarter and a table that was accurate in March is read as careless in September. A landscape slide is one of the few in a pitch deck that needs a scheduled refresh rather than a rewrite.
What makes this slide work
Every provider gets the same four facts
Price a month, target size, integrations, support hours. No row carries an extra column of advantages, and the presenter row is formatted the same as the other four. An investor can read down the price column and see $39, $79, $149, $210, $96 without being steered, which is what makes the row order and the positioning argument credible.
The company sits last, not first
Lumen Ledger closes the table at $96 for 5 to 40 staff, 41 integrations and support from 7am to 9pm seven days. Putting it last means the audience reads the market before the claim, and the position is visible rather than asserted: mid price, mid size, with the widest support hours on the table.
Each column is a fact a buyer could verify
A monthly price, a staff range, a count of integrations, published support hours. None of them is a judgement, so nothing on the table can be argued with in the room. A column headed strengths or weaknesses would put an opinion about a rival on a slide, and in a real pitch that is the line where a landscape table stops being useful.
Questions people ask
What belongs in the columns of a competitive landscape slide?
Facts a reader could verify from public information: price, target customer size, counts of something, published hours or coverage. Opinion columns such as strengths and weaknesses put the presenter in the position of writing the case against a rival, and an experienced audience reads those columns as marketing rather than analysis.
Should the presenting company be on the table?
Yes, and in the same format as the others. A table of four rivals with the fifth company described in a callout looks like it is avoiding comparison. Putting the row last lets the audience read the market first, and the position argument then rests on the numbers already on the screen rather than on a claim.
How many competitors should appear?
Four to six. Fewer looks like the market was not researched, and more turns a slide into a directory. Pick the competitors a buyer actually shortlists against, not the largest names in the category, and say in the notes how the shortlist was chosen so the question can be answered when it comes.
What is the difference between this and a positioning matrix?
A table lists competitors with the same facts; a matrix places them against two axes so position carries meaning. A table can suggest a gap by the order of its rows, but only a matrix can show an empty quadrant. Many decks use both, with the table first for the facts and the matrix after for the argument.
How should competitors be named in a fictional or example deck?
Invent them, as this slide does with Ledgerly, Countwise, Tallyhouse and Booksmith. Using real company names in an example commits the author to facts that change every quarter, and a stale price or feature claim about a real business is a problem no slide is worth. Fictional rivals keep the shape without that risk.
When should a landscape slide be split in two?
Split when the market has distinct segments that are not comparable, for example tools for sole traders and tools for enterprises. One table per segment with the same columns reads far better than one table with a blank column half the time, and it makes the segment the company competes in explicit.
Build your own in about a minute
The button below opens the generator with this use case already described. Change the wording to match your own, generate, then edit anything you like.
Make one like thisOther slide examples
Competitor positioning slide with six brands on two axes
A competitor positioning slide is an argument about two axes, so the axes have to be chosen before the brands are placed or the map simply puts the presenter in the best corner. This one covers a fictional meal kit market on price a serve against range on the menu, and names the quadrant nobody occupies.
Problem solution slide with three paired problems
A problem solution slide fails when it lists problems on the left and features on the right, because nothing on the right answers anything in particular on the left. This one belongs to Kerbside, a fictional kerbside charging business, and every fix sits directly opposite the problem it solves.
Overlap slide example with two circles and side lists
An overlap slide earns its place when the shared ground is written first and the two outer lists are what is left over. This one belongs to Ledgerline, a fictional software firm, and settles which team owns which part of the revenue process.
Want the steps in the builder? Read Add charts, maps and diagrams to slides, then Make a pitch presentation with AI. For everything this generator can do, see the slide maker.
Written and checked by the OneCraft team. Last checked .