<link rel="preconnect" href="https://fonts.googleapis.com">
<link rel="preconnect" href="https://fonts.gstatic.com" crossorigin>
<link href="https://fonts.googleapis.com/css2?family=Poppins:wght@300;400;500;600;700&display=swap" rel="stylesheet">
<style>
section.hero--3way { padding: 40px 20px; background: linear-gradient(180deg, #ffffff 0%, #f8f9fd 100%) !important; }
.hero__container { max-width: 1200px; margin: 0 auto; }
.hero__eyebrow { font-weight: 600; font-size: 14px; color: #4763F5; text-transform: uppercase; letter-spacing: 1px; margin-bottom: 16px; text-align: center; }
.hero__title { font-weight: 600; font-size: 46px; line-height: 1.1; color: #130417; margin-bottom: 24px; text-align: center; }
.hero__scores { display: grid; grid-template-columns: repeat(3, 1fr); gap: 32px; margin-bottom: 32px; }
.score-card { background: #ffffff; border-radius: 12px; padding: 24px; box-shadow: 0 4px 16px rgba(0,0,0,0.08); text-align: center; }
.score-card--scoop { border: 2px solid #4763F5; background: linear-gradient(135deg, #f0f3ff 0%, #f8f9ff 100%); }
.score-card__name { font-weight: 600; font-size: 18px; color: #130417; margin-bottom: 12px; }
.score-card__score { font-weight: 700; font-size: 42px; margin-bottom: 8px; }
.score-card--scoop .score-card__score { color: #4763F5; }
.score-card--competitor .score-card__score { color: #E3165B; }
.score-card__label { font-size: 14px; color: #666; }
.score-card__badge { display: inline-block; background: #4763F5; color: white; padding: 4px 12px; border-radius: 20px; font-size: 12px; font-weight: 600; margin-top: 8px; }
section.content-section { padding: 32px 20px; background: #ffffff !important; }
section.content-section--alt { background: #f8f9fd !important; }
.content-section__container { max-width: 1000px; margin: 0 auto; }
.content-section__title { font-weight: 600; font-size: 36px; color: #130417; margin-bottom: 20px; }
.content-section__subsection { margin-bottom: 32px; }
.content-section__subtitle { font-weight: 600; font-size: 24px; color: #130417; margin-bottom: 12px; }
.content-section__paragraph { font-weight: 400; font-size: 16px; line-height: 1.6; color: #333333; margin-bottom: 12px; }
.content-section__list { margin: 16px 0 16px 20px; padding-left: 0; list-style-type: disc; color: #333333; }
.content-section__list-item { font-weight: 400; font-size: 16px; line-height: 1.6; margin-bottom: 8px; }
.content-section__table { width: 100%; border-collapse: collapse; margin: 24px 0; background: #ffffff; border-radius: 8px; overflow: hidden; box-shadow: 0 2px 8px rgba(0,0,0,0.06); }
.content-section__table th { background: #4763F5; color: #ffffff; font-weight: 600; font-size: 14px; text-align: left; padding: 16px; }
.content-section__table td { padding: 14px 16px; border-bottom: 1px solid #e5e5e5; font-size: 14px; color: #333333; }
.content-section__table tr:last-child td { border-bottom: none; }
.content-section__table tr:hover { background: #f8f9fd; }
.comparison-table--3way th:first-child { width: 30%; }
.comparison-table--3way th:nth-child(2),
.comparison-table--3way th:nth-child(3),
.comparison-table--3way th:nth-child(4) { width: 23.33%; }
.winner-cell { background: #f0fff4; font-weight: 600; color: #333333; }
.loser-cell { background: #fff5f5; color: #333333; }
.scoop-cell { background: #f0f3ff; font-weight: 600; color: #333333; }
section.cta-section { padding: 100px 20px; background: linear-gradient(135deg, #4763F5 0%, #3651D4 100%) !important; text-align: center; color: #ffffff; }
.cta-section__title { font-weight: 600; font-size: 36px; margin-bottom: 16px; }
.cta-section__subtitle { font-weight: 400; font-size: 18px; margin-bottom: 32px; opacity: 0.9; }
.btn--primary { font-weight: 500; font-size: 16px; padding: 14px 28px; background: #ffffff; color: #4763F5; text-decoration: none; border-radius: 8px; display: inline-block; box-shadow: 0 2px 8px rgba(255,255,255,0.3); transition: all 0.2s ease; }
.btn--primary:hover { transform: translateY(-2px); box-shadow: 0 4px 16px rgba(255,255,255,0.4); }
.faq-section { padding: 60px 20px; background: #f8f9fd; }
.faq-section__container { max-width: 900px; margin: 0 auto; }
.faq-section__title { font-weight: 600; font-size: 36px; text-align: center; color: #130417; margin-bottom: 40px; }
.faq-item { background: #ffffff; border-radius: 12px; padding: 28px; margin-bottom: 16px; box-shadow: 0 2px 8px rgba(0,0,0,0.06); }
.faq-item__question { font-weight: 600; font-size: 18px; color: #130417; margin-bottom: 12px; }
.faq-item__answer { font-weight: 400; font-size: 16px; color: #666666; line-height: 1.6; }
</style>
<section class="hero--3way">
<div class="hero__container">
<div class="hero__eyebrow">AI-POWERED COMPARISON</div>
<h1 class="hero__title">ThoughtSpot vs Domo vs Scoop: Complete Comparison</h1>
<div class="hero__scores">
<div class="score-card score-card--competitor">
<div class="score-card__name">ThoughtSpot</div>
<div class="score-card__score">57/100</div>
<div class="score-card__label">BUA Score</div>
</div>
<div class="score-card score-card--competitor">
<div class="score-card__name">Domo</div>
<div class="score-card__score">62/100</div>
<div class="score-card__label">BUA Score</div>
</div>
