The same journey, your app and theirs.
Give one journey to two apps. The report lines them up stage by stage, not step four against step four, and shows what each one asks of a person to get there. Two ledgers, side by side, with the frames they came from, and no winner at the end of it.
Reaching the shop from a cold start
Four things a comparison has to do to be worth having
One journey, two runs
The same intent given to both apps, each run configured independently, then paired into one study.
Matched stages
Milestones are aligned first, and nothing is compared across a boundary the report has not matched.
Two ledgers, no verdict
Each app gets its own advantages and its own friction. Nobody is crowned, because the trade you are willing to make is yours to pick.
It says where it is unsure
Where one side has a stage the other does not, the report says so instead of turning a gap into a win.
Four terms do most of the work. None of them are ours to redefine in a meeting later.
Comparative study
The durable pair: two runs of the same journey against two different apps, and the report generated from them.
Stage alignment
Matching the milestones of two different routes before anything is measured. Step four in one run is never assumed to be step four in the other.
Partial evidence
A run that stopped early, or a stage only one app has, can still take part. What it cannot support is labelled rather than guessed at.
No verdict
By design there is no winner field in the report. Absence of evidence on one side is never rendered as an advantage on the other.
Stage aligned, not step aligned
Two apps never take the same route. The report matches the milestones first and only compares inside a stage it has matched. Where one app has a stage the other does not, that is the finding.
Two ledgers, no verdict
Each app gets its own advantages and its own friction. Nobody is crowned. You are the one who knows which trade you are willing to make.
It says where it is unsure
Where one side has thinner evidence, or no stage at all, the report says so instead of turning a gap into a win.
Made of frames, not opinions
Every difference links to the two screens it was read from, so the claim survives being checked in a meeting.