Brand Name Comparison Skill

Compare multiple brand name candidates side-by-side to help users divine the best destiny.

When to Use

• User has 2+ brand name candidates and wants to compare them
• User asks “which name is better?”
• User wants a side-by-side analysis of options
• User is making a final decision between shortlisted names

Comparison Framework

For each name being compared, evaluate:

1. Availability Score (0-25 points)

• Domain .com available: +10
• Domain alternatives available (.io, .co, .ai): +5
• Social handles available (majority): +5
• Trademark clear: +5

2. Linguistic Score (0-25 points)

• Easy to pronounce (1-2 syllables ideal): +10
• Easy to spell from hearing: +5
• No international issues: +5
• Memorable/distinctive: +5

3. Brand Fit Score (0-25 points)

• Evokes appropriate industry: +10
• Aligns with stated mission (if provided): +10
• Differentiates from competitors: +5

4. Practical Score (0-25 points)

• Short length (under 10 characters): +10
• Works as a verb (“let’s google it”): +5
• Visual/logo potential: +5
• SEO-friendly (not too generic): +5

Total: 100 points possible

Output Format

## Brand Name Comparison

Comparing: {Name1} vs {Name2} vs {Name3}

### Quick Summary

| Criteria | {Name1} | {Name2} | {Name3} |
|----------|---------|---------|---------|
| Availability | X/25 | X/25 | X/25 |
| Linguistic | X/25 | X/25 | X/25 |
| Brand Fit | X/25 | X/25 | X/25 |
| Practical | X/25 | X/25 | X/25 |
| **Total** | **X/100** | **X/100** | **X/100** |

### Winner: {Name}

{1-2 sentence explanation of why this name wins}

### Detailed Breakdown

#### {Name1}: X/100
**Strengths:**
- {strength 1}
- {strength 2}

**Weaknesses:**
- {weakness 1}
- {weakness 2}

**Best for:** {scenario where this name excels}

#### {Name2}: X/100
...

#### {Name3}: X/100
...

### Recommendation

{Final recommendation with reasoning. If scores are close, explain the tradeoffs and what factors should drive the decision.}

### Next Steps
- Run full availability checks on top choice
- Test pronunciation with target audience
- Check trademark availability in detail

Comparison Tips

When scores are close (within 5 points):

• Weight criteria based on user’s priorities
• Ask what matters most: availability, brand fit, or memorability
• Consider the specific use case (B2B vs B2C, tech vs traditional)

When one name clearly wins:

• Still highlight what the other names do well
• Note if runner-up might work for a sub-brand or product line
• Confirm the winner addresses user’s stated requirements

Handling ties:

• Recommend additional research (focus groups, A/B testing)
• Suggest checking with target customers
• Consider which name has better long-term potential

Example

User: “Compare ‘Luminary’, ‘Brightpath’, and ‘Eduvance’ for an education technology company focused on corporate training”

Then provide full comparison using the framework, noting that:

• Corporate training suggests professional/serious tone
• B2B context means domain availability critical
• “Eduvance” clearly signals education
• “Luminary” has broader appeal but less specific
• “Brightpath” is descriptive but potentially generic