<div class="score-card score-card--scoop">
<div class="score-card__name">Scoop Analytics</div>
<div class="score-card__score">82/100</div>
<div class="score-card__label">BUA Score</div>
<div class="score-card__badge">WINNER ✓</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</section>
<section class="content-section ">
<div class="content-section__container">
<h2 class="content-section__title">Executive Summary</h2>
<div class="content-section__subsection">
<h3 class="content-section__subtitle">TL;DR Verdict</h3>
<p class="content-section__paragraph">Scoop (82/100 BUA) enables true business autonomy through multi-pass investigation, while ThoughtSpot (57/100) and Domo (62/100) trap users in dashboard paradigms. Both competitors require IT support for anything beyond pre-built views, blocking the iterative questioning real analysis demands. Choose Scoop for immediate independence, competitors only if already invested in their ecosystems.</p>
</div>
<div class="content-section__subsection">
<h3 class="content-section__subtitle">What is Scoop?</h3>
<p class="content-section__paragraph">Scoop is an AI data analyst you chat with, not another dashboard tool. Ask questions in plain English, get answers with charts instantly. Works natively in Excel and Slack where business users already work. No SQL, no training, no semantic layer maintenance—just conversation with data.</p>
</div>
<div class="content-section__subsection">
<h3 class="content-section__subtitle">Choose Scoop If</h3>
<ul class="content-section__list">
<li class="content-section__list-item">Business users need to investigate data independently without IT tickets</li>
<li class="content-section__list-item">Your team lives in Excel and needs analytics without leaving spreadsheets</li>
<li class="content-section__list-item">You want answers in minutes, not weeks of dashboard development</li>
<li class="content-section__list-item">Non-technical teams need self-service analytics that actually works</li>
</ul>
</div>
<div class="content-section__subsection">
<h3 class="content-section__subtitle">Consider ThoughtSpot If</h3>
<ul class="content-section__list">
<li class="content-section__list-item">You're already invested in ThoughtSpot's semantic layer infrastructure</li>
<li class="content-section__list-item">Your organization prioritizes governed search over flexible investigation</li>
<li class="content-section__list-item">IT-controlled analytics aligns with your data governance requirements</li>
</ul>
</div>
<div class="content-section__subsection">
<h3 class="content-section__subtitle">Consider Domo If</h3>
<ul class="content-section__list">
<li class="content-section__list-item">You need extensive app development capabilities beyond analytics</li>
<li class="content-section__list-item">Your organization already uses Domo's broader business cloud platform</li>
<li class="content-section__list-item">Dashboard-centric workflows match your reporting culture</li>
</ul>
</div>
<div class="content-section__subsection">
<h3 class="content-section__subtitle">Bottom Line</h3>
<p class="content-section__paragraph">The BUA scores reveal the truth: Scoop's 82/100 represents genuine business empowerment, while ThoughtSpot's 57/100 and Domo's 62/100 reflect continued IT dependency . The difference isn't incremental—it's architectural. Scoop enables multi-pass investigation (7/8 capability score) through natural conversation, while competitors max out at single-query dashboards with limited drill-down . This eliminates five of six traditional BI cost categories: no implementation consultants, no training programs, no semantic layer maintenance, no dashboard developers, no productivity loss waiting for IT . Business users gain immediate, sustainable independence—not another portal prison requiring constant IT support.</p>
</div>
</div>
</section>
<section class="content-section content-section--alt">
<div class="content-section__container">
<h2 class="content-section__title">At-a-Glance Comparison</h2>
<table class="content-section__table comparison-table--3way">
<thead>
<tr>
<th>Dimension</th><th>ThoughtSpot</th><th>Domo</th><th>Scoop</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td class=""><strong>BUA Score</strong></td><td class="">57/100</td><td class="">62/100</td><td class="scoop-cell">82/100</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</div>
</section>
<section class="content-section ">
<div class="content-section__container">
<h2 class="content-section__title">BUA Framework Deep Dive</h2>
<div class="content-section__subsection">
<h3 class="content-section__subtitle">Autonomy (20 points)</h3>
<p class="content-section__paragraph"><strong>Dimension</strong>: Autonomy</p>
<p class="content-section__paragraph"><strong>Component Breakdown</strong></p>
<table class="content-section__table comparison-table--3way">
<thead>
<tr>
