Should Your App Target Your Competitor's Unhappy Users?

What if your biggest opportunity for user growth isnt attracting people who've never used an app like yours, but rather winning over people who are already frustrated with your competitors? I've spent years building apps for clients who faced this exact question, and the answer is rarely straightforward. Some of my most successful projects have been apps designed specifically to capture dissatisfied users from market leaders—apps that grew to hundreds of thousands of users within months because they addressed pain points that competitors had ignored or couldn't fix quickly enough. But I've also seen this strategy backfire spectacularly when clients underestimated the complexity of convincing someone to switch their habits and data to a new platform.

The mobile app market is saturated. There are millions of apps across every category you can think of, which means the days of easy organic growth are long gone. User acquisition costs have climbed to the point where acquiring a new user can cost anywhere from £2 to £10 or more depending on your industry. This reality has forced many of my clients to ask a difficult question: should we try to create demand from scratch, or should we target people who already understand the value of what we're offering because they're using a competitor's product?

Targeting competitor users isnt about being unethical or sneaky—its about recognising that no app perfectly serves every user, and some people are genuinely looking for a better option

The strategy of targeting competitor users comes with its own set of challenges though. You need to understand why users might switch, what features or experiences would convince them to make that leap, and how to communicate your value without coming across as desperate or derivative. Through this guide, I'll walk you through the practical realities of this approach based on real projects I've worked on, the mistakes I've seen (and made), and the specific tactics that have actually worked in the trenches of mobile app development.

Why Competitor Analysis Matters for User Acquisition

I've watched hundreds of apps launch over the years, and one pattern keeps repeating—apps that study their competitors before building anything tend to spend less money on user acquisition and see better retention rates. It's not rocket science really; when you understand what frustrates users about existing solutions, you can position your app as the better alternative from day one. I worked with a fitness tracking startup that spent three months analysing reviews of the top five competitors before writing a single line of code—they identified that users were fed up with overly complicated tracking and subscription paywalls. Their simpler approach with a one-time purchase option led to a 34% lower cost per install compared to their initial projections.

The thing about competitor analysis is its not just about features. Sure, you need to know what your competitors offer, but the real gold is in understanding where they're dropping the ball with their users. When iOS 14.5 changed the tracking landscape, many established apps struggled to adapt their ad targeting—newer apps that understood this challenge could market themselves as privacy-first alternatives and grabbed thousands of users who were becoming increasingly uncomfortable with data collection practices.

What You Should Actually Be Looking For

Most people approach competitor analysis completely wrong; they make a spreadsheet of features and try to tick more boxes than everyone else. That's backwards thinking. What you're really after is the gap between what users expect and what they're currently getting. I always tell clients to focus on these specific areas:

• App store reviews that mention switching to or from competitors—these users are already thinking about alternatives
• Social media complaints that get lots of engagement but never seem to get addressed by the competitor
• Feature requests in competitor forums that have been ignored for months or years
• Common workarounds users have created because the app doesn't do what they need
• Pricing complaints that reveal willingness to pay but dissatisfaction with value

A fintech client I worked with discovered through competitor analysis that business banking app users were constantly frustrated by slow transaction approvals—something that wasn't immediately obvious from feature lists but came up repeatedly in support forums. By building faster approval workflows into their MVP, they positioned themselves perfectly to attract these unhappy users without spending a fortune on generic user acquisition campaigns. The cost difference was substantial; targeted campaigns towards switchers cost them about £3.20 per install versus £8.40 for cold acquisition.

Identifying Which Competitor Users to Target

Not all competitor users are worth pursuing—I learned this the hard way when we built an e-commerce app that tried to win over users from a massive marketplace platform. We spent thousands on ads targeting their entire user base and the retention rate was absolutely terrible. Why? Because we didn't get specific enough about who we were actually trying to attract. The users who loved that big platform weren't looking for what we offered; we needed the ones who were frustrated with specific pain points we could solve.

When I'm working with clients now, I get them to map out competitor users into three groups: the loyalists (forget about them, seriously), the satisfied-but-open users (maybe worth targeting if your value prop is strong), and the frustrated-but-stuck users. That last group? Thats your sweet spot. These are people actively complaining in app store reviews, posting frustrated tweets, or asking for alternatives in Reddit threads. For a fitness app we built, we specifically targeted users of a popular competitor who kept mentioning in reviews that the subscription was too expensive and the interface was confusing—two things we'd deliberately designed our app to address.

