The feedback I dreamed of: "It's better than Claude"

I sent out an email last week asking early users of Ferguson how they've found the audits it produces.

I didn't really expect anything back... but then I got a reply that made my day from a Java software testing specialist. Not an SEO person. Not a marketer. Just a developer staring at a landing page they built themselves, wondering why it wasn't converting.

They tried Claude first. Then they tried Ferguson.

Here's what they said:

"Ferguson's findings actually differ from regular LLM conclusions. I tried running Claude against my website before Ferguson, and Claude gave me some recommendations, but Ferguson was better."

"Ferguson's report was priceless for me because it gave me at least a brief understanding of what might be wrong with my landing page."

This is the type of customer I was building for: the developer who is world-class at their own thing - but who has never once thought about objection coverage or social proof hierarchy.

They don't need another generic AI chat. They need something that has already done the thinking: here's what's wrong, here's why it matters, here's what to change.

That's what Ferguson is supposed to be. Nice to have early proof it's working!
Interested in testing your own URL to see how it compares to Claude? Head to https://useferguson.com