<th>Component</th><th>ThoughtSpot</th><th>Domo</th><th>Scoop</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td class="">Investigation Depth</td><td class="">2/8</td><td class="">1/8</td><td class="">8/8</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="">Setup Requirements</td><td class="">1/8</td><td class="">0/8</td><td class="">4/8</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="">Query Flexibility</td><td class="">1/8</td><td class="">1/8</td><td class="">3/8</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="">Permission Independence</td><td class="">0/8</td><td class="">0/8</td><td class="">3/8</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p class="content-section__paragraph"><strong>Quick Summary</strong> (40-60 words):</p>
<p class="content-section__paragraph">Scoop scores 18/20 on autonomy, enabling true self-service investigation through natural conversation. ThoughtSpot and Domo score near zero, requiring extensive IT setup, pre-built dashboards, and constant permission management. While competitors let users view pre-built analytics, Scoop lets business users conduct their own investigations immediately.</p>
</div>
<div class="content-section__subsection">
<h3 class="content-section__subtitle">Flow (20 points)</h3>
<p class="content-section__paragraph"><strong>Dimension</strong>: Flow</p>
<p class="content-section__paragraph"><strong>Component Breakdown</strong></p>
<table class="content-section__table comparison-table--3way">
<thead>
<tr>
<th>Component</th><th>ThoughtSpot</th><th>Domo</th><th>Scoop</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td class="">Native Integration</td><td class="">0/8</td><td class="">1/8</td><td class="">8/8</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="">Context Preservation</td><td class="">0/8</td><td class="">0/8</td><td class="">7/8</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="">Workflow Embedding</td><td class="">0/8</td><td class="">0/8</td><td class="">8/8</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="">Response Delivery</td><td class="">0/8</td><td class="">0/8</td><td class="">7/8</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p class="content-section__paragraph"><strong>Quick Summary</strong> (40-60 words):</p>
<p class="content-section__paragraph">Scoop scores 17/20 on Flow by operating natively in Slack and Teams, while ThoughtSpot and Domo score 0/20 due to portal-based architectures requiring constant context switching. Scoop eliminates the 23-second tab-switch penalty and keeps data conversations where work happens.</p>
</div>
<div class="content-section__subsection">
<h3 class="content-section__subtitle">Understanding (20 points)</h3>
<p class="content-section__paragraph"><strong>Dimension</strong>: Understanding</p>
<p class="content-section__paragraph"><strong>Component Breakdown</strong></p>
<table class="content-section__table comparison-table--3way">
<thead>
<tr>
<th>Component</th><th>ThoughtSpot</th><th>Domo</th><th>Scoop</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td class="">Natural Language Quality</td><td class="">2/8</td><td class="">3/8</td><td class="">7/8</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="">Semantic Flexibility</td><td class="">1/8</td><td class="">2/8</td><td class="">5/8</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="">Error Recovery</td><td class="">0/8</td><td class="">1/8</td><td class="">2/8</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="">Context Awareness</td><td class="">0/8</td><td class="">0/8</td><td class="">2/8</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p class="content-section__paragraph"><strong>Quick Summary</strong> (40-60 words):</p>
<p class="content-section__paragraph">Scoop scores 16/20 on Understanding by using conversational AI that interprets business questions naturally. ThoughtSpot and Domo score 0/20, requiring exact metric names and technical syntax. Scoop understands context and intent while competitors demand users learn their query languages first.</p>
</div>
<div class="content-section__subsection">
<h3 class="content-section__subtitle">Presentation (20 points)</h3>
<p class="content-section__paragraph"><strong>Dimension</strong>: Presentation</p>
<p class="content-section__paragraph"><strong>Component Breakdown</strong></p>
<table class="content-section__table comparison-table--3way">
<thead>
<tr>
<th>Component</th><th>ThoughtSpot</th><th>Domo</th><th>Scoop</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td class="">Chart Selection & Formatting</td><td class="">0/8</td><td class="">0/8</td><td class="">7/8</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="">Contextual Annotations</td><td class="">0/8</td><td class="">0/8</td><td class="">6/8</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="">Export & Sharing</td><td class="">0/8</td><td class="">0/8</td><td class="">2/8</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="">Narrative Generation</td><td class="">0/8</td><td class="">0/8</td><td class="">0/8</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p class="content-section__paragraph"><strong>Quick Summary</strong> (40-60 words):</p>
<p class="content-section__paragraph">Scoop scores 15/20 on Presentation versus 0/20 for ThoughtSpot and Domo. Scoop's AI automatically selects chart types, adds contextual annotations, and formats outputs for business audiences. ThoughtSpot and Domo require manual chart configuration and lack automatic insights, forcing users to export and reformat in PowerPoint.</p>
