How to Analyse Competitors' Winning Bids and Improve Your Next Tender

Intro

Anyone who regularly enters tenders sooner or later starts asking the same question, which is why do some companies win more often than others?

The answer to this question is worth looking for in the results of settled proceedings. They leave behind much more than just information about the winner. They let participants understand how the market behaves and what strategies the competition uses. However, observations show that many companies treat tender results solely as a summary of a closed procedure.

Conducting a regular tender competitor analysis and evaluating winning bids allows for a better understanding of the competition and helps spot repeatable patterns. But most of all, it enables more informed decision-making in future tenders.

This article highlights what information to pay attention to in order to refine the approach and increase the chances of success in upcoming proceedings.

Tender competitor analysis: why just checking the price is not enough

After a tender concludes, some contractors check the tender results, look at the winner's price, and try to answer why they lost based only on that. It is a natural reflex, but it can hardly be called an analysis. The amount alone is just one piece of the puzzle.

True, effective analysis happens when the tender results are paired with the question: "What can be done differently next time?"

Particularly with recurring tenders, this information allows for a gradual calibration of the strategy – not just regarding pricing, but the entire proposal.

There is the moment of opening bids, followed by the announcement of the results, but it is essential to remember to return to them at the right time and analyse them. Naturally, finding the time for this can be hard, which is why automated tracking of results brings huge value.

It relieves the team from the obligation of monitoring every single proceeding and ensures that analysis becomes a repeatable part of the process (rather than a task performed only when someone happens to remember it).

At this stage, it is worth emphasising that a tender competitor analysis should not end with the question of whether the price could have been lowered. It is equally important to understand what the competition did and what the real margin was for modifying one's own offer.

This matters because losing is very rarely due to price alone; everything depends on the evaluation criteria specified by the contracting authority.

Suppose the price accounts for 60% of the points, and the remaining 40% covers the warranty period or delivery date. It is entirely possible to submit the cheapest offer and still lose to a contractor who was slightly more expensive but responded better to the other requirements.

Also, experience shows that even companies that have won a tender do not always have a clear answer as to why their bid turned out to be the best. Sometimes the deciding factor lies in the technical parameters of the product, sometimes in the implementation conditions, and sometimes in the sum of many small elements that are not visible in a simple price comparison.

And that is precisely why analysing the winning bids of the competition is about gathering as much information as possible to enable better decision-making in future proceedings, and not as many think about searching for a single answer.

Where to find tender results and what the records of the proceedings reveal

Most companies competing in public procurement are aware that tender results are public. However, my observations suggest that very few realize how deep this transparency goes and what powerful insights about the competition can be extracted from it. It is not just about finding out who won and for how much. The real goldmine of information is the record of the proceedings, which reveals the cards of all market participants step by step.

The knowledge of how to analyse competitor bids should be based on an ironclad chronology. Starting from the contract award notice, moving through the inspection of the record of proceedings, and leading up to reconstructing the procurement history of a given contracting authority. When you examine winning proposals, you can extract the full scoring for each criterion, detailed justifications for rejections, and a complete list of bidders.

Many contractors treat this document superficially, checking only the final amount, which is a mistake. The most underrated element of the record (and simultaneously the place where most strategic information is hidden) is the technical attachments, including detailed product specifications.

Technical parameters can hide traps

Particularly in technical or medical industries, technical specifications and the parameters of specific products are very important. Experience shows that it is within the technical parameters of a product that traps are most frequently hidden. If the documentation seems overly steered or tailored, it is the perfect moment to react, for example, by filing an appeal with an independent review body to challenge such provisions. There should be one in each country.

An important, even critical point in specification benchmarking is checking whether the contracting authority allows for equivalent solutions. Such a formula is a clear signal that a product does not have to perfectly match the original guidelines. For instance, if the documentation specifies a requirement for a front windshield divided in half, and a solid, single-piece windshield is permitted as an equivalent solution, this opens up space for action as early as the stage of submitting questions to the contracting authority.

The phase of submitting and publishing questions regarding the documentation is one of the most critical stages of market research, even though it is not formally part of the final bid yet. The answers to these questions are fully public and require meticulous analysis, as this is where the competition involuntarily betrays its plans. If the wording of a question reveals concern over a specific active substance or a unique technical parameter characteristic of only one manufacturer, it is possible to predict with high probability who exactly will enter the proceedings.

The entire process is concluded by the official opening of bids. This milestone allows for verification of whether new players have emerged on the market, or if existing rivals have decided to expand their portfolios and enter a completely new segment of procurement. Only such a comprehensive view makes it possible to effectively evaluate tender results, conduct successful bid benchmarking, understand why competitors win tenders, and build a competitive advantage for the future.

Moving from a single result to a full rival profile

A single tender result rarely tells you sufficient information about the competition. It is only when you look at a series of proceedings that clear patterns begin to emerge. You start to see who regularly bids with specific contracting authorities, who only appears in selected regions, and who consistently fights for the exact same type of contract.

The good news is that the public procurement market is not nearly as unpredictable as it might seem. While new contractors appear from time to time, most companies in any given sector have been bidding for years. After a handful of proceedings, you know exactly who your real competition is.

To do an effective tender competitor analysis, you need to track:

• The specific proceedings a company targets
• How often they win with particular contracting authorities
• Whether they submit bids independently or form consortiums
• What their pricing strategy looks like.

Some companies regularly price their offers remarkably close to the buyer’s budget, while others almost always go for aggressive price cuts. It takes time and data to see that this is a deliberate, repeatable strategy.

