Sameness Index · 5 sites compared

Your page scores 62 out of 100 for sameness against the 4 competitors you named.

https://oxd.com/

01

Your verdict

62
Sameness · vs 4 named
How is this calculated?

Your page is mostly the same.

Most of what your page says, Button says too. You're less same than 11 of the 48 services sites scored (services avg 59).

No category benchmark matched this set.
Sameness Index on a 0 to 100 scale, from distinctive at 0 to interchangeable at 100. This page scores 62. Quartech scores 60. AOT Technologies scores 49. Button scores 57. Forge scores 51. The services avg is 59.

Each named site is scored the same way, against the other 4 in this set, so its tick means the same as your marker. The dashed line is the frozen benchmark average.

  1. More same than average

    The average services site scores 59; you scored 62.

    You are 3 points more same than the average services site.

  2. Closest overlap: Button

    Of the 4 sites you named, Button echoes the most of what your page says: 72% of it, weighted by placement. Scored the same way you were, against the rest of the set, Button's own Sameness Index is 57. Those are different measures: the first is overlap with your page, the second is how same Button's whole page is.

    Button is the competitor you sound most like.

  3. Room to own more

    29% of your claim space is ownable: unique, relevant, and hard to copy.

    29% is ownable, and every claim you own already leads.

Do this first

Three changes worth testing first.

Chosen by rule from the comparison with Quartech, AOT Technologies, Button and Forge: the shared claim taking your most prominent space, then the claims only you make that sit too low on the page to be read. Each one links to its claim card.

  1. “For over 30 years, we've partnered with government and private sector leaders across Canada”

    Quartech, Button and Forge say it too (75% of the set). Buyers may still need it, but shared ground cannot carry your hero — move it lower and give that space to something only you can say.

    Table stakes
    Most of the set says this too.
  2. “accessible government services”

    Keep the fact, lose the position: quartech, Button and Forge say it too (75% of the set), and your hero is spending its first impression on the same territory as theirs.

    Table stakes
    Most of the set says this too.

Try these changes, then test them with real buyers.

This measures overlap. Whether buyers notice is a different question, and only they can answer it.

02

What you can own

Claims only you make, that buyers weigh, and that competitors can’t easily copy.

29% of your page’s claim space is yours to keep.

29%Yours to keep10%Unique but weak61%A competitor says it too
Why this is not 100 minus the Sameness Index

The index is a weighted composite across six categories, including page structure and visuals. This bar is measured on your claims alone, weighted by where each one sits on the page. Different denominators, so the two never add to 100 and are not meant to.

Already leading with · 5

  1. Systems stay reliable under real load

    “reliable government services”

  2. Runs BC's highest-traffic government site

    “BC's busiest government site, serving millions of sessions every month”

  3. Built for Canadian public sector requirements

    “Canada-ready by design”

  4. Cut case processing from 5 days to under 3

    “average processing time dropped from 5 days to under 3 after launch”

  5. Modernized front end without replacing legacy back end

    “OXD modernized child care subsidy for 25,000+ Alberta families a year without touching the legacy system behind it”

Buried in body copy · 0

Nothing buried. Every claim you own is already above body copy.

03

Where you blend in

Territory you spend prominent space on that the set also occupies. Not every line is one to delete — the question is whether it has earned the space, or whether something only you can say should be there instead.

  • Commodity · 100%KeepHero
    builds digital government services
    • “We design and build accessible, reliable, and impactful government services”
    • “Canada-ready by design”

    You say this 2 different ways.

    Quartech, AOT Technologies, Button and Forge all say what they are and who they are for, as every page in a category must. Keep it — it is orientation, not differentiation.

    They say
    • Quartech“From app implementation to custom development, we're here to meet your unique application needs”
    • AOT Technologies“Public Sector Consulting Pillared on Flexible Engagement Models and AI.”
    • Button“Our partners are typically engaged in (or planning) digital transformation”
    • Forge“Government fluency”
  • Commodity · 75%Table stakesHero
    accessible, human-centred design practice
    • “accessible government services”

    Quartech, Button and Forge cover this territory. Buyers may need to hear it, but in your hero it spends the first impression on shared ground.

    They say
    • Quartech“People-centric”
    • Button“Our proven service design techniques get to the heart of complex challenges”
    • Forge“Accessibility: WCAG 2.1 AA conformance reviews, remediation planning, inclusive design from the start.”
  • Commodity · 75%Table stakesHero
    long track record and deep expertise
    • “For over 30 years, we've partnered with government and private sector leaders across Canada”

    Common ground with Quartech, Button and Forge. Say it if buyers need it — lower on the page, where it is not the thing they read first.

