Home · Business · Marketing & Content · Market research
As of 13 August 2026, AI can only partly analyse UK reviews of your competitors.
This still needs a person who signs their name to it.
Can you do it?
15 minutesto a draft.
1 hourto something you’d act on.
Cost, all in£0
Skill neededpower-user
Who has to check ityou
What the alternative costsThe supplied tool information gives no price for a human market-research alternative.
If this goes wrong: you base messaging or product decisions on a biased sample, miss an important complaint or attribute a competitor's strength to the wrong cause.
What to actually do
Hand it to a person
The route this page recommends
A person who owns the outcome does this end to end, worth it when the failure is dear.
Use a tool built for this
Second choiceDo it yourself
The distant thirdA chat interface, power-user skill, and roughly 1 hour until you can act on the result.
How to actually do it
- Open the review platforms and competitor pages you are allowed to use, and collect a clearly labelled UK-only sample with the competitor, platform, rating, date and review text for each entry.
- Remove names, email addresses, order numbers and other unnecessary personal details, then check that copying or exporting the reviews complies with the relevant platform terms.
- Paste the cleaned dataset into a spreadsheet, give every review a source label, and mark duplicate, non-UK or unclear entries instead of silently deleting them.
- Open a chatbot and paste the supplied prompt followed by the labelled review dataset, then ask it to produce the themes, competitor comparison, evidence and sample limitations in separate sections.
- Compare every reported theme and quotation with the original review rows, correcting counts, source labels and wording where the draft is wrong.
- Ask a colleague who knows the market to challenge whether the sample is representative and whether each proposed implication follows from the evidence.
- Turn only the checked implications into testable marketing or product actions, and keep the source dataset and analysis together so the conclusions can be updated when new reviews arrive.
Prompt
Analyse the UK competitor reviews pasted below. Use only the supplied reviews and metadata, and do not invent reviews, quotes, ratings, dates, customer details or competitor facts. Tasks: 1. State the number of reviews, competitors, platforms and review dates represented, if those details are supplied. 2. Group the reviews into recurring positive and negative themes. 3. For each theme, give the number of supporting reviews only when it can be counted from the supplied text, and include short exact quotations with their source labels where available. 4. Compare the competitors by theme, separating direct observations from your interpretation. 5. Identify unmet customer needs, common purchase reasons and repeated complaints. 6. Flag contradictory evidence, possible duplicate reviews, unclear wording, missing metadata and limits caused by the sample. 7. End with no more than five cautious marketing or product implications. Phrase them as hypotheses to test, not established facts. Use British English. Do not claim that the reviews represent all UK customers. Do not infer a customer's location, identity, protected characteristic or motive unless the review explicitly states it. Do not recommend publishing a competitor comparison without checking the original sources and current facts. Review dataset: [PASTE THE REVIEWS HERE, INCLUDING COMPETITOR, PLATFORM, RATING, DATE AND REVIEW ID WHEN AVAILABLE]
Open it prefilled in ChatGPT or Claude, or copy it into Gemini, which takes no prefill link.
What it gets wrong
- AI cannot establish that your collected reviews are a representative sample of UK customers.
- AI cannot reliably detect every copied, incentivised, misleading or strategically posted review without platform-level evidence.
- AI cannot know whether a complaint reflects a competitor-wide problem, one location, one staff member or an unusual incident unless the data shows that context.
- AI cannot decide which customer trade-offs fit your positioning or whether a proposed response is commercially sensible.
- AI cannot guarantee that live review pages, competitor claims or platform rules remain current after the analysis.
What caps this at PARTLY: real time truth, verification cost and context depth.
How we scored this
Five axes, each scored nought to two by hand: ten means AI carries the task cleanly, and the thresholds that turn a total into YES, PARTLY or NO are published in the methodology. Each axis name links to its definition.
| Axis | Score (0–2) |
|---|---|
| Output | 2 |
| Inputs | 1 |
| Verification | 1 |
| Liability | 1 |
| Effort delta | 2 |
| Total | 7 / 10 |
The methodology and its thresholds are published in full.
FAQ
- Can ChatGPT analyse competitor reviews?
- Yes, it can analyse a supplied set of competitor reviews and produce themes, comparisons and evidence tables. It cannot reliably collect a representative UK sample or prove that the conclusions reflect the whole market, so check the source rows and sample limits yourself.
- How do I analyse competitor reviews in the UK?
- Collect a labelled UK-only sample from sources you are allowed to use, remove unnecessary personal data and paste it into an AI tool with clear instructions to separate evidence from interpretation. Check every count and quotation against the original reviews before using the findings in marketing or product decisions.
- Can AI find common complaints in customer reviews?
- Yes, AI is useful for grouping repeated complaints and positive themes across a clean review dataset. It may overstate a theme when the sample is small, duplicated or biased, so retain the review-level evidence and report the sample limits.
- Is it legal to use competitor reviews for market research?
- That depends on how you collect, store and reuse the reviews, the platform terms and whether personal data is involved. This is not professional advice; for a serious commercial campaign or large-scale collection, ask a UK solicitor or data protection professional to check the proposed process.
Nearby answers
Assessed by gpt-5.6-luna (gpt-5.6-luna) on 2026-08-13, second-checked by an independent model. Wrong somewhere? Email [email protected] and it gets re-checked.
The newsletter
AI news, new answers and product picks, straight to your inbox.