Find your unfair advantage.

Turn competitive evidence into strategic bets you can defend.

Citations. Assumptions. Confidence.

Example decision output

Launch a constrained free tier for reliability teams

81.4/ 100 overall
10 verifiable sources
pricing·docs·reviewsincluded

Competitive norms

4 of 5 competitors offer free tiers with usage-based limits; StatusFlow and PagerGrid expanded theirs in the past 6 months

8.6 / 10Score
Pricing

Customer friction

Enterprise reviews mention evaluation friction and security review delays before purchase; mid-market buyers cite trial time limits as adoption blockers

7.9 / 10Score
Reviews

Market maturity

Buyers expect hands-on evaluation periods and reliability proof before committing; free tiers have become table stakes in this category

7.1 / 10Score
Docs

Business risk

Cannibalization risk appears manageable given hard caps on team size and retention windows; upgrade conversion data from competitors supports this

6.4 / 10Score
Pricing

What would change this call?

  • Two competitors introduce equivalent free tiers with usage parity (5+ seats, 14+ days retention) within 90 days
  • Trial-to-paid conversion improves to above 18% without pricing or feature changes, indicating reduced friction

Analyzed 47 sources across 4 evidence types · Generated in 3.2 minutes

Built for product, strategy, and UX leaders at scale

Decisions without shape

Too many opinions. Not enough proof. Most strategy debates fail before they start—not because ideas are bad, but because evidence never makes it to the table.

statuspage.io

Real-time status updates

99.9% uptime SLA

Docs
High
docs.acme.com

Enterprise API documentation

Docs
Med
g2.com

4.8/5 rating

150+ reviews

Reviews
High
pricing.example.com

Starting at $49/month

Pricing
Med
changelog.io

Latest release notes

Updated 2 days ago

Changelog
High
docs.beta.com

Beta feature documentation

Docs
Med

Evidence sources scattered across domains

Strategy without evidence is just opinion.

Plinth turns public competitive signals into defensible decisions—with citations, assumptions, and confidence you can forward.

Being wrong is expensive

This usually takes a long time and costs a lot of money.

Weeks Lost

Strategic decisions typically take 6–12 weeks to resolve. During that time, teams wait—or move in parallel without coordination.

Planning cycles, review meetings, rework.

Cost Compounds

Delays multiply cost across engineering capacity, leadership review cycles, and external research spend.

One unresolved decision touches 5–10 people repeatedly.

Missed Leverage

While teams wait, competitors move, markets shift, budgets lock, and strategic windows close.

Opportunity cost rarely appears on a roadmap.

Default Decisions Win

The biggest risk isn't choosing wrong. It's never choosing—and letting inertia decide the outcome.

Indecision is still a strategy (just not yours).

Plinth collapses this cycle—without trading rigor for speed.

The cost of being wrong compounds

Evidence base

Evidence creates structure

The fog lifts. Fragments align. Signals group. Boundaries appear.

113 sources grouped into 4 evidence types

Competitive Positioning

12 signals
Recent
4 of 5
offer free tiers
Market
Expansions
noted
Timing
Favorable
expectation shift
Pattern
Consistent
across segments

Market Friction

8 signals
Enterprise
Evaluation
delays
Mid-market
Longer
trials
Pattern
Consistent
across segments
Structure emerging
Clarity:
Increasing
Grouped
Organized
Bounded

This is where opinions end

Evidence replaces debate

A defensible call

The recommendation. The confidence. The evidence. The conditions that would change it.

Investment-ready
81.4/100

Launch a constrained free tier for reliability teams

Confidence Level

Strong confidence based on 17 sources across 5 evidence types

Supporting Evidence

Competitive alignment

4 of 5 competitors offer free tiers; StatusFlow and PagerGrid expanded theirs recently

Market friction

Enterprise reviews cite evaluation delays; mid-market buyers need longer trial periods

Market maturity

Free tiers have become table stakes; buyers expect hands-on evaluation before purchase

Risk profile

Cannibalization risk manageable with hard caps; competitor conversion data supports this

17 sources analyzed·
Pricing (6)Docs (5)Reviews (3)Changelog (2)

Synthesized from 47 verifiable sources · Confidence calculated across 4 evidence dimensions

When evidence holds up, decisions stick

What changes when it holds up

Closed loops. Clean timelines. Fewer artifacts, more resolution.

Decision Timeline

Resolved
Decision
Made
Execution
In Progress
Outcome
Measured
Team Alignment
Single source of truth
Clear Resolution
No ambiguity
Forward Motion
Continuous progress

This is what alignment looks like.

Not for everyone

Plinth is built for teams that make evidence-based decisions. If that's not your process, you'll find it constraining.

Opinion-first strategy

If you're looking for a tool to validate decisions you've already made, Plinth will frustrate you. We surface evidence, not confirmation.

Speed over rigor

Plinth takes time. We analyze dozens of sources, cross-reference signals, and build defensible confidence scores. If you need answers in 30 seconds, look elsewhere.

Feature parity analysis

We don't do competitive feature checklists. We analyze strategic positioning, market signals, and evidence-based opportunities. If you want a feature matrix, use a spreadsheet.

Consensus-driven decisions

Plinth doesn't build consensus. It builds evidence. If your process requires everyone to agree before moving forward, our outputs will feel too definitive—or not definitive enough.

If you're still reading, you're probably our kind of person. Evidence-first strategy work requires patience, rigor, and a willingness to be wrong.

Get a clear answer in minutes

See where you're ahead—and why it holds up when challenged.

Takes ~2 minutes. No login required.

Plinth
Plinth

Built for senior Product, UX, and Strategy teams. Turn competitor signals into decision-ready outputs.

© 2026 Plinth

Plinth – Clarity that holds up