    They say
    • Quartech“For more than 30 years, we've had law enforcement's back”
    • Button“Button delivers value through a combination of scientific expertise, impact-driven design, and world-class development”
    • Forge“Years in Government”
  • Commodity · 75%Table stakesHero
    work creates public value and trust
    • “impactful government services”

    Quartech, Button and Forge make the same claim (75% of the set). It cannot set you apart, so it should not carry the hero.

    They say
    • Quartech“Impactful partners”
    • Button“We help cut through complexity, with purpose”
    • Forge“See how we transform ideas into tangible solutions, delivering outstanding results and success-stories for our clients and their users.”
  • Commodity · 100%Table stakesSection
    faster processing and reduced cycle times
    • “average processing time dropped from 5 days to under 3 after launch”

    Quartech, AOT Technologies, Button and Forge make the same claim. It cannot set you apart, so it should not carry the section. Nobody else uses your exact words, but everyone is on the ground. Nobody else makes this exact claim, but everyone occupies the territory — lead with the specific, not the generic.

    They say
    • Quartech“This system enhances efficiency, reduces the timeline for applicant review, and improves metrics and demographics”
    • AOT Technologies“Our platforms enable swift orchestrations, integrations and workflow app-development.”
    • Button“deliver rapid incremental innovation”
    • Forge“Fast Turnaround”
  • Commodity · 75%Table stakesSection
    better, auditable, evidence-based decisions
    • “an algorithm distributes trial dates fairly, not by who dials first”

    A buyer comparing tabs sees this on Quartech, AOT Technologies and Forge too (75% of the set). Yours earns nothing by repeating it up top; it can live lower down. Nobody else uses your exact words, but everyone is on the ground. Nobody else makes this exact claim, but everyone occupies the territory — lead with the specific, not the generic.

    They say
    • Quartech“We leverage data intelligence to accelerate and improve decision making, optimize processes, and increase efficiency”
    • AOT Technologies“Make the move to Decision Intelligence + Agentic AI.”
    • Forge“turn assumptions into ranked, evidence-backed decisions your developers can act on”
  • Commodity · 75%Table stakesSection
    integrates with existing and legacy systems
    • “OXD modernized child care subsidy for 25,000+ Alberta families a year without touching the legacy system behind it”

    Quartech, AOT Technologies and Button got here first as far as a buyer can tell. Keep the fact for readers who need it; move the position to a claim only your page can make. Nobody else uses your exact words, but everyone is on the ground. Nobody else makes this exact claim, but everyone occupies the territory — lead with the specific, not the generic.

    They say
    • Quartech“From system setup and maintenance to Cloud and IoT, we've got the experts and experience to help”
    • AOT Technologies“node-wire is AOT's open-source, Python-based connector platform, the connective tissue that lets enterprise systems, workflows, AI agents, and applications…”
    • Button“Let's talk about your goals with the Google Cloud Platform offerings, like data and app cloud migration and Google Workspace tools”
  • Commodity · 75%Table stakesSection
    vendor partnerships and procurement pre-qualification
    • “We maintain active standing agreements and are on pre-qualified vendor lists with 15+ government bodies, streamlining procurement for Digital Transformation…”

    Shared with AOT Technologies, Button and Forge, 75% of the set. True of you, true of them — which is exactly why it will not decide anything.

    They say
    • AOT Technologies“We also work with top-technology vendors including Hyperscalers and Enterprise software companies - helping you closely knit the two worlds together: open…”
    • Button“As your Google Cloud Partner, we have been vetted and approved by Google to support your business needs and digital transformation”
    • Forge“Two easy ways to start. No RFP required.”
  • Contested · 50%SharpenSection
    automation and workflow orchestration platform
    • “a failed request is remembered and given priority next time”

    Quartech and AOT Technologies are on this territory too (50% of the set). It narrows the field without winning it — make it specific enough that it cannot be said of them. Nobody else uses your exact words, but everyone is on the ground. Nobody else makes this exact claim, but everyone occupies the territory — lead with the specific, not the generic.

    They say
    • Quartech“Platform Powered”
    • AOT Technologies“Our suite of products and accelerators help you modernise your workflows and build the data-readiness to help you transition to the AI-driven world.”
  • Contested · 50%SharpenSection
    collaborative, consultative engagement style
    • “Government services are shaped by policy, user needs, and operational reality, all at once. We work across silos and mandates to hold them together, for…”

    Button and Forge are on this territory too (50% of the set). It narrows the field without winning it — make it specific enough that it cannot be said of them.

    They say
    • Button“Every Button client engagement starts with discovery”
    • Forge“Forge sits between your policy requirements and your build team, running iterative design loops”
  • Contested · 25%SharpenHero
    reliable systems at scale
    • “reliable government services”
    • “BC's busiest government site, serving millions of sessions every month”

    You say this 2 different ways.

