# Apples-to-apples comparison

*Also called: like-for-like comparison, comparable quotes, comparable bids.*

**Definition.** An apples-to-apples comparison is one where every bid covers identical work under identical conditions, so the only variable left between them is price. Achieving it requires a single shared scope; without one, the phrase is aspirational.

Most bid comparisons are not apples-to-apples and are described as though they were. If each contractor wrote their own scope, the totals differ because the work differs — the comparison is measuring the proposals, not the prices.

There are two ways to get there. Either issue one scope to every bidder before they price it, or level the bids afterwards by reconciling each one back to a common basis. The first is far less work and far more reliable.

A true like-for-like comparison also fixes the non-price terms: the same schedule, the same warranty period, the same materials grade, the same payment structure.

## Why it matters

It is the whole point of getting multiple bids. Three prices for three different jobs tell you nothing about who is expensive, and the decision defaults to gut feeling or to whoever quoted lowest.

## Related terms

- [Bid leveling](https://quotrium.com/glossary/bid-leveling)
- [Scope of work](https://quotrium.com/glossary/scope-of-work)
- [Exclusion](https://quotrium.com/glossary/exclusion)
- [Three-bid rule](https://quotrium.com/glossary/three-bid-rule)

---

Source: https://quotrium.com/glossary/apples-to-apples · Quotrium — Comparable quotes for property work