PPTX.gallery

Comparisons Block

Comparison Table

A side-by-side comparison block for alternatives, vendors, products, or options.

comparison-table1 slidedense density

Comparison

Three options, four criteria

Keep criteria parallel so the conclusion is defensible.

FitCostRisk
HighMedMed
FitHighMed
FitMedHigh

OPF Config

blocks:comparison-table
OPF JSON
{
  "$schema": "https://openpresentation.org/schema/opf/v1",
  "name": "Comparison Table",
  "description": "A side-by-side comparison block for alternatives, vendors, products, or options.",
  "tone": "formal",
  "narrative": "pyramid-principle",
  "takeaway": "Compare options across shared decision criteria.",
  "tags": [
    "content-block",
    "gallery:blocks/comparison-table"
  ],
  "design": {
    "colorScheme": "slate-gray",
    "fontScheme": "segoe-ui",
    "background": {
      "type": "solid",
      "color": "#ffffff"
    }
  },
  "slides": [
    {
      "id": "comparison-table",
      "layout": "table",
      "title": "Three options, four criteria",
      "subtitle": "Structured comparison for decision-making.",
      "table": {
        "columns": [
          "Criteria",
          "Option A",
          "Option B",
          "Option C"
        ],
        "rows": [
          [
            "Fit",
            "Medium",
            "High",
            "Low"
          ],
          [
            "Cost",
            "$$",
            "$$$",
            "$"
          ],
          [
            "Risk",
            "Low",
            "Medium",
            "High"
          ]
        ]
      }
    }
  ],
  "catalogs": {
    "default": {
      "source": "https://www.pptx.gallery",
      "narratives": {
        "pyramid-principle": {
          "name": "Pyramid Principle",
          "summary": "Lead with your conclusion, then provide supporting logic. Respects audience time and attention.",
          "description": "Lead with the conclusion, then provide the supporting logic. State the main recommendation up front, follow with three or four arguments that support it, then back each argument with data and examples. The tone is deductive: conclusion first, reasoning second, so the audience never waits for the point. Best for executive presentations, recommendations, and time-constrained settings; typical decks run 3-8 slides (consulting recommendation, investment thesis, strategic options analysis).",
          "audienceFit": [
            "executive",
            "board",
            "time-pressed-decision-makers"
          ],
          "duration": {
            "min": 5,
            "max": 20
          },
          "tags": [
            "executive",
            "strategy",
            "deductive",
            "recommendation"
          ],
          "beats": [
            {
              "id": "answer-first",
              "name": "Answer First",
              "description": "Lead with your main point or recommendation. Don't make executives wait for it.",
              "instructions": "Lead with the conclusion or recommendation.",
              "type": "text",
              "layout": "statement"
            },
            {
              "id": "key-arguments",
              "name": "Key Arguments",
              "description": "Provide 3-4 supporting reasons that logically support your answer.",
              "instructions": "Group the main reasons supporting the answer.",
              "type": "text",
              "layout": "pillars"
            },
            {
              "id": "supporting-evidence",
              "name": "Supporting Evidence",
              "description": "Back each argument with data, examples, or proof points.",
              "instructions": "Back each argument with verifiable proof.",
              "type": "chart",
              "layout": "chart"
            }
          ]
        }
      },
      "tones": {
        "formal": {
          "name": "Formal",
          "summary": "Polished, restrained voice for board, investor, and regulator audiences.",
          "description": "Authoritative without being cold. Use third-person constructions, full sentences, and concrete numbers. Avoid hedges and humor that depend on shared in-jokes; rely on clarity and precision to land.",
          "voiceCues": [
            "Use third person and the corporate 'we' sparingly.",
            "Lead with the recommendation, then evidence.",
            "Quote concrete numbers; avoid round-tripping ranges.",
            "Prefer full sentences to bullet fragments on key claims."
          ],
          "avoid": [
            "Slang, idioms, or in-jokes.",
            "Hedging language ('maybe', 'sort of', 'I think').",
            "Marketing superlatives ('world-class', 'best-in-class').",
            "Excessive emoji or exclamation points."
          ],
          "samplePhrases": [
            "Q4 revenue grew 18% year over year, led by enterprise expansion.",
            "We recommend approving the Series B raise at $30M.",
            "Net retention was 124%; gross retention was 96%."
          ],
          "recommendedNarratives": [
            "board-meeting",
            "qbr",
            "scqa",
            "strategic-narrative"
          ],
          "tags": [
            "business",
            "executive",
            "formal"
          ]
        }
      },
      "colorSchemes": {
        "slate-gray": {
          "name": "Slate Gray",
          "accent1": "#9E9E9E",
          "accent2": "#424242",
          "accent3": "#616161",
          "accent4": "#757575",
          "accent5": "#9E9E9E",
          "accent6": "#212121",
          "dark1": "#000000",
          "dark2": "#1B1B1B",
          "followedHyperlink": "#424242",
          "hyperlink": "#212121",
          "light1": "#FFFFFF",
          "light2": "#F8F8F8",
          "summary": "Neutral gray palette for understated executive communication.",
          "description": "A disciplined gray scale with strong neutral contrast. Use it when the content should feel calm, mature, and analytical.",
          "tags": [
            "neutral",
            "minimal",
            "mature",
            "analytical",
            "restrained"
          ]
        }
      },
      "fontSchemes": {
        "segoe-ui": {
          "name": "Segoe UI",
          "app": "powerpoint",
          "languageFamily": "latin",
          "languages": [],
          "major": "Segoe UI Semibold",
          "minor": "Segoe UI",
          "textSample": "Modern interface font",
          "type": "sans-serif",
          "description": "Segoe UI is a sans serif OPF font scheme for Latin presentations, using Segoe UI Semibold for headings with Segoe UI for body text."
        }
      },
      "layouts": {
        "table": {
          "name": "Table",
          "summary": "A table across the slide, with an optional note.",
          "tags": [
            "Visuals"
          ],
          "direction": "column",
          "regions": [
            {
              "name": "title"
            },
            {
              "name": "table",
              "accepts": [
                "table"
              ],
              "role": "primary",
              "flow": "column"
            },
            {
              "name": "note",
              "size": "auto",
              "accepts": [
                "text"
              ],
              "role": "supporting",
              "flow": "none"
            }
          ],
          "description": "Present structured data that benefits from precise comparison. Use clear row and column headings and concise cell content.",
          "preview": {
            "vectorSrc": "https://www.pptx.gallery/layout-previews/table.svg"
          }
        }
      }
    }
  }
}
Open in visual editorOpen in Inspector

Load this config in the gallery's visual editor, or in the Inspector at pptx.dev.

Use Case

Use when a decision depends on structured comparison across consistent criteria.

When to Use

For vendor selection, feature comparison, option analysis, and competitive positioning.

When to Avoid

Avoid when the criteria are not comparable across options.

Block Structure

table

Three options, four criteria

Structured comparison for decision-making.

Best Practices

1

Keep criteria mutually exclusive.

2

Use consistent rating language.

3

Make the recommendation explicit outside the table.

Playground deep link: config=blocks:comparison-table