Backed by Y CombinatorThree documents and three sheets that rank your G2 gap against two named competitors, then match it to the lifecycle trigger that actually earns that review.
Free download · No account needed
What you get
Pack of 6 files: 3 documents, 3 spreadsheets
G2 Review Generation Strategy TemplateGap Against Competitors
Every dimension G2 scores, pre-ranked by the importance tier G2's own methodology assigns it.
| Dimension | G2 Tier | You | Competitor | Gap |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| — | High | — | — | — |
| — | High | — | — | — |
| — | Medium | — | — | — |
| — | Low | — | — | — |
Rows sort by tier first and gap size second, so a small gap in a High tier outranks a bigger one in a Low tier.
Most G2 review advice reduces to one move: find the happiest customers and ask them. G2's own scoring documentation states plainly that this violates its Community Guidelines and that reviews collected that way are subject to removal. The FTC's guide for review platforms opens with the same principle: "Don't ask for reviews only from people you think will leave positive ones." Eighteen of Windmere Analytics's 75 logged requests over two quarters used exactly that filter, and not one of the reviews it produced touched the dimension actually costing Windmere shortlist position.
Gap Against Competitors ranks every sub-score Windmere trails on by the importance tier G2's own scoring methodology assigns it, High before Medium before Low, so a smaller High-tier gap outranks a larger Low-tier one. That puts Meets Requirements first: 8.3 against leader Solvane Insights's 9.1. Request Tracker then reads back which trigger's reviews already speak to that dimension. Renewal Signed sent only 19.3% of compliant requests yet produced 4 of 7 Meets Requirements reviews, a 66.7% hit rate, while Support Ticket Resolved converts at a similar rate and has never produced one.
The population question is separate from which dimension to chase, and it is not negotiable: every request goes to everyone reaching a lifecycle event, never to a list pre-filtered by NPS or CSAT. Windmere's Request Tracker keeps its 18 sentiment-filtered sends as history instead of deleting them, and retires the practice going forward. Onboarding completion, a resolved ticket, a signed renewal and a QBR are the same four moments most launch and lifecycle plans already track. This pack installs into the marketing workspace beside the template library.
The GapWindmere Analytics against category leader Solvane Insights and contender Cartwell Systems, on every dimension G2 scores.
| Dimension | Tier | Windmere | Solvane | Cartwell | Gap | Rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Meets Requirements | High | 8.3 | 9.1 | 8.6 | -0.8 | 1 |
| Ease of Use | High | 8.7 | 9.2 | 8.5 | -0.5 | 2 |
| Quality of Support | High | 9.4 | 8.8 | 8.2 | +0.6 | Strength |
| Ease of Setup | Medium | 7.8 | 8.5 | 7.6 | -0.7 | 3 |
| Ease of Admin | Medium | 8.1 | 8.7 | 7.9 | -0.6 | 4 |
| Ease of Doing Business With | Medium | 9.0 | 9.0 | 8.4 | 0.0 | Even |
| Likelihood to Recommend | Low | 9.1 | 9.3 | 8.7 | -0.2 | 5 |
Ease of Setup's gap, -0.7, is wider than Ease of Use's -0.5, but Ease of Use still outranks it: tier sorts before size, and High beats Medium regardless of which gap is larger.
The Tracker75 logged requests over two quarters. Compliant excludes 18 retired sentiment-filtered sends.
| Trigger | Sent | Posted | Conv. | Meets Req. |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Renewal Signed | 11 | 6 | 54.5% | 4 |
| QBR Held | 9 | 5 | 55.6% | 2 |
| Onboarding Milestone | 22 | 7 | 31.8% | 1 |
| Support Ticket Resolved | 15 | 5 | 33.3% | 0 |
| NPS Promoter (retired) | 18 | 3 | 16.7% | 0 |
Renewal Signed sent only 19.3% of compliant requests and produced 4 of the 7 Meets Requirements reviews on record, a 66.7% hit rate. Support Ticket Resolved converts one in three and has never produced one.
Windmere's G2 sub-scores against two named competitors on all seven scored dimensions, ranked by G2's own importance tier first and gap size second, so the priority dimension is never just the largest number on the sheet.
All 75 logged requests, including the 18 retired sentiment-filtered ones kept as history, with the trigger, the population basis and the dimension every posted review actually emphasized.
G2, Capterra and TrustRadius counts, ratings and this quarter's velocity against last quarter's, so a volume claim never rests on a single site's number.
The policy behind every request, the tier ranking that sets the priority dimension, and the trigger-to-dimension match read back from Request Tracker rather than assumed.
One message per lifecycle trigger, the incentive disclosed up front, and nothing that hints the review should be positive.
How to reply to a Meets Requirements mention either direction, plus the platform rules that end a programme if ignored, the same discipline that keeps a claim type on the competitive battlecard honest.
Open the pack in River and send your G2, Capterra or TrustRadius links plus two named competitors, or download the Word documents and CSV sheets and run the comparison yourself.
River reads G2's published sub-scores for you and your named competitors, and reads in whatever review requests you have already logged, retired sentiment-filtered ones included.
Every negative gap sorts by G2's own importance tier first and size second, so the dimension actually costing shortlist position never gets buried under a bigger number in a tier that counts less.
River reads which lifecycle trigger's posted reviews already speak to the priority dimension, and Request Tracker keeps every future send so next quarter's match is real instead of assumed.
Yes, with no account, no card and no email gate on the download. Edit with AI is the optional half: send River your G2, Capterra or TrustRadius links and two named competitors, and it builds your own Gap Against Competitors and starts logging real requests. Every pack sits in the template library.
Three Word documents and three CSV sheets, in a zip. The documents open in Word, Pages and Google Docs. The sheets open in Excel, Numbers and Sheets, and Request Tracker is a real spreadsheet you can filter by trigger or by outcome, not a table flattened into a page.
G2's own scoring documentation and the FTC's guide for review platforms both treat that as a problem. G2 says segmenting customers to solicit only positive reviews violates its Community Guidelines and can get a review removed. The FTC's first principle is the same: don't ask only the people likely to say yes. This pack asks everyone who reaches a lifecycle event instead.
No. A review confirms a sub-score at scale, across dozens of customers who chose to write one, but it does not explain why one specific deal was lost. The win-loss interview programme is built for that deal-by-deal question, joining what the rep logged to what the buyer actually said.
Yes, and the two are complementary rather than overlapping. Review mining reads a competitor's own review text for a recurring complaint you could credibly solve. This pack reads your own G2 sub-scores against named competitors to find which of your dimensions is actually costing shortlist position.
It signs you up, installs this pack as a private workspace, and starts with your own Gap Against Competitors. Send your profile links, your two closest named competitors, and whatever request history you have, and it tells you which lifecycle trigger already has the best record against your priority dimension.
Written by
Co-founder & CEO, River
Chandler has spent the last six years working in AI, building tools for millions of users and Fortune 100 companies. In 2025, he co-founded River to build a new kind of operating system for AI agents.
Send your G2, Capterra or TrustRadius links and your two closest named competitors. River ranks the gap, then shows which lifecycle trigger already has the record to close it.
Edit with AI