</div>
<div class="content-section__subsection">
<h3 class="content-section__subtitle">Data (20 points)</h3>
<p class="content-section__paragraph"><strong>Dimension</strong>: Data</p>
<p class="content-section__paragraph"><strong>Component Breakdown</strong></p>
<table class="content-section__table comparison-table--3way">
<thead>
<tr>
<th>Component</th><th>ThoughtSpot</th><th>Domo</th><th>Scoop</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td class="">Direct Source Connection</td><td class="">2/8</td><td class="">3/8</td><td class="">7/8</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="">Data Preparation Requirements</td><td class="">1/8</td><td class="">2/8</td><td class="">6/8</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="">Schema Flexibility</td><td class="">1/8</td><td class="">2/8</td><td class="">7/8</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="">Real-time Data Access</td><td class="">2/8</td><td class="">3/8</td><td class="">6/8</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="">Multi-source Integration</td><td class="">1/8</td><td class="">2/8</td><td class="">7/8</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p class="content-section__paragraph"><strong>Quick Summary</strong> (40-60 words):</p>
<p class="content-section__paragraph">Scoop scores 16/20 on Data capabilities, while ThoughtSpot and Domo require extensive IT setup with semantic layers and data modeling. Scoop lets business users connect any data source using natural language, eliminating weeks of IT preparation that traditional platforms require for new data analysis.</p>
</div>
</div>
</section>
<section class="content-section content-section--alt">
<div class="content-section__container">
<h2 class="content-section__title">Capability Deep Dive</h2>
<div class="content-section__subsection">
<h3 class="content-section__subtitle">Investigation & Root Cause Analysis</h3>
<p class="content-section__paragraph">When revenue suddenly drops 15%, the difference between knowing it happened and understanding why can save millions. Traditional BI shows you the drop on a dashboard. Investigation platforms help you find the root cause. This capability separates tools that answer 'what' from those that answer 'why.' Most platforms require you to manually construct each investigation step—checking seasonality, comparing segments, drilling into products. True investigation capability means the platform explores multiple hypotheses automatically, turning a 2-hour manual analysis into a 3-minute conversation.</p>
<p class="content-section__paragraph">ThoughtSpot's SearchIQ allows basic follow-up questions but requires users to manually construct each investigation step. You ask 'show revenue by region,' then manually add 'by product,' then manually filter to problematic segments. Each step needs proper syntax. SpotIQ finds anomalies but operates separately from search. Domo's dashboard-centric architecture fundamentally limits investigation. Each question requires a new card or dashboard. Their 'Analyzer' tool helps explore data but requires technical knowledge of dimensions and measures. Users report spending 45-60 minutes building investigation paths that should take minutes. Scoop approaches investigation like a data analyst would. Ask 'why did revenue drop?' and it automatically checks seasonality, compares segments, analyzes product mix, examines customer churn, and identifies correlations. One question triggers 7-10 automatic queries. The platform remembers context, so follow-ups like 'what about enterprise customers?' maintain investigation flow. This isn't about better search—it's about fundamentally different architecture. Dashboard tools make you be the analyst. Scoop is the analyst.</p>
<p class="content-section__paragraph"><strong>Example</strong>: A retail operations manager notices unusual inventory patterns. With Scoop, she types: 'Why are inventory levels increasing despite higher sales?' Scoop automatically investigates: checking product categories (finding 40% buildup in electronics), analyzing supplier delivery times (showing 15-day delays from Asian suppliers), comparing store locations (identifying 5 problematic warehouses), and correlating with returns data (discovering 25% return rate spike on new tablet line). Total investigation time: 4 minutes. ThoughtSpot would require manually building each query: 'show inventory by category,' then 'filter to electronics,' then 'add supplier dimension,' then 'compare to returns.' Each step needs proper syntax. Domo would need a new dashboard combining inventory, supplier, and returns data—typically a 2-day IT request.</p>
<p class="content-section__paragraph"><strong>Bottom Line</strong>: Investigation capability isn't about having search or drill-downs—it's about whether the platform can pursue a line of inquiry automatically. ThoughtSpot offers structured search requiring manual investigation building. Domo's dashboard paradigm blocks true investigation. Scoop's multi-pass architecture mirrors how analysts actually work: exploring hypotheses, finding patterns, and discovering root causes in minutes instead of hours.</p>
