← Pricing & commercial

Pricing & commercial

Comparing builder quotes fairly.

No two builder quotes include exactly the same scope, quality, or risk provision. Comparing them on price alone is misleading. The key is to normalise what each quote includes, excludes, and assumes.

Authored by Alexandr Vreme & Maksym Vasylkov
Published July 2026 — Next review July 2027

The problem with price-only comparison

A client who collects three quotes and picks the cheapest may be comparing very different propositions. One builder might include full design development, another excludes decoration, a third specifies lower-grade materials. The £20,000 gap between the lowest and highest quote often reflects different scope assumptions rather than different pricing efficiency. Comparing quotes fairly means unpicking those differences.

What to compare

• Scope of works — Use a standardised list of items and check each quote against it. What is included in one may be an omission in another.
• Material specifications — A lower price may use budget products. Compare like-for-like on performance and longevity.
• Exclusions — Every quote has them. List them side by side to see what would cost extra.
• Provisional sums — What allowances does each builder assume for unpriced elements such as drainage or ground conditions?
• Preliminaries — Is site supervision, welfare, and security separately stated or embedded in rates?

Quality vs price

A higher price often reflects better materials, more experienced supervision, longer warranty cover, and a more thorough approach to risk. A £195,000 quote from a builder with a robust quality management system and a direct labour force may ultimately cost less than a £162,000 quote from a builder who subcontracts the entire project with minimal oversight. Consider the total cost of ownership, not just the starting price.

Normalisation method

Create a comparison table with a row for each significant scope item, exclusion, or provisional sum. Mark which quotes include it and add the adjustment needed to bring them to a common baseline. This reveals the true cost of each option.

Miniature example

Three quotes for a two-storey rear extension:

• Quote A £185,000 — Full specification including design and planning, preliminaries stated separately, project manager on site 3 days per week, 12-month warranty on workmanship.
• Quote B £162,000 — Lower-spec uPVC windows (not aluminium), no decoration allowance, no design contingency, preliminaries absorbed into rates and not itemised.
• Quote C £198,000 — All-in price including drainage and external works, structural engineer fees, and a 5% design development allowance.

After normalising for scope: Quote B effectively costs approximately £182,000 when windows, decoration, and a design contingency are added. Quote A at £185,000 is then the better value for the specification offered.

Questions to ask

• Is the cheapest quote missing items that the others include?
• What provisional sums does each quote assume, and are they realistic?
• What material specifications and quality standards are assumed?
• Would adding the excluded items to the lowest quote bring it closer to the middle or highest?