SWOT analysis examples that end in a decision
Six SWOT analysis examples, from a plumber, a skincare brand, a SaaS app, a restaurant, an agency and Netflix, each with evidence and the action it leads to.
These SWOT analysis examples cover six different kinds of business. Five are hypothetical, written to show the standard rather than describe a real firm. The sixth is Netflix, built only from its own shareholder letters and one named news report, all linked.
Every point carries its evidence, strengths and weaknesses are measured against named rivals, and each example ends with the action it leads to. For a blank version, start with the SWOT analysis template.
1. A local service business: a plumbing firm
A hypothetical four-van plumbing and heating firm in a UK city. Its rivals are a national franchise and a one-person operator who undercuts everyone on price.
| Point | Evidence | |
|---|---|---|
| Strength | Turns up when it says it will | "On time" or "when they said" in 46 of its 380 Google reviews (4.8 stars) |
| Strength | Does boilers as well as plumbing | Gas Safe registered engineer on every van; the one-person rival lists plumbing only |
| Weakness | No out-of-hours service | Calls after 8pm go to voicemail; the franchise advertises 24/7 on its homepage |
| Weakness | One web page for every service | Not in the top 20 for "boiler repair" plus the city |
| Opportunity | The franchise's call-out fee annoys people | The £95 call-out fee comes up in 27 of the franchise's 1 and 2 star reviews |
| Opportunity | Nobody local publishes prices | None of the five local firms' websites gives a price for a boiler service |
| Threat | The franchise is buying its searches | Its ads now appear for "emergency plumber" plus the city; the Ads Transparency Center shows them running since August |
| Threat | A new entrant with no call-out fee | New trades directory listing in September with "no call-out charge" in the headline |
The action: publish fixed prices for the five most common jobs with no call-out fee, and build a separate boiler repair page. Do not add a 24/7 line to match the franchise; say plainly that it is not an emergency service, so 10pm callers go elsewhere without leaving a one star review. More in competitor analysis for home services.
2. An ecommerce brand: fragrance-free skincare
A hypothetical two-year-old online brand selling fragrance-free moisturisers at $32 a jar. Rivals: a pharmacy staple and a brand that grew on TikTok.
| Point | Evidence | |
|---|---|---|
| Strength | Customers come back | 41% of first-time buyers reorder within 90 days (store data) |
| Strength | Trusted by people with sensitive skin | "Sensitive" or "no reaction" in about a third of its 1,900 reviews |
| Weakness | One channel, getting dearer | 85% of new customers come from Meta ads; cost per purchase up 30% in a year |
| Weakness | One product carries the business | The hero moisturiser is 70% of revenue |
| Opportunity | The pharmacy staple reformulated and its buyers noticed | "New formula" complaints in its retailer reviews since spring |
| Opportunity | Nobody is speaking to older buyers | Every active ad from both rivals in the Meta Ad Library features people under 30 |
| Threat | The TikTok brand launched a cheaper fragrance-free line | New $24 product page, found in its sitemap in September |
| Threat | The pharmacy brand outspends everyone | Over 100 active Meta ads, most leading with "dermatologist recommended" |
The action: build ads and a landing page for buyers over 50 with sensitive skin, and test Google Search as a second channel before the $24 rival line collects reviews. Do not cut the price. A 41% reorder rate says the people who find the brand think it is worth $32.
3. A SaaS company: shift scheduling for care homes
A hypothetical rota app for independent care homes at $4 per staff member a month. Rivals: a large HR suite, and the spreadsheet most homes already use.
| Point | Evidence | |
|---|---|---|
| Strength | Built around care rules | Checks training expiry on every shift; the HR suite needs custom fields for this, per its help docs |
| Strength | Quick to set up | "Live in a day" or similar in 14 of 52 reviews |
| Weakness | No payroll integration | Named in 9 of the last 25 lost deals (CRM notes) |
| Weakness | Hardly anyone has heard of it | About 30 branded search impressions a month in Search Console |
| Opportunity | The HR suite priced out small homes | Its pricing page now starts at 50 seats; the Wayback Machine shows 10 seats a year ago |
| Opportunity | Managers search for spreadsheets | "Care home rota template" results are generic templates with no care rules |
| Threat | The spreadsheet is free and good enough | 6 of the last 25 lost deals ended in "no change" |
| Threat | The HR suite is moving into care | New care sector landing page in its sitemap, and new ads in the LinkedIn Ad Library |
The action: build the payroll integration first, because it is behind roughly a third of lost deals. Then publish a free care home rota template that shows what the app adds, and aim outreach at homes under 50 staff that the suite just priced out. The wider method is in SaaS competitor analysis.
4. A restaurant: a neighbourhood Thai restaurant
A hypothetical 40-cover Thai restaurant in a suburb, against a national chain branch and two delivery-only kitchens on the apps.
| Point | Evidence | |
|---|---|---|
| Strength | Food people cross town for | 4.7 stars from 600 Google reviews; "authentic" in 90 of them |
| Strength | Loyal regulars | 35% of weekend bookings are repeat guests (booking system) |
| Weakness | Delivery apps take a big cut | 40% of orders come through apps at about 30% commission |
| Weakness | Empty early in the week | Monday and Tuesday average 11 covers (till data) |
| Opportunity | Nobody nearby does a quick lunch | No set lunch on any rival's online menu; three office buildings within a 10 minute walk |
| Opportunity | The chain's delivery is slow | "Cold" or "late" in 40 of the chain's 1 and 2 star reviews |
| Threat | Delivery-only kitchens discount every week | Both run 20% to 25% off on the apps, continuously since July |
| Threat | Ingredient costs are rising | Main supplier's price list up 8% since spring (invoices) |
The action: launch a 45 minute set lunch from Tuesday to Friday for the three office buildings, and move regulars to direct ordering with a discount that still costs less than app commission. Do not join the app discounting: a price fight with kitchens that have no dining room is one it loses. See restaurant competitor analysis for the rest of the checklist.