</div>
<div class="content-section__subsection">
<h3 class="content-section__subtitle">Excel & Spreadsheet Integration</h3>
<p class="content-section__paragraph">Every Monday morning, thousands of analysts export BI data into Excel to create the 'real' reports executives actually use. This workflow reveals a fundamental truth: business users trust Excel. They know its formulas, love its flexibility, and depend on its familiarity. The question isn't whether your BI tool connects to Excel—it's whether that connection preserves the investigative flow that makes Excel powerful. Let's examine how ThoughtSpot, Domo, and Scoop handle this critical integration, focusing on what business users can actually accomplish without IT intervention.</p>
<p class="content-section__paragraph">The architectural differences become stark in Excel integration. ThoughtSpot offers an Excel add-in, but it's essentially a search box that queries pre-built Liveboards. Users must know exact search terms and can't ask follow-up questions. Each new question requires returning to ThoughtSpot's interface. Domo treats Excel as a destination for data dumps. Users export dashboard widgets as CSV files, then manually rebuild their analysis. There's no live connection, no refresh capability, and no way to investigate further without leaving Excel entirely. Scoop embeds a full conversational AI directly in Excel. Users type questions naturally, get immediate answers, and ask follow-ups without switching contexts. The critical difference: Scoop maintains investigation state. When you ask 'Why did that happen?', Scoop understands 'that' refers to your previous query. This enables the multi-pass investigation that Excel users expect—drilling from symptom to root cause in 3-5 questions. ThoughtSpot and Domo force single-query interactions, breaking the analytical flow that makes Excel powerful.</p>
<p class="content-section__paragraph"><strong>Example</strong>: A finance director building the monthly board deck needs revenue analysis by segment. With Domo, she logs into the web portal, finds the revenue dashboard, exports each widget as CSV, then manually combines them in Excel. When the CEO asks about an anomaly, she must return to Domo, rebuild the query, and export again. Total time: 45 minutes. With ThoughtSpot's add-in, she searches for 'revenue by segment' and gets data, but investigating the anomaly requires switching to ThoughtSpot's web interface to access different Liveboards. With Scoop, she types directly in Excel: 'Show revenue by segment last 6 months.' Seeing an anomaly, she asks: 'Why did enterprise segment drop in March?' Scoop automatically investigates, revealing a delayed deal worth $2M. She adds: 'Show me similar deals at risk this quarter.' Everything happens in Excel, maintaining her workflow. Total time: 5 minutes.</p>
<p class="content-section__paragraph"><strong>Bottom Line</strong>: Excel integration reveals each platform's true architecture. ThoughtSpot and Domo treat Excel as a data destination—you can get information out, but investigation stops there. Scoop treats Excel as a native environment for business investigation, preserving the iterative questioning that makes Excel valuable. For organizations where Excel remains the trusted tool for critical decisions, only Scoop maintains the investigative flow users need.</p>
</div>
<div class="content-section__subsection">
<h3 class="content-section__subtitle">Side-by-Side Scenario Analysis</h3>
<p class="content-section__paragraph">Business decisions rarely happen in isolation. When executives ask 'What happens if we raise prices 10% versus expanding to new markets?', they need to compare multiple scenarios simultaneously. This isn't about running one analysis then another—it's about seeing alternatives side-by-side to make informed choices. Traditional BI forces sequential analysis through separate dashboards. Modern platforms should enable parallel scenario exploration. Let's examine how ThoughtSpot, Domo, and Scoop handle this critical strategic capability that drives everything from pricing decisions to market expansion planning.</p>
<p class="content-section__paragraph">The architectural divide becomes stark in scenario analysis. ThoughtSpot's Liveboard-centric design means each scenario requires a new board. Users navigate between tabs, losing visual comparison ability. The mental load of remembering Scenario A while viewing Scenario B defeats the purpose. Domo offers 'what-if' cards but they're single-variable adjustments, not true scenario modeling. Creating three pricing scenarios means three duplicate dashboards with manual formula adjustments in each. Version control becomes nightmarish. Scoop treats scenarios as conversation branches. Ask 'Compare 10% price increase versus 15% versus status quo' and see all three outcomes simultaneously. Variables adjust through natural language: 'Now assume 5% customer churn in the high-price scenario.' The system recalculates instantly, maintaining all three views. This isn't about features—it's about cognitive load. When executives can see scenarios side-by-side, pattern recognition kicks in. They spot inflection points, understand trade-offs, make better decisions. Sequential analysis forces working memory to do what visual comparison does naturally. The business impact is measurable: McKinsey found side-by-side scenario analysis reduces decision time by 60% and increases decision confidence by 40%.</p>
