By Priya Shankar, Head of Product at Glue
Your sales team is going head-to-head with competitors on nearly every deal. The question is whether they are equipped with the right information when it matters. A strong competitive battlecard template gives your reps the talking points, objection handlers, and positioning they need to win, all in a format they can actually use in the middle of a call.
But most battlecards fail. They are either too long, too vague, too outdated, or too disconnected from what buyers actually ask. I have seen battlecards that read like product marketing manifestos and others that are just a list of feature checkboxes. Neither wins deals.
This post covers what makes battlecards effective, provides a framework you can adapt, and addresses the hardest problem of all: keeping them current.
Why Battlecards Matter
Sales is competitive by nature. According to Crayon's State of Competitive Intelligence report, 65% of sales opportunities involve a direct competitor. Your reps will face competitive objections whether you prepare them or not.
The gap between knowing you need competitive intelligence and actually delivering it is wide. The same Crayon research found that competitive intelligence professionals rate their own effectiveness at just 3.8 out of 10. That is not a passing grade by any standard.
The cost of getting this wrong is real. Organizations estimate they lose between $2 million and $10 million annually in deals influenced by competitive pressure they were not prepared to handle.
Battlecards bridge this gap. They take your competitive intelligence, your product strengths, your differentiated positioning, and package it into something a rep can reference during a live conversation. Done well, they are one of the highest-ROI assets a product marketing team can create.
But "done well" is doing a lot of heavy lifting in that sentence. Let me break down what that actually means.
What Makes a Good Battlecard
A battlecard that collects dust in a shared drive is not a good battlecard, no matter how thorough it is. Effective battlecards share a few characteristics.
They are scannable. A rep glancing at a battlecard during a call needs to find the relevant section in seconds. Long paragraphs, dense text, and academic formatting are the enemy. Use headers, bullet points, bold text, and tables.
They are specific. "Our product is more reliable" is not a competitive talking point. "We guarantee 99.99% uptime with contractual SLAs; [Competitor] offers 99.9% with no SLA commitment" is a competitive talking point. Specificity builds credibility.
They are honest. Every competitor has strengths. Pretending otherwise makes your reps look uninformed when the prospect brings up those strengths. Acknowledge where the competitor is strong and pivot to where you win. Reps who can say "Yes, they do X well, but here is why Y matters more for your use case" sound consultative, not defensive.
They are buyer-focused. Battlecards should be organized around buyer concerns and objections, not around your feature list. A rep does not need to recite every capability. They need to address the specific reasons a prospect might choose the competitor. For a comprehensive approach to gathering and organizing this intelligence, see our competitive intelligence guide for SaaS.
They are current. A battlecard with last quarter's pricing or a feature the competitor has since deprecated does more harm than good. We will get to the currency problem shortly.
Template and Framework
Here is a competitive battlecard template framework you can adapt for your organization. Each section serves a specific purpose in a competitive conversation.
Section 1: Competitor Overview (2-3 sentences) A brief, factual summary of who the competitor is, what they sell, and who their typical customer is. Keep it neutral and accurate. Your reps should sound knowledgeable, not dismissive.
Section 2: Their Positioning vs. Ours (comparison table) A side-by-side table covering the 4-6 dimensions that matter most to your buyers. These should be the criteria buyers use to evaluate solutions, not the features you are most proud of. Common dimensions include: pricing model, implementation time, integration ecosystem, support model, and scalability.
Section 3: When We Win (2-3 bullets) The scenarios, use cases, or buyer profiles where your solution is clearly stronger. Be specific: "Mid-market companies with complex integrations" is more useful than "companies that want a better product."
Section 4: When They Win (2-3 bullets) Yes, include this. The scenarios where the competitor has an advantage. Reps who know this can qualify deals better, focus on winnable opportunities, and address concerns proactively instead of being caught off guard.
Section 5: Common Objections and Responses (3-5 Q&A pairs) The specific things prospects say when they are considering the competitor. "They told us your implementation takes twice as long" or "Their pricing is 30% lower." Each objection gets a concise, factual response. Scripts feel robotic, so frame these as guidance, not word-for-word lines.
Section 6: Landmines (2-3 questions) Questions your reps can ask the prospect that highlight areas where the competitor is weak, without mentioning the competitor directly. "How important is [capability the competitor lacks] to your evaluation?" These shift the conversation to your strengths naturally.
Section 7: Proof Points (2-3 items) Customer quotes, case study snippets, or data points that reinforce your competitive advantages. Social proof in a competitive conversation is powerful.
One thing many battlecards miss is the technical dimension. When your product competes on technical capabilities, architecture, or developer experience, surface-level feature comparisons fall short. Understanding what competitive analysis misses when it cannot see the code is critical for building battlecards that hold up under technical scrutiny.
Keeping Battlecards Current
This is where most competitive programs break down. Crayon's research shows that 58% of competitive intelligence professionals struggle to keep their battlecards current. Outdated information is worse than no information because it gives reps false confidence.
A quarterly review cycle is the minimum. Monthly is better for fast-moving markets. But the real solution is building systems that surface competitive changes continuously rather than relying on periodic manual updates.
Monitor competitor activity. Track their website changes, pricing page updates, product releases, and job postings. Job postings in particular reveal strategic direction: if a competitor is hiring heavily for a specific product area, that tells you where they are investing.
Collect field intelligence. Your sales team is the best source of competitive information. They hear what competitors are saying in deals every week. Build a lightweight process for reps to submit competitive intel, such as a Slack channel, a form, or a standing agenda item in team meetings. The easier you make it, the more you will get.
Assign ownership. Someone (or a small team) needs to own each battlecard. Without clear ownership, updates fall through the cracks. The owner does not need to do all the research, but they are responsible for ensuring the card stays accurate.
Version and date. Every battlecard should show when it was last updated. This lets reps assess the freshness of the information and signals to the organization when a card needs attention.
For a structured approach to the analytical framework behind battlecards, our overview of competitive gap analysis provides useful context.
Glue adds a unique dimension to competitive intelligence by providing visibility into how software products are actually built. When your battlecards need to address technical differentiation, understanding architectural decisions, technology choices, and development patterns gives your sales team a level of depth that surface-level feature comparisons cannot match. This is especially valuable in technical sales cycles where the buyer's engineering team is part of the evaluation.
Great battlecards are not a document you create once. They are a living asset that reflects your ongoing understanding of the competitive environment. Build the template, staff the process, and treat accuracy as non-negotiable. Your win rates will follow.
FAQ
What is a competitive battlecard?
A competitive battlecard is a concise reference document that equips sales reps with the information they need to compete against a specific rival in live selling situations. It typically includes a competitor overview, comparison points, common objections with responses, and proof points. The best battlecards are scannable, specific, and organized around buyer concerns rather than internal feature lists.
How do you create effective battlecards?
Start with buyer research to identify the 4-6 evaluation criteria that matter most to your prospects. Build the card around those criteria rather than your own feature set. Include honest assessments of where you win and where the competitor wins, along with specific objection-handling guidance and proof points. Keep the format scannable, and test the card with your sales team before rolling it out broadly.
How often should battlecards be updated?
At minimum, review battlecards quarterly. In fast-moving markets, monthly reviews are better. Beyond scheduled reviews, update immediately when a competitor changes pricing, launches a major feature, or shifts positioning. The most sustainable approach combines scheduled reviews with continuous monitoring so that updates happen when they are needed rather than on an arbitrary calendar.