Interspecific interactions, including predator–prey, intraguild predation (IGP) and competition, may drive distribution and habitat use of predator communities. However, elucidating the relative importance of these interactions in shaping predator distributions is challenging, especially in marine communities comprising highly mobile species. We used individual‐based models (IBMs) to predict the habitat distributions of apex predators, intraguild (IG) prey and prey. We then used passive acoustic telemetry to test these predictions in a subtropical marine predator community consisting of eight elasmobranch (i.e. shark and ray) species in Bimini, The Bahamas. IBMs predicted that prey and IG prey will preferentially select habitats based on safety over resources (food), with stronger selection for safe habitat by smaller prey. Elasmobranch space‐use patterns matched these predictions. Species with predator–prey and asymmetrical IGP (between apex and small mesopredators) interactions showed the clearest spatial separation, followed by asymmetrical IGP among apex and large mesopredators. Competitors showed greater spatial overlap although with finer‐scale differences in microhabitat use. Our study suggests space‐use patterns in elasmobranchs are at least partially driven by interspecific interactions, with stronger spatial separation occurring where interactions include predator–prey relationships or IGP. This paper uses individual‐based models and acoustic telemetry to investigate predator interactions in marine communities, offering insights into spatial distribution patterns of large‐bodied predators like sharks and rays. It addresses a significant knowledge gap, revealing how competition, predation and intraguild predation influence habitat preferences, crucial for marine ecology and conservation.