Head-to-head · Back to the report

Who your audience would pick
between you and 3 competitors

URA · uralabs.app · Oct 13 · 100 audience members saw all 4 pages

Your rank

#1 of 4 first choice · 72 of 100

Your page was the first choice for 72% of the audience, ahead of Deepsona at 12%.

First choice · share of the audience

  1. 01Your page72%
  2. 02Deepsona12%
  3. 03Evelance9%
  4. 04Electrictwin7%

Everyone saw all the pages and picked one. Shares add up to 100%.

What to steal

3 moves · from why people picked a rival
1

Add a 'How accurate is it?' section directly below the hero. State a predictive-alignment range against named external benchmarks (real campaign outcomes, YouGov/GWI-style human response data). Report

Deepsona does this

“Claims 'consistently achieved 74-90% predictive alignment with real campaign outcomes and actual human responses from YouGov and' GWI. Separately reports 64% predictive alignment and 70% repeatability”

Pickers said Deepsona was 'the only page that states its own validation': it named the benchmark sources, gave a range rather than one number, reported repeatability separately and stated caveats. · +~6 of 100 people

2

Add a row of recognizable customer logos next to your existing pricing and trust signals, with a 'View the case study' link under them. Add one concrete head-to-head proof line, e.g. 'We ran the same

Evelance does this

“'We ran the same product past 23 real people and 7 Evelance personas. The themes overlapped in 11 of 13 categories', plus a 'View the case study' link.”

Pickers wanted 'the most proof I could take to a CEO': recognizable client logos, linked case studies and a specific accuracy claim alongside pricing. · +~4 of 100 people

3

Add an 'For insights & research teams' block. Say personas are built from the buyer's own customer data, and that synthetic responses are checked against real survey data the model has never seen. Lin

Electrictwin does this

“'we generate synthetic responses, then compare them against real survey data the model has never seen'. Testimonial: Chris Courtney-Smith, Director of Data Operations, The Times: 'We went from rationi”

Pickers said it was 'the only page built for research teams': audiences built from their own customer data eased staleness worries, and the dedicated Accuracy page compared it against surveys and focus groups. · +~3 of 100 people

Why they picked a rival

Top reasons · in their words
Deepsona12% first choice
  1. 01Deepsona is the only page that comes close to my real question, whether predictions match live results. It cites 74–90% alignment with real campaign outcomes and names Meta and Google spend. The others lean on general accuracy claims or on other people's research.
  2. 02Deepsona is the only page that directly answers my core doubt: it claims 74-90% predictive alignment with real campaign outcomes, cites the YouGov/GWI benchmarks and a 2M-simulation base, and caveats the results, though its 64% headline figure is confusingly inconsistent with tha

“Show me that predictions track real campaign results and I'll try it. Deepsona at least puts a number on that and mentions Meta and Google. URA gives me Harvard papers, not its own validation data.”

Skylar · The Ad-Spend Guardian

Evelance9% first choice
  1. 01Evelance offers the most complete proof package for skeptical stakeholders: recognizable customer logos, linked case studies, a specific accuracy claim, pricing and a free trial. URA's sample report and research citations come close, but its credibility is borrowed from academic
  2. 02Evelance covers the most of my three must-haves: a pricing page, linked case studies, recognizable customer logos for CEO credibility, and a real product UI that suggests my team would actually adopt it. URA's sample report is compelling but it lacks customer case studies.

“If I'm putting this in front of my CEO, I need to show that companies like Meta and Samsung actually use it, plus case studies. Evelance gives me that. URA's sample report is tempting, but Harvard research doesn't prove”

Sawyer · The Opinion-Loop Breaker

Electrictwin7% first choice
  1. 01Electric Twin best addresses my two biggest worries. Its 'Synthetic audiences built from your customer data' line speaks directly to grounding personas in my real ICP. Its dedicated Accuracy page and enterprise logos (Channel 4, Virgin, Sage) give me something defensible to show
  2. 02Electric Twin best fits my research-throughput goal and enterprise needs. It builds personas from my own customer data, which addresses staleness. It has a dedicated Accuracy page, names an Insights & Research team use case, and frames the research agent as accelerating existing

“If I'm going to put the words 'synthetic audience' in front of my leadership, I need personas built from our own customer data and logos they recognize. Electric Twin gets closest to that. I still need to see their secur”

Moss · The Messaging-First Product Marketer

Who each audience type picked

8 types
Audience typeTheir first choiceYouDeepsonaEvelanceElectrictwin
The Methodology Skeptic CRO SpecialistDeepsona0%100%0%0%
The Research-Rationing Insights LeadElectrictwin0%0%0%100%
The Opinion-Loop BreakerEvelance40%0%60%0%
The Scrappy Pre-Launch FounderYour page100%0%0%0%
The Agency Validation-Layer BuilderYour page100%0%0%0%
The Launch-Day Indie MakerYour page100%0%0%0%
The Ad-Spend GuardianYour page91%9%0%0%
The Messaging-First Product MarketerYour page89%0%0%11%

What the audience said

2 of 100 responses

Picked you

“It's built for exactly what I'm doing, and I can run my page free with no card and see the sample report first. I'd still like to see their own predicted-vs-real CVR numbers instead of Harvard citations, but there's almo”

Alex
The Ad-Spend Guardian

Picked Deepsona

“Show me that predictions track real campaign results and I'll try it. Deepsona at least puts a number on that and mentions Meta and Google. URA gives me Harvard papers, not its own validation data.”

Skylar
The Ad-Spend Guardian