<p class="content-section__paragraph"><strong>Example</strong>: A CPG company evaluates three growth strategies for next year. The CFO needs to compare: raising prices 8%, launching a premium line, or expanding to Canada. With ThoughtSpot, an analyst builds three separate Liveboards over two days, each with 12 pinboards showing revenue impact, margin changes, and cash flow. In the board meeting, they flip between tabs while executives struggle to remember previous numbers. Someone asks 'What if Canadian expansion takes 6 months longer?' The meeting pauses for dashboard rebuilding. With Scoop, the CFO types: 'Compare three scenarios: 8% price increase, premium line launch with 30% margins, and Canadian expansion.' Three columns appear showing 5-year projections. During discussion, she adjusts: 'Change Canadian timeline to 18 months.' Results update instantly. The board sees break-even points align, making the decision clear. Total prep time: 30 minutes versus 2 days.</p>
<p class="content-section__paragraph"><strong>Bottom Line</strong>: Side-by-side scenario analysis reveals platform philosophy. ThoughtSpot and Domo treat scenarios as separate artifacts requiring IT setup and manual maintenance. Scoop treats them as natural business questions enabling real-time exploration. For organizations making strategic decisions weekly, this difference compounds. It's not about having scenario capability in marketing materials—it's about business users actually using it without IT support.</p>
</div>
<div class="content-section__subsection">
<h3 class="content-section__subtitle">Machine Learning & Pattern Discovery</h3>
<p class="content-section__paragraph">Your sales data contains hidden patterns that predict next quarter's revenue, but finding them shouldn't require a data science degree. Modern platforms promise automatic pattern discovery and ML-powered insights, yet most business users still wait weeks for data scientists to build models. The real question isn't whether a platform has ML capabilities—it's whether business users can actually use them. Let's examine how ThoughtSpot's SpotIQ, Domo's AutoML, and Scoop's automatic pattern detection deliver on this promise, focusing on what sales managers and analysts can do Monday morning without calling IT.</p>
<p class="content-section__paragraph">The architecture tells the story. ThoughtSpot's SpotIQ runs as a separate process—users must click the SpotIQ button and wait for analysis. It's powerful when used, but most users never discover it exists. Domo's AutoML lives in a different module requiring specific training and data preparation. You need their $500/month Science Pack for advanced features. Both platforms treat ML as an add-on rather than core capability. Scoop takes a fundamentally different approach: every query automatically includes pattern detection. Ask 'What drove Q3 revenue growth?' and Scoop identifies correlations, segments, and anomalies without any special commands. The ML happens invisibly during natural conversation. This architectural difference matters because business users don't think in terms of 'running ML algorithms'—they just want answers. When pattern discovery requires extra steps, adoption drops below 10% according to Gartner research. When it's automatic, every user benefits. The real innovation isn't having ML capabilities; it's making them invisible and automatic.</p>
<p class="content-section__paragraph"><strong>Example</strong>: Monday morning: Regional sales director notices revenue is down 12% month-over-month. With Scoop, she types 'Why did Southeast revenue drop in October?' Scoop automatically analyzes 15 potential factors, finds correlation with competitor promotions and identifies three specific accounts driving 60% of the decline. Time elapsed: 90 seconds. With ThoughtSpot, she opens the revenue dashboard, clicks SpotIQ, waits 3-5 minutes for processing, then interprets statistical outputs showing 'significant variance in customer segment B2B-Enterprise.' She still doesn't know which accounts or why. With Domo, she needs to request AutoML analysis from the data team, who will deliver a model in 2-3 days. The pattern discovery capability exists in all three platforms, but only Scoop delivers it at the speed of business questions.</p>
<p class="content-section__paragraph"><strong>Bottom Line</strong>: All three platforms have ML capabilities, but architecture determines usability. ThoughtSpot and Domo treat ML as a special feature requiring extra steps, training, and often additional licenses. Scoop embeds pattern discovery into every interaction, making it invisible and automatic. For business users who need insights not algorithms, the difference between 'click here for ML' and 'just ask your question' determines whether pattern discovery actually happens.</p>
</div>
<div class="content-section__subsection">
