# Your page scores 57 out of 100 for sameness against the 3 competitors you named.

Parts of your page are genuinely your own — but the features you list is where you and fingerprint.com start to sound the same.

- **Your page:** https://www.incognia.com/
- **Compared against:** Sardine (sardine.ai), fingerprint.com (fingerprint.com), BioCatch (biocatch.com)
- **Sameness Index:** 57 — Half shared
- **Ownable share:** 30% (of 36% distinctive)
- **Report:** https://grader.wynter.com/c/incognia-com-JYNaeZk

**How you compare · vs 366 SaaS sites** — 1 point more same than the average SaaS site. The average SaaS site scores 56; you scored 57. You are less same than 179 of the 366 SaaS sites. The best-differentiated site in the set is at 6.
_A single check can move several points between runs; the benchmark averages up to eight sites per category._

> With 3 competitors, commonness can only take 4 distinct values. The figures are honest at that resolution and no finer.

## 1. Sameness Index

| Category | Weight | Score | What it means |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Messaging | 30% | 67 | The most expensive kind of sameness. A buyer cannot tell what job you do that the others do not. |
| Claims | 30% | 67 | Every shared claim is a line already read on another tab. Cut the ones nobody owns and spend the space on something they cannot. |
| Features | 15% | 71 | Expected in a mature category, and the least alarming of the six. Feature parity is normal; leading with it is the mistake. |
| Proof | 10% | 47 | Same kinds of proof as everyone means the proof stops working as proof. It is scored on the kind of evidence, not on which customers are named. |
| Structure | 10% | 0 | The generic SaaS template — hero, logos, three-feature grid, testimonial, CTA. Familiar is not the same as memorable. |
| Visual | 5% | 34 | Weighted lowest on purpose: buyers rarely decide on this. Worth knowing, rarely worth fixing first. |

**Half shared** — About half your claims are also on competitor pages.

## 2. Closest competitors

| Competitor | Echoes your claims |
| --- | --- |
| fingerprint.com | 66% |
| BioCatch | 64% |
| Sardine | 53% |

_Measured from your side: the share of what YOU say that each competitor also says, weighted by where you put it. This is not a Sameness Index — a competitor can echo most of your page and still score low on its own index by saying a great deal you do not._

## 3. Ownable share

**The share of your own page's claim space that is yours to keep.** This is not the inverse of the Sameness Index — it is measured on your claims alone, so the two do not add up to 100 and are not meant to.

30% of your page is unique, relevant and defensible — a strong share, and the thing to protect in any rewrite.

- **Distinctive message share:** 36% — prominent space spent on claims no competitor makes.
- **Ownable share:** 30% — the part of that which is also relevant to how buyers choose and hard to copy.

## 4. Where you sound like everyone else

Most of your set makes each of these and you are spending prominent space on them, ranked by how much. **These are not necessarily lines to delete** — some of what a page has to say is unavoidably shared, and claims about what kind of product you are were left out of this list for exactly that reason. The question each one raises is whether it has earned its space.

- **Device and browser identification/recognition** (Hero, 67% of the set) — also on fingerprint.com, BioCatch
  - _"Across devices"_
- **Tells legitimate users from fraudsters without friction** (Hero, 67% of the set) — also on Sardine, fingerprint.com
  - _"Identify users vs. fraudsters"_
- **AI-powered fraud risk platform** (Hero, 67% of the set) — also on Sardine, BioCatch
  - _"AI Rule Builder"_
  - Said your way: nobody else makes this exact claim, but everyone occupies the territory.
- **Device and browser identification/recognition** (Hero, 67% of the set) — also on fingerprint.com, BioCatch
  - _"AI-powered Browser ID"_
  - Said your way: nobody else makes this exact claim, but everyone occupies the territory.
- **Named customers as proof** (Section, 100% of the set) — also on Sardine, fingerprint.com, BioCatch
  - _"Trusted by leading platforms (Zeps, webull, nextdoor, delivery-hero, just-eat-takeaway, grubhub, favor, cabify, SumUp2)"_
- **One unified platform across fraud and AML** (Section, 100% of the set) — also on Sardine, fingerprint.com, BioCatch
  - _"Three layers, one powerful fraud signal"_
- **Named customers as proof** (Section, 100% of the set) — also on Sardine, fingerprint.com, BioCatch
  - _"50%+ of top delivery platforms trust Incognia"_
  - Said your way: nobody else makes this exact claim, but everyone occupies the territory.
- **Serves many industries and fraud types** (Section, 67% of the set) — also on Sardine, BioCatch
  - _"Covers fraud types including Promo & Refund Abuse, Account Ban Evasion, Driver Account Sharing, Account Takeover, Collusion Scams, Compensation Abuse…"_

## 5. Buried gold

Unique, relevant, and sitting in body copy. The cheapest wins here — you already have the differentiation and the page hides it.

- **Guaranteed return on investment** (Body, 0% of the set)
  - _"Guaranteed return[s]"_

## 6. Claim inventory

| Claim | Type | Placement | Common | Sayability | Relevant | Ownership |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Recognizes the same user across devices/browsers | capability | Hero | 67% | some | yes | Commodity |
| AI-powered risk/fraud intelligence platform | category | Hero | 33% | anyone | yes | Contested |
| Distinguishes legitimate users from fraudsters | outcome | Hero | 33% | anyone | yes | Contested |
| AI-assisted rule building for risk teams | capability | Hero | 0% | some | yes | Unique and owned |
| AI-powered browser identification signal | capability | Hero | 0% | some | yes | Unique and owned |
| Trusted by named leading platforms/brands | proof | Section | 100% | some | yes | Commodity |
| Combines multiple signal layers into one risk signal | capability | Section | 33% | some | yes | Contested |
| Majority of top delivery platforms are customers | proof | Section | 0% | some | yes | Unique and owned |
| Covers a broad range of fraud types | capability | Section | 67% | anyone | yes | Commodity |
| Rival approaches miss sophisticated evasion techniques | quality | Section | 67% | anyone | yes | Commodity |
| Stops fraud without adding friction or false positives | outcome | Section | 67% | anyone | yes | Commodity |
| Serves multiple industry verticals | segment | Section | 0% | anyone | no | Unique for now |
| Guaranteed return on investment | outcome | Body | 0% | some | yes | Unique and owned |

## What we compared

- **Incognia** (your page) — https://www.incognia.com/
- **Sardine** — https://www.sardine.ai/
- **fingerprint.com** — https://fingerprint.com/
- **BioCatch** — https://www.biocatch.com/

## What this does and does not tell you

An AI read each page and wrote down the claims it makes, then grouped the claims that say the same thing. **No score in this report was written by a model** — every number is computed from those groupings in our own code, with the weights shown above.

## The only way to know if it matters

This report can tell you where your messaging overlaps. It cannot tell you whether a buyer would care, or which of your reasons to buy actually land. Put the page in front of real B2B buyers in your target market and ask them.

[Test it with real buyers](https://wynter.com)