The key is looking at actual behavioural signals, not just demographics. A healthcare client wanted to target "millennials interested in telemedicine" which sounds fine until you realise that tells you nothing about why they'd switch. Instead, we looked for users of competitor apps who'd left reviews mentioning long wait times or difficulty booking appointments...basically the exact problems our client's app solved better. You need to get forensic about this—read through app store reviews, monitor social media mentions, even look at support tickets from competitors if you can access that data (ethically, of course). The users worth targeting are the ones whose specific frustrations align with your specific strengths.

Create a spreadsheet tracking competitor app reviews over 2-3 months; look for recurring complaints mentioned by at least 15-20% of negative reviewers—these patterns reveal which user segments are genuinely unhappy and why.

Understanding Why Users Switch Apps

Right, so here's what I've learned from watching hundreds of thousands of users move between competing apps—people don't switch because they're bored or fancy a change. They switch because something broke their trust or patience. I mean, its usually one of about five core reasons, and if you understand these you can build your entire acquisition strategy around them.

The most common reason? Performance issues. I worked on a fintech app where we gained nearly 40,000 users in three months, and when we surveyed them about 68% said they left their previous banking app because it was too slow or kept crashing. People tolerate a lot of things but they won't tolerate an app that fails when they need it most—especially when money's involved. Same goes for healthcare apps; if your prescription reminder app doesn't send notifications reliably, users will find one that does. Its that simple really.

The Five Main Reasons Users Leave Apps

• Performance problems—crashes, slow loading times, or features that don't work consistently
• Poor customer support—users feel ignored when they report bugs or ask for help
• Missing features—competitors added something they genuinely need and you haven't
• Privacy concerns—new policies or data breaches that make users uncomfortable
• Price increases—subscription costs go up without proportional value improvements

What The Data Actually Shows

Here's the thing though; users rarely switch immediately when something annoys them. They accumulate frustrations over time until one final issue pushes them over the edge. In e-commerce apps I've built, we noticed users would struggle through maybe 2-3 failed checkout attempts before uninstalling, but they'd already had complaints about slow image loading or confusing navigation beforehand. The checkout failure was just the last straw. Understanding this pattern means you need to address not just the obvious breaking point but the accumulation of smaller annoyances that made them ready to leave in the first place.

Creating Your Switching Strategy

Once you've identified unhappy users in your competitor's base, you need a proper plan to convert them—and I mean a real plan, not just hoping they'll magically find your app. The switching strategy I've used successfully for clients in fintech and healthcare comes down to three things: removing friction, creating immediate value, and making the transition feel safe. When we built an alternative to a clunky banking app (the incumbent had terrible reviews about its login process), we made account switching our entire focus for the first release.

Your strategy needs to address the specific pain point thats driving users away from your competitor. If their app crashes constantly? Lead with stability and show proof—crash rate stats, uptime guarantees, whatever builds confidence. When we targeted users of a meal planning app that had gone subscription-heavy, we offered a freemium model that gave away what our competitor was now charging for. Simple really, but it worked because we knew exactly what frustrated their users. The success of your entire approach depends on tracking development milestones to ensure you deliver these switching features on time.

The best switching strategies don't just solve the problem your competitor created—they make the act of switching so easy that users wonder why they didn't do it sooner.

Here's what most agencies get wrong though... they focus purely on features. But users dont switch apps just because yours has one extra button—they switch because you've made the hassle of changing worth their time. Data migration is huge for this. We built an import tool for a project management app that pulled in everything from the competitor automatically; tasks, deadlines, team members, the lot. Took us three weeks longer to build but our conversion rate from free trial to paid was 43% higher than industry average. The technical lift was worth it because we understood that switching costs—the time and effort to move—are often what keeps users trapped with apps they actively dislike.

Building Features That Convert Dissatisfied Users

Right, so you've identified what makes users unhappy with your competitor's app—now comes the interesting bit. Building features that actually convert those frustrated users into loyal customers of your app. I've done this dozens of times across different industries and I can tell you its not about cramming in every feature your competitor is missing; its about being strategic with what you build and how you build it.