    Shared with AOT Technologies. Sharpen it to the thing only you do here, or it reads as a claim any of you could make. Nobody else uses your exact words, but everyone is on the ground. Nobody else makes this exact claim, but everyone occupies the territory — lead with the specific, not the generic.

    They say
    • AOT Technologies“node-wire's standardized framework creates connections that are secure, resilient, observable, and reusable, spanning cloud platforms, enterprise…”
  • Contested · 25%KeepSection
    serves public and private sector clients
    • “Solutions for the public and private sector”

    Every page has to name its category and audience, and Button do too. Keep the line; just do not expect it to do any differentiating.

    They say
    • Button“organizations that answer to citizens and private stakeholders”
04

Claim-by-claim evidence

Every claim on your page (19)
What the columns mean
Claim
The grouped claim, then your exact line beneath it.
Type
What kind of claim it is: category, segment, outcome, capability, quality or proof.
Placement
Where it sits on your page: hero, section or body copy. Hero claims weigh most in the index.
Same claim
Share of the competitors making this exact claim. Drives ownership and ownable share.
Same territory
Share of the competitors with any claim in the same buyer-facing territory. This is what the index is scored on.
Sayability
Whether a competitor could truthfully make the same claim: anyone could, copyable with effort, or hard to copy.
Relevant
Whether buyers decide on this. A unique claim nobody buys on is not ownable.
Ownership
Commodity: 60% or more of the set says it. Contested: 20–59%. Unique: under 20%, owned when it is also hard to copy.

Tap a column to sort by it; tap again to reverse. Sorted by Same claim, highest first.

  • Over 30 years serving this sector
    “For over 30 years, we've partnered with government and private sector leaders across Canada”
    proofHerosame claim 50%same territory 75%Copyable with effort
    Contested
    Also on Quartech, Forge
  • Work produces meaningful public impact
    “impactful government services”
    qualityHerosame claim 50%same territory 75%Anyone could say itnot a buying criterion
    Contested
    Also on Quartech, Forge
  • Delivers digital transformation and innovation services
    “Digital Transformation and Innovation”
    capabilityBodysame claim 50%same territory 100%Anyone could say it
    Contested
    Also on AOT Technologies, Button
  • Practices human-centred design
    “Human-Centred Design”
    capabilityBodysame claim 50%same territory 75%Anyone could say it
    Contested
    Also on Quartech, Button
  • Designs and builds digital government services
    “We design and build accessible, reliable, and impactful government services”
    categoryHerosame claim 25%same territory 100%Anyone could say it
    Contested
    Also on Quartech
  • Services are accessible to all users
    “accessible government services”
    qualityHerosame claim 25%same territory 75%Copyable with effort
    Contested
    Also on Forge
  • Pre-qualified on government vendor lists, easing procurement
    “We maintain active standing agreements and are on pre-qualified vendor lists with 15+ government bodies, streamlining procurement for Digital Transformation…”
    proofSectionsame claim 25%same territory 75%Copyable with effort
    Contested
    Also on Forge
  • Reconciles policy, user needs and operations across silos
    “Government services are shaped by policy, user needs, and operational reality, all at once. We work across silos and mandates to hold them together, for…”
    capabilitySectionsame claim 25%same territory 50%Copyable with effort
    Contested
    Also on Forge
  • Serves both public and private sector clients
    “Solutions for the public and private sector”
    segmentSectionsame claim 25%same territory 25%Anyone could say itnot a buying criterion
    Contested
    Also on Button
  • Staff teach and speak in the design communitygrouping uncertain
    “Our people teach, speak, and contribute to the communities shaping how public services get designed”
    proofSectionsame claim 25%same territory 75%Anyone could say itnot a buying criterion
    Contested
    Also on Forge
  • Offers government and management consulting
    “Government Consulting”
    capabilityBodysame claim 25%same territory 100%Anyone could say it
    Contested
    Also on AOT Technologies
  • Provides technology/infrastructure solutions and support
    “Technology Solutions”
    capabilityBodysame claim 25%same territory 75%Anyone could say it
    Contested
    Also on Quartech
  • Systems stay reliable under real load
    “reliable government services”
    qualityHerosame claim 0%same territory 25%Copyable with effort
    Unique and owned
  • Algorithm allocates court dates fairly
    “an algorithm distributes trial dates fairly, not by who dials first”
    outcomeSectionsame claim 0%same territory 75%Copyable with effortnot a buying criterion
    Unique and owned
  • Built for Canadian public sector requirements
    “Canada-ready by design”
    categorySectionsame claim 0%same territory 100%Copyable with effort
    Unique and owned
  • Cut case processing from 5 days to under 3
    “average processing time dropped from 5 days to under 3 after launch”
    outcomeSectionsame claim 0%same territory 100%Copyable with effort
    Unique and owned
  • Failed requests are retried with priority
    “a failed request is remembered and given priority next time”
    capabilitySectionsame claim 0%same territory 50%Copyable with effortnot a buying criterion
    Unique and owned
  • Modernized front end without replacing legacy back end
    “OXD modernized child care subsidy for 25,000+ Alberta families a year without touching the legacy system behind it”
    outcomeSectionsame claim 0%same territory 75%Copyable with effort
    Unique and owned
  • Runs BC's highest-traffic government site
    “BC's busiest government site, serving millions of sessions every month”
    proofSectionsame claim 0%same territory 25%Hard to copy
    Unique and owned
05

