# How tenders are evaluated: price, quality and MEAT

Source: Tender Navigator Knowledge Base, https://tendernavigator.com/knowledge-base/how-tenders-are-evaluated (canonical HTML). Category: Bidding for public tenders. Published 2026-09-15, last updated 2026-09-15.

Note: General guidance, not legal advice. Public procurement rules differ by country, by buyer and by procedure, and the tender documents and the law that governs them decide. Where a guide cites a rule, it names the jurisdiction and links the official text.

> Public buyers usually award a contract to the most economically advantageous tender (MEAT), or its equivalent elsewhere: the best balance of quality and price under criteria and weightings published in the tender documents, such as 70% quality and 30% price. How many points a price earns depends on the scoring formula, so understanding the formula matters more than simply bidding low.

## The short answer

Once the compliance checks are passed, the buyer scores each tender against the award criteria it published, and the best combined score wins. Price is almost always one criterion and quality usually another, and the documents state how much each weighs. The mathematics that turns a price into points is the part bidders most often misread.

## The rules

| Jurisdiction | Award standard | What it means |
| --- | --- | --- |
| EU | The **most economically advantageous tender** (MEAT) | Identified on the basis of price or cost, using a cost-effectiveness approach such as life-cycle costing, and it may include the best price-quality ratio, assessed on criteria that can include qualitative, environmental and social aspects linked to the subject-matter ([Directive 2014/24/EU](https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2014/24/oj), Article 67) |
| UK | The **most advantageous tender** | The tender the buyer considers satisfies its requirements and best satisfies the award criteria, assessed by the published assessment methodology and, where there is more than one criterion, their relative importance ([Procurement Act 2023, section 19](https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2023/54/section/19)) |
| US (federal) | **Best value** | A continuum, from a tradeoff process in which the government may accept other than the lowest price when the benefits merit the extra cost, to lowest price technically acceptable (LPTA), in which the lowest-priced proposal that meets the technical standards wins ([FAR 15.101](https://www.acquisition.gov/far/15.101)) |

In the EU, the buyer must state the relative weighting of each criterion in the procurement documents, except where the award is on price alone. The weighting may be given as a range with an appropriate maximum spread, and where weighting is impossible for objective reasons the criteria must be listed in decreasing order of importance (Directive 2014/24/EU, Article 67(5)).

## How a price becomes points

Buyers use different formulas, and the documents should say which one applies. Two families are common:

- **Relative to the lowest price.** The lowest price gets full marks and every other tender gets marks in proportion, for example price points = (lowest price / your price) × maximum points. Your score then depends on your competitors' prices, which you do not know.
- **Against a fixed scale.** Prices are scored against a budget, an estimate or fixed bands. Your score depends only on your own price.

## A worked example

This example is illustrative, not a rule. A contract is scored 70% on quality and 30% on price, and price uses the lowest-price formula above.

|  | Tender A | Tender B |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Price | 100,000 | 120,000 |
| Price points, out of 30 | 30, the lowest price | 100,000 / 120,000 × 30 = 25 |
| Quality points, out of 70 | 50 | 63 |
| **Total** | **80** | **88** |

Tender B wins while costing 20% more, because its 13 extra quality points outweigh the 5 price points it loses. Under this formula, cutting B's price by 10% would have added under 3 points: at 108,000 it scores 100,000 / 108,000 × 30, about 27.8. In a quality-heavy contest, a better quality answer is often a cheaper route to points than a lower price.

## Bidding to the formula without cutting your margin

1. **Find the formula and the weightings** in the documents before you price. If the formula is not stated, ask. See [Clarification questions in public tenders](/knowledge-base/tender-clarification-questions).
2. **Model a few competitor prices.** With a relative formula, estimate where the lowest price might land and see how your points move.
3. **Put the effort where the points are.** In a 70/30 contest, a stronger quality answer is often worth more than a lower price.
4. **Read the quality criteria as a marking scheme.** Answer every sub-criterion, in the order and the words the buyer uses.
5. **Do not price below cost to win.** In the EU a buyer must ask a bidder to explain a price or costs that appear abnormally low, and may reject the tender only where the explanation does not satisfactorily account for them (Directive 2014/24/EU, Article 69). A contract won at a loss is delivered at a loss.

## Not to be confused with Tender Navigator's AI evaluation

Tender Navigator's AI evaluation is not a bid evaluation. It judges whether a published notice fits your business, as described in your filter's prompt, before you decide to bid. The buyer's evaluation of submitted tenders is a separate process in which Tender Navigator plays no part. See [How AI tender evaluation works](/knowledge-base/how-ai-tender-evaluation-works).

## Frequently asked questions

### Does the lowest price always win a public tender?

No. Many contracts are awarded on a combination of price and quality: the most economically advantageous tender in the EU, the most advantageous tender in the UK, and best value in US federal procurement. Some are awarded on price alone, or, in US federal procurement, as lowest price technically acceptable, where the cheapest proposal that meets the technical standards wins ([FAR 15.101-2](https://www.acquisition.gov/far/15.101-2)).

### Does the buyer have to publish the weighting of price and quality?

In the EU, yes: the relative weighting of each criterion must be stated in the procurement documents, possibly as a range, or, where weighting is impossible for objective reasons, the criteria must be listed in decreasing order of importance (Directive 2014/24/EU, Article 67(5)). In the UK, the relative importance of the award criteria is part of how the most advantageous tender is determined (Procurement Act 2023, section 19).

### What happens if our price looks abnormally low?

In the EU the buyer must ask you to explain it, for example by the economics of your method, the technical solution you chose or exceptionally favourable conditions available to you, and may reject the tender only if the explanation does not satisfactorily account for the low price or costs (Directive 2014/24/EU, Article 69). Prepare that explanation before submitting a price you expect to stand out.