The biggest mistake I see? Teams that try to build everything at once. When we worked on a fitness tracking app competing against a market leader, users complained about the complicated workout logging process in the competitor's app. We could have built a massively complex alternative but instead we focused on one thing—making workout logging take less than 10 seconds. That single feature became our main selling point and the conversion rate from competitor users was nearly 40% higher than our baseline. The feature itself wasn't complicated but the impact was massive because it directly addressed the pain point that mattered most.

Prioritising Your Feature Development

You need to be ruthless about what you build first. I use a simple framework when deciding which features will convert dissatisfied users most effectively. Rate each potential feature on three criteria: how many users does this frustration affect, how painful is the current solution, and how quickly can we build something better? The features that score highest on all three should be your starting point.

For a fintech app we developed, competitor users were frustrated with the approval time for loan applications—it took 3-5 days. We couldn't magically make the underlying approval process instant but we could make the waiting experience better. We built real-time status updates, transparent explanations of each approval stage, and an estimated completion time that updated as the application progressed. Users still waited the same amount of time technically but the complaints about waiting dropped by 70%. Sometimes its not about doing something completely different... its about doing the same thing in a way that feels better.

The Switching Experience Needs Its Own Features

Here's something most teams overlook—you need features specifically designed for the switching process itself. When someone decides to leave their current app for yours they're taking a risk and you need to minimise that friction. Data migration is huge here. I've seen apps lose potential switchers simply because importing their existing data was too complicated or incomplete.

We built an e-commerce app that competed against an established platform and one of our most successful features was a "switch assistant" that imported the user's entire purchase history, saved payment methods, and favourite products from the competitor. It took us three months to build and get right but it was worth every hour because it removed the biggest barrier to switching. Users didn't have to start from scratch... they could pick up exactly where they left off but with a better experience.

The technical implementation wasn't simple though. We had to build scrapers for the competitor's export formats, handle dozens of edge cases where data didn't map perfectly, and create a verification system so users could review what was imported before finalising the switch. But that complexity on our end meant simplicity for the user and that's what converts switchers.

Another thing—build comparison features into your onboarding. When users first open your app after switching show them explicitly what's better. I know it sounds a bit cheeky but it works. For that fitness app I mentioned earlier we showed new users "In your old app this workout would take 6 taps... watch how we do it in 2." Making the improvement tangible and visible reinforces their decision to switch and reduces buyer's remorse. Understanding how progress indicators influence user psychology during onboarding can make these comparison moments even more effective.

You also need to think about feature gaps that might send users back to the competitor. This is where you cant just focus on what they're doing wrong... you need to match what they're doing right. I worked on a project management app where users were switching because our competitor's notification system was overwhelming and badly designed. We built a better notification system but we also made sure we matched every other feature they relied on daily because if we didn't? They'd switch for the notifications but switch back when they realised we were missing something they needed.

Testing these features with actual switchers before launch is non-negotiable. We always recruit a small group of users who currently use the competitor app and have them try our new features while still using their existing app. The feedback is invaluable because these people know exactly what they're comparing against and they'll tell you honestly whether your solution is actually better or just different.

One more thing about building for switchers—make sure your features are discoverable. The best feature in the world is useless if new users don't find it. We use targeted tooltips and guided tours specifically for users who indicate they're switching from a competitor during onboarding. These tours highlight the features that address their specific frustrations rather than showing them everything at once.

Performance matters more than you'd think too. If users are switching because your competitor's app is slow or buggy they'll be hypersensitive to any performance issues in yours. We obsess over load times, animation smoothness, and crash rates especially in the first week after a user switches. That initial impression determines whether they'll stick around or go crawling back to their old app despite its problems.