5. An agency: a paid search agency for dentists
A hypothetical six-person paid search agency that works mostly for dental practices. Rivals: two generalist agencies and freelancers.
| Point | Evidence | |
|---|---|---|
| Strength | Deep in one niche | 22 dental clients; the only agency in the region with dental case studies on its site |
| Strength | No lock-in | Month-to-month contracts; both generalist rivals require 12 months, per their terms pages |
| Weakness | The founder sells everything | Every new client in the past year came through the founder's own calls |
| Weakness | No SEO service | 7 clients asked for SEO this year; 2 moved it to another agency |
| Opportunity | A generalist rival is slipping | "Kept changing account manager" in several of its recent Google reviews |
| Opportunity | Practices want proof, not promises | Rival sites show client logos, but none publishes cost per new patient |
| Threat | Automated Google campaigns make specialists look optional | "Can't Performance Max just do this?" comes up in sales calls (call notes) |
| Threat | Freelancers undercut on price | Freelancers listing dental experience at about half the agency's retainer on freelance marketplaces |
The action: publish anonymised cost per new patient ranges across the 22 clients, the sales asset no rival has. Turn the first meeting into a fixed fee account audit so new business stops depending on the founder. Partner with an SEO freelancer rather than hiring.
6. A real public company: Netflix
Built only from public sources, checked on 4 October 2026: Netflix's Q2 2026 shareholder letter, its Q1 2026 letter, its Q4 2025 letter and an NBC News report from 30 September 2026. The judgements in the "Point" column are ours; the evidence is theirs.
| Point | Evidence | |
|---|---|---|
| Strength | Scale and profit | 2025 revenue of $45.2B, up 16%, at a 29.5% operating margin; 2026 forecast of $51.0B to $51.4B at 31.5% |
| Strength | Can raise prices | First half 2026 price changes in markets including the US, Mexico and Spain landed "consistent with prior price changes and our expectations" |
| Weakness | Viewing is barely growing | View hours up 2% in the first half of 2026, after 1.5% growth in 2025 |
| Weakness | Advertising is still small | About $3B of ad revenue forecast for 2026, roughly 6% of forecast revenue |
| Opportunity | Ads are doubling | Ad revenue expected to roughly double in 2026; programmatic buying of Pause Ads and live inventory opens Netflix to smaller advertisers |
| Opportunity | Live events bring people in | Live is expected to be just over 5% of 2026 content spend and about 1% of view hours, yet accounted for six of the top 10 new member sign-up days in five years |
| Threat | Rivals are consolidating | Netflix's Warner Bros. deal ended with Netflix receiving a $2.8B termination fee; Paramount agreed to take over Warner Bros. Discovery, which would put HBO Max and Paramount+ under one owner |
| Threat | Competition for time | Netflix itself named the Winter Olympics and the World Cup as competitive pressure on viewing this year |
What it leads to: Netflix's growth now comes from charging more and selling ads rather than from people watching much more, which is why it calls building the ads business "a top priority" and keeps adding live events. The lesson for any business is the pairing of the first weakness with the second opportunity: when usage plateaus, spend on what brings new customers in, even if it is a tiny share of what existing customers use.
What the best SWOT analysis examples have in common
Every point has a number or a source. "Strong brand" appears nowhere above. "4.7 stars from 600 reviews" does.
The action uses more than one box. The plumbing firm's fixed prices combine an opportunity (nobody publishes prices) with a threat (a rival with no call-out fee). Pairing boxes like this is the TOWS matrix, and it is where SWOTs turn into plans.
Most opportunity and threat rows above came from public competitor evidence: ad libraries, pricing pages, sitemaps and reviews. Figo collects that every week for the competitors you name and summarises it on Monday. Ours, so judge accordingly. Strengths and weaknesses still come from your own data.
Questions people ask
What is a good example of a strength in a SWOT analysis?
One that is specific, measurable and better than a named rival, such as a 4.8 star rating from 380 reviews when the main competitor has 4.1. Vague strengths like good service or experienced team fail that test.
What is the difference between a weakness and a threat?
A weakness is inside the business and you could fix it, such as having no online booking. A threat comes from outside and you can only respond to it, such as a rival launching a cheaper product.
Can you do a SWOT analysis on a competitor?
Yes, but you only see their public side, so their strengths and weaknesses come from reviews, pricing, ads and search rather than internal numbers. Treat it as a sketch, not an audit.
How do you write a SWOT for a personal or student project?
The same way: pick a narrow scope, compare yourself with named alternatives, attach evidence to every point and finish with two or three actions. The format does not change because the subject is small.
See it on your own competitors
Figo checks their ads, pages, rankings and reviews every week, then tells you what to do in plain words. Set up in two minutes.
Keep reading