Comparison is the highest converting format in UGC and the one with the most legal exposure, because a comparative claim in Canada has to be substantiated before it airs.

People are already comparing

Nobody buys in a vacuum. A viewer considering your product has two or three others open in other tabs, and a video that does the comparison for them is doing the work they were going to do anyway. That is why the format performs.

Compare against categories, not competitors

Comparing a product to the generic version, to the previous method or to doing nothing gives most of the persuasive benefit with a fraction of the risk. Naming a competitor turns every statement into a claim somebody may challenge.

Every comparative statement needs support

Cheaper, faster, lasts longer, works better. Each of those is a measurable claim that requires adequate testing before the video runs, not after somebody complains. This is the format where the compliance step is not optional.

Let the creator do the honest version

A comparison where your product wins on everything is not believable. A creator saying the competitor is better on one point and yours is better on the two that matter more is far more persuasive, and it also happens to be the defensible version.

Show the test, do not just state the result

If the claim is that one dries faster, film both drying side by side. The demonstration is more convincing than the sentence and it is also the evidence, which means the video is doing two jobs at once.

Keep reading

Find creators for your campaign →

Frequently asked questions

Why does comparison convert?

It does work the viewer was doing anyway.

Should competitors be named?

Usually not, compare against categories.

Does a comparative claim need testing?

Yes, before it airs.

Should your product win everything?

No, that is not believable.