• Build one feature exceptionally well rather than many features adequately—specificity converts switchers
• Create data migration tools that make switching painless and preserve user history
• Include comparison moments in onboarding to reinforce the switching decision
• Match your competitor's table-stakes features while exceeding them on pain points
• Test with actual competitor users before launch to validate your improvements
• Make your differentiating features immediately discoverable to new switchers
• Prioritise performance and reliability to avoid reinforcing their fears about switching

Marketing Messages That Resonate with Switchers

When you're targeting users who are actively frustrated with a competitor's app, your messaging needs to be sharp and direct. I've found that vague promises about being "better" don't work—switchers want to know exactly what you're doing differently. A few years back, I worked on a fitness tracking app where we were going after users frustrated with their current app's complex calorie logging. Instead of saying "easier tracking," we showed screenshots of our one-tap meal logging versus the competitor's six-step process. Downloads increased by 40% within the first month of that campaign change.

The most effective messaging I've seen speaks directly to the pain point without being negative or attacking competitors by name. You see, there's a fine line between highlighting your strengths and coming across as desperate or petty. For a banking app project, we used phrases like "finally see all your accounts in one place" rather than "unlike other apps that make you switch between screens." Same message, different tone—and it converted far better because it focused on the solution rather than the problem. This approach aligns with proven strategies for positive competitive positioning that build trust rather than creating negativity.

What Switchers Actually Care About

Your messaging should address the three things every switcher is worried about: will switching be worth the hassle, will my data transfer easily, and am I making the same mistake twice? I always tell clients to lead with migration support in their messaging. When we launched onboarding for an e-commerce app targeting Shopify users, we made "Import your products in under 5 minutes" the headline—not features or benefits, but addressing that immediate friction point. Conversion rate from landing page to sign-up jumped from 8% to 19%.

Testing Your Messages

Here's where a lot of teams get it wrong—they test messaging on their existing users instead of actual switchers. For a healthcare appointment app, we ran Facebook ads specifically targeting people who'd recently reviewed competitor apps with 1-2 stars. The messaging that performed best? "Booking shouldn't take longer than the appointment itself." It was specific, relatable, and immediately resonated with their lived experience. Generic messages about "simple booking" performed 60% worse with the same audience.

Create separate landing pages for users coming from each major competitor. A user leaving App A has different frustrations than someone leaving App B, and your messaging should reflect that. I've seen this approach double conversion rates compared to using a single generic page for all switchers.

Don't forget that social proof matters even more for switchers because they've already been burned once. Include testimonials from other switchers in your messaging, not just happy users. Phrases like "I switched from [competitor] six months ago and haven't looked back" carry enormous weight. For a project management app, we added a dedicated "Why teams are switching" section with specific before-and-after stories, and it became the second most-viewed page on the entire site after the homepage. Building an audience early through pre-launch email marketing helps you collect these switching stories before you even launch.

The Ethics and Risks of Targeting Competitor Users

I'll be honest with you—going after your competitor's users isn't always sunshine and rainbows. There are some proper ethical considerations you need to think about before you start this kind of campaign. I've seen companies get themselves into hot water because they didn't think through the implications of their targeting strategies, and it's not pretty when things go wrong.

The biggest risk? Coming across as predatory or dishonest. I worked with a fitness app client who wanted to target users of a competitor by highlighting every single flaw in the other app. We pushed back hard on that approach because it felt nasty, and honestly it would've damaged their brand reputation. Users don't like companies that slag off the competition—it makes them look desperate. Instead, we focused on what made our client's app better without mentioning competitors by name. Much cleaner approach, and the conversion rates were actually higher because people trusted the messaging more.

Legal Considerations You Cannot Ignore

There are real legal lines you cannot cross. Using a competitor's trademark in your ads or app store listings can land you in court, and trust me, legal fees add up fast. I've seen fintech apps get cease-and-desist letters for comparative advertising that went too far. You need to be factual, you need to be fair, and you absolutely cannot mislead users about what your competitor offers vs what you offer. Making sure you have proper legal protection in place becomes even more important when you're engaging in competitive marketing tactics.

The Reputational Risk

Your industry is smaller than you think. Word gets around when you're being aggressive with competitor targeting. I worked on an e-commerce app where the client wanted to send push notifications to users who had our competitor's app installed. Technically possible? Yes. Good idea? Absolutely not. It felt invasive, and we explained that users would associate that creepy feeling with their brand forever.