Experienced bidders know their rivals inside out. It is incredibly common to hear teams ask, "Is that company bidding for this one too?" or call out a competitor by name simply because they have crossed paths in the same proceedings for years. Market awareness is often much higher than people think.

A great bid benchmarking process is all about backing up those industry instincts with hard data. If you spend a few months observing the same contractor regularly winning with a specific buyer, maintaining a stable pricing bracket, and appearing only in distinct types of proceedings, you truly begin to understand their strategy. And that is far more valuable than simply knowing they happened to be 10% cheaper in one isolated tender.

Winning bids and non-price criteria: what scoring reveals about your rival’s strategy

The public procurement market rarely throws up sudden plot twists. It is not the kind of fast-moving environment where a completely unknown company appears out of nowhere every week. The businesses competing for tenders have usually been established in their respective industries for years, and their presence surprises no one.

After reviewing bid openings time and time again, you get a very clear picture of exactly who is stepping into the arena. Because market awareness runs so high, you rarely find yourself up against total strangers. Rivals know each other inside out and can accurately predict who they will be battling for any given contract.

Finding the space where price no longer decides the winner

Non-price criteria become the real battleground in industries where price differences between the main players are razor-thin. This is where contracts are won or lost. A rigorous procurement award analysis lets you decode your rivals' operational capabilities and weak spots. The points awarded in categories like delivery timelines, warranty periods, or team experience offer a direct window into the other side's business strategy.

Knowing how to analyse competitor bids against these specific benchmarks helps you spot exactly where a rival is hedging their bets and where they are prepared to stretch their logistics to the absolute limit.

For instance, if a competitor lands top marks for an incredibly tight delivery window while keeping their pricing low, it signals an aggressive tactic designed to sweep the market. On the flip side, lower scores on non-price criteria paired with a rock-bottom margin might point to staffing shortages or equipment constraints. This is your cue to beat them – not by entering a race to the bottom on price, but by showcasing superior documented experience or a more reliable delivery setup.

Understanding why competitors win tenders through pure determination

Experienced businesses rarely walk away from a contract opportunity just because the initial terms look less than ideal. In my experience, abandoning a tender due to formal or operational hurdles is typically something you see with smaller or less experienced players.

If a contract fits within a company’s general wheelhouse, they will pull out all the stops – including bringing on subcontractors – just to get their offer submitted. Often, the only genuine barrier that will stop a heavyweight from bidding is an excessively high bid bond that stretches their current cash flow too thin.

In almost every other scenario, strong players will take the gamble, calculate the risks, and look for loopholes in the non-price scoring. By breaking down past winning bids, you can track these exact patterns and build a watertight counter-strategy for your next procurement round.

Tender competitor analysis as the basis for go/no-go decisions

Conducting a tender competitor analysis lets you make smarter decisions long before you even submit an offer. It helps you accurately assess your chances, fine-tune your strategy, and consciously choose exactly how to approach a specific proceeding.

In practice, it is rare to see companies back out of a race simply because they are worried about a strong rival. If a tender aligns with their core business, they will almost always find a way to get a foot in the door. They might bring on a subcontractor, form a consortium, or just take a shot anyway, knowing that no two proceedings are ever identical.

Consciously making those tactical pivots requires a deep dive into historical award data.

Consider a couple of everyday scenarios.

In the first scenario, you notice that the exact same contractor has been clean-sweeping contracts with a specific buyer for months. They are consistently aggressive on price, they know the buyer's quirks inside out, and their win rate is sky-high. Having this insight does not mean you have to walk away; instead, it signals that it is time to change your approach. It might push you to lean heavily into non-price quality scores, partner up with another supplier, or at the very least, set a realistic benchmark for your expectations.

The second scenario plays out completely differently. You analyse competitor bids and discover that the rival you always assumed was your biggest threat rarely bids for a certain group of public buyers – or when they do, their success rate is dismal. That is a clear green light. It tells you exactly where to focus your energy and aggressively chase contracts with minimal interference.

You cannot build this level of market intelligence by looking at a single past contract. It only happens when you consistently track the market, monitor award results, and spot competitor patterns over time. That is why this shouldn't be a post-mortem exercise you only do after a painful loss – it needs to be a core part of your ongoing sales workflow.

This is where the problem of scale kicks in. You can easily dissect a handful of proceedings by hand. But keeping tabs on a dozen competitors, dozens of buyers, and hundreds of results manually is near impossible. Tools like Minerva turn this from an occasional research chore into an automated, systematic stream of intelligence, helping you instantly decide where it is worth bidding and how to structure your proposal.

Deciding on your next move

Ultimately, studying the competition is about learning how to tip the scales in your favour. However, if you are a step behind that and still figuring out whether a contract is worth your time in the first place, check out our guide: Go/No-Go decisions in procurement: 3 questions that will protect your budget.

Procurement award analysis – the key to understanding market realities

The real insights are hidden in the details – procurement minutes, the phrasing of clarification questions, and how non-price criteria are scored. When you know what to look for, these pieces of data let you reverse-engineer your rivals' operational capabilities and future plans with incredible precision.

Knowing how to analyse competitor bids completely changes the way you approach your own submissions. Instead of relying on gut feel or getting dragged into a risky price war, you back your strategy with solid arguments. By examining exactly what makes rival bids successful, you can target the right contracts, bypass hidden traps in specifications, and ultimately win more lucrative public work.