A supplier quotation is comparable only when it answers the same RFQ. First confirm specification, quantity, unit, currency, delivery location, and required date. Then compare total landed cost and the non-price factors that can change the real outcome: lead time, payment terms, quality evidence, warranty, capacity, and delivery risk.
Use pass/fail requirements before weighted scoring. A low quote that misses a mandatory specification should not win because its price score compensates for non-compliance.
| Criterion | How to evaluate it |
|---|---|
| RFQ compliance | Pass/fail against every mandatory requirement |
| Total landed cost | Price plus freight, taxes, duties, and fees |
| Lead time | Promised delivery against the required date |
| Commercial terms | Payment, validity, warranty, and returns |
| Supplier risk | Quality, capacity, delivery record, and compliance |
1. Check mandatory RFQ compliance first
Build a pass/fail list from the RFQ: specification, quantity, delivery location, required date, certification, warranty, or any other non-negotiable term. Resolve omissions before scoring. A supplier that fails a mandatory requirement should not win because a weighted price score hides the exception.
2. Normalize price into total landed cost
Align unit, pack size, quantity break, currency, and tax basis. Then add freight, duties, insurance, tooling, setup charges, and other known costs. Keep assumptions visible. If two quotations cannot be normalized without guessing, ask for clarification rather than manufacturing precision.
3. Compare delivery and commercial terms
- Lead time and promised delivery date against the actual requirement.
- Available quantity, minimum order quantity, and partial-delivery terms.
- Payment terms, deposit requirements, quotation validity, and currency exposure.
- Warranty, returns, service, quality evidence, and capacity constraints.
- Past delivery, quality, and communication performance where reliable data exists.
4. Use a scorecard without hiding judgment
Choose weights before opening the offers. A straightforward example might assign 40% to landed cost, 20% to delivery, 15% to specification and quality evidence, 15% to supplier performance, and 10% to commercial terms. Change the weights to fit the purchase risk; do not reuse them mechanically across every category.
Show the raw answer beside the score. The score helps organize a decision, but approvers should still be able to see that one supplier is cheaper because it excluded freight or proposed a later delivery.
5. Document clarification, negotiation, and award
Retain revised prices, changed terms, and the reason for the final selection. If the award does not go to the lowest comparable quote, state the delivery, risk, quality, capacity, or total-cost reason. That record strengthens the next negotiation and keeps the decision defensible.
How AuraVMS supports the comparison
AuraVMS collects supplier responses against the same RFQ items and displays prices with L1, L2, L3, and subsequent ranks. Buyers can review available quantity, lead time, remarks, and supporting files before selecting a quotation. The price rank is a signal, not an automatic award rule.
For the commercial comparison view, see supplier quote comparison software
Compare the next supplier responses side by side
AuraVMS keeps each response tied to the same RFQ and ranks prices without hiding the commercial fields needed for the final decision. Compare one RFQ free