Here are the main risks you should consider before launching a competitor targeting campaign:

• Brand damage from appearing desperate or aggressive in your messaging
• Legal action if you misrepresent competitor features or misuse their trademarks
• User backlash if your targeting feels invasive or manipulative
• Attracting price-sensitive users who'll leave you just as quickly for the next best offer
• Retaliation from competitors who might target your users with even more resources
• Platform penalties if your ad campaigns violate App Store or Google Play policies

The healthcare apps I've built face even stricter rules. You can't make comparative claims about health outcomes without proper clinical evidence, and targeting vulnerable users (people with serious health conditions) requires extra sensitivity. One client wanted to target users of a mental health app, and we had to be incredibly careful about the messaging because we were dealing with people in potentially fragile states. Getting that wrong could've caused real harm, never mind the PR disaster it would've created.

But here's the thing—ethical targeting isn't just about avoiding problems. Its actually more effective. When you focus on genuinely serving users better rather than just poaching them from competitors, you build a sustainable business. I've watched apps that took the high road end up with better retention rates because their users chose them for positive reasons, not because they were misled or manipulated into switching. The challenge is maintaining that ethical approach while also thinking about long-term app relevance in competitive markets.

The question you should ask isn't "can we target these users?" but rather "should we, and if so, how can we do it in a way that respects everyone involved?" That includes respecting the users you're targeting, respecting your competitors (yes, really), and respecting your own brand's long-term reputation. The mobile app world is competitive enough without burning bridges unnecessarily.

Measuring Success and Retention Rates

Once you've convinced competitor users to switch to your app, the real work begins—keeping them there. I mean, acquisition is expensive enough without watching users disappear after a week, right? When working on a fintech project a while back, we spent months targeting users frustrated with their banking app's clunky transfer process; we got the downloads but lost 60% within the first month because we hadnt properly thought through our retention strategy. Bloody expensive mistake.

The metrics you track need to tell the whole story, not just the pretty bits. Sure, download numbers look great in a pitch deck, but I focus on Day 1, Day 7, and Day 30 retention rates because thats where you see if your switching strategy actually worked. For users coming from competitors, you should expect slightly better initial retention than organic users—they switched for a reason after all—but they're also more likely to switch again if you dont deliver on your promises. Its a double-edged sword really. Poor app store visibility can also impact retention when users can't easily find your app again after deleting it, which is why understanding search ranking optimisation strategies matters for retention as much as acquisition.

Users who switch from a competitor because of a specific pain point will leave just as quickly if you introduce new friction points they didnt expect.

Track cohorts separately based on acquisition source; competitor switchers behave differently than brand new users. On an e-commerce project, we noticed switchers had 40% higher purchase intent but also higher support ticket volumes in week one—they were comparing everything to their old app and needed reassurance they'd made the right choice. Set up proper attribution so you know which competitor's users stick around longest (some competitors train better customers than others, honestly) and measure time-to-first-value separately. If someone switched because your competitor's checkout was rubbish, how quickly do they complete their first purchase with you? Thats the number that matters, not just whether they opened the app. Making sure your app creates memorable experiences worth sharing helps convert individual switchers into advocates who bring their networks with them.

Conclusion

Look, targeting your competitor's unhappy users isn't just some marketing trick—it's a legitimate growth strategy that I've seen work across healthcare apps, fintech platforms, and even entertainment products. But here's the thing: it only works when you've genuinely built something better, not just different. I mean, you can't just copy what they're doing and expect people to jump ship. They need a real reason to switch, and that reason needs to be obvious within the first few minutes of using your app.

The apps that succeed with this approach are the ones that do their homework properly. They spend time in competitor app reviews, they run user research with people who've tried multiple solutions in their category, and they build features that specifically address the gaps they've found. Its not about stealing users—it's about serving users who weren't being served well enough. That's a big difference actually.

What I've learned over the years is that switchers can become your most loyal users if you get the experience right. They've already been burned once by choosing the wrong app, so when they find one that actually delivers on its promises, they stick around. But if your onboarding is confusing or your core features dont work as well as you claimed, they'll leave faster than they came. The trust threshold is higher with these users because they're naturally more sceptical.

So should you target competitor users? Yes, if you've built something genuinely better and you can prove it quickly. No, if you're just hoping to steal market share without doing the hard work of understanding why people are unhappy in the first place. Do the research, build the right features, be honest in your messaging, and measure everything obsessively—that's really all there is to it.