Across the Lantern 200-brand sample, top-quartile brands publish a median of 11 "X vs Y" comparison pages; bottom-quartile brands publish 2. Comparison pages average a 2.3× higher Citation Score than the marketing pages on the same site.
Why "vs." pages outperform marketing copy
Models route a meaningful share of buyer-intent traffic through comparison prompts, and the page best positioned to be cited is one that already names both brands, fairly, with structured evidence. The mistake is treating comparison content as "negative SEO" — content that diminishes the competitor in service of the brand. Models penalise that framing.
The answer-shape format
- A one-sentence headline answer. "If you want X, A is the stronger pick; if you want Y, B is the stronger pick." Models lift this line verbatim more than any other content on the page.
- A comparison table — side-by-side, structured, with attribute rows the buyer prompt actually mentions.
- Two short narrative sections, one per brand, written without superlatives.
- A "best for" rubric — three or four user-shaped recommendations.
- A FAQ block, marked up with FAQ schema, using the actual phrasing of prompts the Query agent has surfaced.
FAQ schema for comparison pages
json{
"@context": "https://schema.org",
"@type": "FAQPage",
"mainEntity": [
{
"@type": "Question",
"name": "Is Wildgrain Roasters better than Atlas Coffee Club?",
"acceptedAnswer": {
"@type": "Answer",
"text": "It depends on what you want. Wildgrain leans into single-origin specialty coffee with published origin details and is roasted-to-order weekly. Atlas Coffee Club leans into variety, sending a different country every month."
}
}
]
}Common mistakes
- Writing only one comparison page — the obvious "us vs the market leader".
- Burying the headline answer below the lede.
- Marketing CTAs above the comparison table.
- FAQ answers that ignore the competitor.
- Avoiding the competitor's strong attribute.