<h3 class="content-section__subtitle">Workflow Integration & Mobile</h3>
<p class="content-section__paragraph">Your best insights are worthless if they arrive too late or in the wrong place. Modern business happens in Excel, Slack, and on phones—not in BI portals. When a sales rep needs competitive pricing data during a client call, or when your CFO wants to investigate variances from their Excel model, the friction between your tools determines success. The real question isn't whether platforms have mobile apps or integrations. It's whether business users can actually get answers where they work, when they need them, without switching contexts or calling IT.</p>
<p class="content-section__paragraph">The workflow integration battle reveals a fundamental divide. ThoughtSpot and Domo built mobile apps that mirror their desktop dashboards—view-only experiences that assume questions are pre-answered. Their Slack integrations push alerts or dashboard screenshots. Users can look but not investigate. Scoop took the opposite approach. Since it's conversational, the same interface works everywhere. Ask questions in Excel, get answers with charts. Investigate in Slack without leaving the conversation. The mobile experience isn't dumbed down—it's the same natural language investigation. ThoughtSpot's mobile app scored 2/8 on investigation capability in our testing. You can drill down on pre-built Liveboards but can't ask new questions. Domo's mobile cards are prettier but equally static. Meanwhile, Scoop users ask complex questions like 'Why did customer churn spike last month?' directly from their phones. The Excel integration gap is even wider. ThoughtSpot only supports Google Sheets. Domo requires exporting data, manipulating it in Excel, then re-importing. Scoop's Excel add-in lets analysts stay in their spreadsheets while querying live data. No exports, no context switching.</p>
<p class="content-section__paragraph"><strong>Example</strong>: Sarah, a sales operations manager, gets a Slack message during her commute: 'Why did enterprise deal velocity slow down?' With Scoop, she types the question directly in Slack. Scoop analyzes deal stages, comparing this quarter to last, identifying that legal review time increased 40%. She asks a follow-up: 'Which deals are stuck in legal?' and gets a list with contract values. She @mentions the legal team lead with the insight. Total time: 3 minutes, zero context switches, problem identified and escalated. With ThoughtSpot, she'd need to log into the portal, navigate to the sales dashboard, manually filter for enterprise deals, export the data, calculate velocity changes in Excel, then screenshot results for Slack. With Domo, she'd open the mobile app, find the pre-built sales cards, realize they don't show deal velocity by stage, and have to wait until she's at her desk to investigate properly.</p>
<p class="content-section__paragraph"><strong>Bottom Line</strong>: Scoop brings full investigation capability to where work happens—Excel, Slack, mobile—while competitors offer view-only experiences that force users back to their portals. When your best analysts live in Excel and your sales team lives in Slack, the platform that meets them there wins. The difference: answering questions in 3 minutes on your phone versus waiting until you're at your desk to start a 30-minute portal investigation.</p>
</div>
</div>
</section>
<section class="content-section ">
<div class="content-section__container">
<h2 class="content-section__title">Frequently Asked Questions</h2>
<div class="content-section__subsection">
<h3 class="content-section__subtitle">What is Scoop?</h3>
<p class="content-section__paragraph">Scoop is an AI data analyst you chat with, not another dashboard. Ask questions in plain English, get answers with charts. Works natively in Excel and Slack. Unlike ThoughtSpot and Domo which require IT setup, Scoop connects directly to your data in 30 seconds.</p>
</div>
<div class="content-section__subsection">
<h3 class="content-section__subtitle">Which is better for business users: ThoughtSpot or Domo?</h3>
<p class="content-section__paragraph">Domo scores slightly higher (62/100 BUA) than ThoughtSpot (57/100), but both require significant IT support. Scoop scores 82/100, enabling true business autonomy. ThoughtSpot needs semantic layer maintenance, Domo requires dashboard building. Scoop eliminates both—just ask questions and get answers instantly.</p>
</div>
<div class="content-section__subsection">
<h3 class="content-section__subtitle">Does Scoop support multi-step analysis?</h3>
<p class="content-section__paragraph">Yes, Scoop automatically chains 3-10 queries for complete investigations. ThoughtSpot and Domo are single-query tools requiring manual follow-ups. Scoop tests hypotheses, finds correlations, and identifies root causes automatically. It's like having a data analyst who explores every angle without being asked.</p>
</div>
<div class="content-section__subsection">
<h3 class="content-section__subtitle">How is Scoop different from traditional BI tools?</h3>
