Similar but some differences. ZAGG for its part has done a much better job with branding and has scaled up far more. Its important because in the end the product relies alot on faith - consumers have to have faith the product does something for them. All of my friends who have bought cheap Chinese screen protectors off eBay for $5 have had issues with them not performing when they needed it, either by falling off or not resisting damage (Note: I am aware ZAGG Shields are produced on the cheap in China, I use the term for lack of a way of referencing the less expensive generics). ZAGG generally does work and its a big enough brand with local accessibility that consumers buy it over the cheaper protectors available online. As such, I don't think its terribly vulnerable to a lightly branded product like Wrapsol even if Wrapsol puts out a comparable product since its already been fending off cheaper/weaker/less well known competitors for years.
In the end, since it would cost me $500 to replace my iPhone if it became damaged, the added cost of buying a branded protector from ZAGG over a Wrapsol or other generic product is simply trivial. Its one reason I like ZAGG so much - cause lets be honest, the product can be replicated pretty easily. The branding, marketing, and distribution is what is separating it from the cheap competition. I am curious to see if ZAGG can maintain the $30 price point on the newer Invis Shields, I think they can. I paid it myself recently but I also spent alot of time watching the kiosk to see what traffic looked like and how consumers reacted when the Zagg guy explained the costs. No one balked at paying it, people just said do it and had the kiosk apply the Zagg Shield.
The"Fool" waffles on its recommendations..First down then up and now down..said Peterson had sold all his shares but I note he still owns a bunch..Unfortunately we still have people using the brand name "Fool" or foolish to post their opinions..