Style 08 of 10
Us vs. them
Also called “comparison ad”, “split screen” or “old way vs new way”.
Put your product next to the alternative and let the viewer see the difference: the bank's six weeks against three days, $15,000 of demolition against four hours of resurfacing, a watery latte against a rich one. It's among the formats with the highest hit rates, and it only works when you win the comparison plainly.
- Lenders & financial services
- Consumer brands
- Local & professional services
- Warm audiences who are comparing, and cold ones with a clear villain
Opens OpenCraft Studio with this style’s brief ready to edit. Fill in your product; nothing is made until you approve the storyboard.
What it is
A comparison ad puts two ways of doing something side by side, split screen or back to back, and shows yours winning on a criterion the buyer already cares about. The "them" is usually the old way (the bank, the full remodel, the capsule machine), not a named competitor.
It fits the moment when someone has decided to do something and is choosing how. That's why it's natural for lenders (a bank loan against an online one), home services (replace against repair) and any product that replaces a habit. Motion lists "us vs them" among its top formats by hit rate.
The honest version picks one or two criteria and shows them. The dishonest version stacks a strawman against a highlight reel, and viewers can tell. Claims about speed, price or approval also have to be true and provable, and for credit they have to be phrased carefully.
Anatomy
- 0–2sThe matchupBoth sides on screen, or the question that sets them up: "Which latte would you pick?" "Why spend $15,000?"
- 2–10sThe usual wayThe alternative at its most familiar, not its worst: the paperwork pile, the demolition, the machine on the counter.
- MiddleYour wayThe same task, done your way, from the same angle, so the difference is the only thing that changed.
- LateThe numberThe one difference, stated as a number on screen: 4 hours vs 4 weeks, $46 off, three days vs six weeks.
- Last 3sCloseYour product alone, and the action.
- Length
- 15–45 seconds. Longer if a presenter explains why the difference exists.
- Shot length
- Paired shots: each "them" shot answered by an "us" shot at the same size and angle.
- Talking head
- Optional. An owner or creator explaining the difference works; so does a pure split screen.
- Captions
- Labels on each side (THEM / US, or the brand names), and the key number as big text.
- Music
- A bed under any voice. A small beat on each reveal.
- End card
- Your side only. Don't end on the comparison graphic.
What it’s good for, and bad for
Good for
- Replacing a habit. Capsule coffee, a bank loan, a full remodel: the viewer already does it one way and needs to see why yours is better.
- A clear, measurable win. Time, price, steps, taste in a blind test. If you can put it in a number, it works.
- Buyers who are comparing. It meets people at the point where they're weighing options.
Bad for
- Close contests. If you only win on a technicality, the side-by-side shows it.
- Naming competitors carelessly. Comparative claims about a named brand need to be true and provable. Comparing against "the usual way" is safer.
- Claims you can't back. "Approved in 24 hours" or "half the price" needs to be true for a typical customer, with the fine print on screen.
By business
- Consumer brands
- Food and drink taste tests, cleaning products, subscriptions that replace a store run. Keep it fair: same light, same amount, same angle.
- Lenders & financial services
- The bank is the natural "them": the paperwork, the waiting, the no. Keep speed claims typical and disclaimed, and label actors.
- Local & professional services
- Repair against replace, one visit against three, a flat price against a quote that grows. Resurfacing and roofing companies run it for months.
Real examples
Real brands’ ads, cited for reference. We didn’t make them. Unless marked “ran”, each was still running in the Meta Ad Library on Sep 29, 2026. Days live is the only performance signal the Library shows, and an ad that keeps running is usually paying for itself.
- Surface RenewTub and tile resurfacing, Twin Cities
The owner walks and talks through the argument: "Why spend $15,000" (in red, over pills reading "Ripping out / Replacing") when the tub can be resurfaced. He sits on the edge of a tub in a gutted bathroom, a stack of before photos is labelled with the problem (a stained tub, outdated tile), and the core comparison lands as big type: 4 hours, not 4 weeks. It ends with a warranty badge and the team by their van.
Take from it: Compare against the expensive default, not a competitor, and make the difference two numbers.
View in the Meta Ad Library · ID 1797440527559916 - CometeerFrozen coffee concentrate
Runs from a creator's page as a partnership ad. It opens on a woman sipping two iced lattes through straws, the cups labelled with each brand, and asked which she prefers. Then the creator explains why: the frozen capsule, the concentrate pouring, a capsule machine next to it, milk poured into two identical glasses, and the other latte looking "super watery". The post text cites a third-party blind taste test and a discount.
Take from it: A blind taste gives the verdict, and the explanation afterwards makes it believable.
View in the Meta Ad Library · ID 2011903796122532 - BestMoneyBusiness-loan comparison
The bank against the comparison site, played as a solo skit: an owner asks her bank for a $90,000 SBA loan and gets a credit-score wince and a request for "666 documents"; then she shows the approval she got elsewhere and screen-records the site's quiz. Supers disclose the paid actor and that the site isn't a lender and can't promise approval.
Take from it: For lenders, "them" is the bank everyone has already dealt with. The comparison can be a scene rather than a chart.
View in the Meta Ad Library · ID 1768418977455629
Common mistakes
- A strawman. Showing the alternative at its absolute worst reads as rigged. Show it as people normally live it.
- Unequal shots. Different light, angle or amount on each side makes the viewer doubt the whole thing.
- Too many criteria. A seven-row comparison table is a web page, not an ad. Pick the one or two that decide it.
- Untrue or atypical numbers. The best case presented as normal is misleading, and for credit it breaks platform rules. Use typical figures and put the caveat on screen.
- Ending on them. The last image should be your product, not the split screen.
The prompt
The brief we’d give OpenCraft to make one. Swap the brackets for your own details. The director turns it into a script and a storyboard for you to approve before anything is filmed.
Make a 20-second us-vs-them ad for [product] from [brand]. "Them" is [the usual way, e.g. a bank loan, a full remodel, capsule coffee], shown as people normally live it: [what that looks like]. "Us" is the same task done our way, from the same angle: [what it looks like]. Pair the shots, one of theirs then one of ours, with THEM and US labels. Put the one difference on screen as a number: [e.g. 3 days vs 6 weeks] (typical, not best case). Music bed with a beat on each reveal. End on our side only: [CTA]. [Any required disclaimer.]