How this was calculated

Sameness measures how much your claims overlap with the sites compared. It does not measure message quality or whether buyers prefer you.

AI-analyzed: an AI read each page on its own and grouped the claims that say the same thing. No score here was written by a model — every number is computed from those groupings in our own code, with the weights below.

How the score is built
The six category scores, their weights, and what a high score in each one means
CategoryWeightYoursWhat a high score means
Messaging
Category framing, who it is for, and the outcome promised
30%81The most expensive kind of sameness. A buyer cannot tell what job you do that the others do not.
Claims
Attribute and benefit claims — speed, ease, quality, ROI
30%58Every shared claim is a line already read on another tab. Cut the ones nobody owns and spend the space on something they cannot.
Features
Capabilities and functions the page lists
15%65Expected in a mature category, and the least alarming of the six. Feature parity is normal; leading with it is the mistake.
Proof
The kinds of evidence offered: customer logos, numbers, testimonials, case studies, badges
10%22Same 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
Section order, navigation, CTA language and placement
10%50The generic SaaS template — hero, logos, three-feature grid, testimonial, CTA. Familiar is not the same as memorable.
Visual
Palette family, imagery style, layout patterns
5%58Weighted lowest on purpose: buyers rarely decide on this. Worth knowing, rarely worth fixing first.

Each site was read on its own first, with no knowledge of the others, so your page gets no benefit of the doubt a competitor’s does not. A category nothing could be measured for drops out and the rest are re-weighted, rather than counted as zero.

What we compared (5 pages read)
Your page
OXD
oxd.com
Competitor
Quartech
quartech.com
Competitor
AOT Technologies
aot-technologies.com
Competitor
Button
button.is
Competitor
Forge
forgeux.com
What it cannot tell you

The index can find where two pages converge. It cannot say whether a buyer would notice, or which of your reasons to buy actually land. A single check also moves several points between runs, so read the band and the ranking, not the last digit.

Your highest-impact changes

  1. 1
    Table stakesYour hero copy says “For over 30 years, we've partnered with government and private sector leaders across Canada”.

    Quartech, Button and Forge say it too (75% of the set). Buyers may still need it, but shared ground cannot carry your hero — move it lower and give that space to something only you can say.

  2. 2
    Table stakesYour hero copy says “accessible government services”.

    Keep the fact, lose the position: quartech, Button and Forge say it too (75% of the set), and your hero is spending its first impression on the same territory as theirs.

  3. 3
    Table stakesYour hero copy says “impactful government services”.

    This is the set's common ground — Quartech, Button and Forge say it too (75% of the set). It will not set you apart wherever it sits, and in the hero it costs you the one place a distinctive claim would be read.

  4. 4
    Table stakesYour section copy says “average processing time dropped from 5 days to under 3 after launch”.

    A buyer with three tabs open reads a version of this on every one of them. Say it further down for the readers who need it; the section should carry a claim they will only find here.

  5. 5
    Table stakesYour section copy says “an algorithm distributes trial dates fairly, not by who dials first”.

    True of you and true of them: Quartech, AOT Technologies and Forge say it too (75% of the set). That is why it decides nothing, and why the section is the wrong place to spend it.

  6. 6
    Table stakesYour section copy says “OXD modernized child care subsidy for 25,000+ Alberta families a year without touching the legacy system behi…”.

    In the section: Keep the fact, lose the position: quartech, AOT Technologies and Button say it too (75% of the set), and your section is spending its first impression on the same territory as theirs.

  7. 7
    Table stakesYour section copy says “We maintain active standing agreements and are on pre-qualified vendor lists with 15+ government bodies, stre…”.

    In the section: This is the set's common ground — AOT Technologies, Button and Forge say it too (75% of the set). It will not set you apart wherever it sits, and in the section it costs you the one place a distinctive claim would be read.

  8. 8
    Table stakesYour body copy says “Digital Transformation and Innovation”.

    In the body: Quartech, AOT Technologies, Button and Forge all say it too. Buyers may still need it, but shared ground cannot carry your body — move it lower and give that space to something only you can say.

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
Trusted by
HubSpotRingCentralShopifyCognismPaddleVeeamRipplingMiro