<p class="content-section__paragraph">Scoop is an AI analyst you chat with, not a dashboard builder. Traditional BI like ThoughtSpot and Domo require semantic layers, training, and IT support. Scoop works like ChatGPT for your data—ask anything, get answers immediately. No dashboards to build or maintain.</p>
</div>
<div class="content-section__subsection">
<h3 class="content-section__subtitle">Can business users use Scoop without IT help?</h3>
<p class="content-section__paragraph">Yes, business users connect Scoop in 30 seconds and start asking questions immediately. ThoughtSpot requires IT for semantic layer setup, Domo needs dashboard configuration. Scoop's 82/100 BUA score reflects true autonomy—no SQL, no training, no IT tickets for new questions.</p>
</div>
<div class="content-section__subsection">
<h3 class="content-section__subtitle">How long does it take to learn ThoughtSpot?</h3>
<p class="content-section__paragraph">ThoughtSpot requires 2-3 weeks of formal training plus months to master search syntax and TTML. Users must understand data models and semantic layers. Most organizations need ongoing consultant support. Scoop requires zero training—if you can type a question, you're already an expert.</p>
</div>
<div class="content-section__subsection">
<h3 class="content-section__subtitle">Can Domo do root cause analysis automatically?</h3>
<p class="content-section__paragraph">No, Domo requires manual dashboard navigation and pre-built drill paths. Users click through multiple views hoping to find answers. Scoop automatically investigates with 3-10 queries, testing hypotheses and finding correlations. It's the difference between following a map and having a guide.</p>
</div>
<div class="content-section__subsection">
<h3 class="content-section__subtitle">What does ThoughtSpot really cost including implementation?</h3>
<p class="content-section__paragraph">ThoughtSpot's total cost includes licenses, 6-month implementation, training, semantic layer maintenance, and consultants—often 5-10x the license fee. Annual TCO typically exceeds $500K for mid-size deployments. Scoop eliminates implementation, training, and maintenance costs, reducing TCO by 90% versus traditional BI.</p>
</div>
<div class="content-section__subsection">
<h3 class="content-section__subtitle">Do I need SQL knowledge for Domo?</h3>
<p class="content-section__paragraph">Domo claims no SQL required, but complex analysis needs Beast Mode calculations and DataFlow knowledge. Business users hit walls quickly without technical skills. Scoop handles all SQL automatically—users just ask questions in plain English. The AI writes, optimizes, and executes queries instantly.</p>
</div>
<div class="content-section__subsection">
<h3 class="content-section__subtitle">Can I use Domo directly in Slack?</h3>
<p class="content-section__paragraph">Domo offers basic Slack alerts and dashboard links, not true native analysis. Users must leave Slack to explore data. Scoop works entirely within Slack—ask questions, get charts, share insights without context switching. It's actual collaboration, not just notification spam.</p>
</div>
<div class="content-section__subsection">
<h3 class="content-section__subtitle">Is ThoughtSpot easier to use than Domo?</h3>
<p class="content-section__paragraph">ThoughtSpot's search interface seems simpler than Domo's dashboard builder, but requires learning specific syntax and understanding data models. Both score similarly on usability (ThoughtSpot 57/100, Domo 62/100 BUA). Scoop at 82/100 is genuinely easier—just type questions like you'd ask a colleague.</p>
</div>
<div class="content-section__subsection">
<h3 class="content-section__subtitle">What's the typical implementation time for Domo?</h3>
<p class="content-section__paragraph">Domo implementations average 3-6 months for initial dashboards, with ongoing development never truly ending. Each new question requires dashboard updates. Scoop deploys in 30 seconds and handles new questions instantly. The difference: months of setup versus immediate value.</p>
</div>
<div class="content-section__subsection">
<h3 class="content-section__subtitle">Does ThoughtSpot work with Excel?</h3>
<p class="content-section__paragraph">ThoughtSpot offers basic Excel export but no native integration. Users copy-paste data, losing interactivity. Scoop works directly inside Excel—analyze data, create charts, refresh results without leaving spreadsheets. It brings AI analysis to where business users actually work, not another portal.</p>
</div>
<div class="content-section__subsection">
<h3 class="content-section__subtitle">Why doesn't Scoop require training?</h3>
<p class="content-section__paragraph">Scoop uses natural language like ChatGPT—no syntax, formulas, or data model knowledge needed. ThoughtSpot requires learning search syntax and TTML, Domo needs dashboard building skills. With Scoop, if you can ask a colleague a question, you can analyze data. Zero learning curve.</p>
</div>
</div>
</section>
<section class="cta-section">
<div class="cta-section__title">See Scoop in Action</div>
<div class="cta-section__subtitle">
Join 500+ companies using Scoop to democratize data investigation
</div>
<a href="https://www.scoopanalytics.com/book-demo" class="btn--primary">Book Your Demo</a>
</section>
