How to write comparison content that doesn't age like milk

Comparison content targets readers who have already decided they need a product and are choosing between options, making it especially effective at turning research into sign-ups. PostHog reports that since 2021, more than 25,000 people signed up after reading its comparisons. In 2025, head-to-head pages converted about 10% of visitors, alternatives and tool roundups about 4%, and other blog posts about 2.5%. The challenge is keeping these pages trustworthy as products, prices, and companies change. PostHog’s approach is to prioritize accurate advice over making its own product look best: comparisons should neither disparage rivals nor distort their strengths, and should help readers decide what fits their needs.

That means clearly acknowledging where a competitor is stronger, identifying who should choose them, and describing PostHog’s intended audience and current limitations rather than substituting roadmap promises for present capabilities. The author argues that fairness builds reader trust, avoids reputational blowback, and may also make pages more useful to AI systems that answer product-comparison questions. Competitors are invited to correct errors, including through direct edits; one Amplitude representative’s corrections were merged and propagated across pages. To manage roughly 90 comparison and roundup pages, PostHog treats maintenance as an engineering problem: each competitor’s claims are kept in a centralized data file, so updates can correct multiple pages at once. The guiding test is whether a competitor would feel accurately represented if the comparison were written about them.