Product
Know what you're risking
Bid Confidence is in development. Tender discovery and compliance checking are live; this is not. The page explains what we are building and asks what you would need from it — every figure below is invented to show a shape, and none of it comes from your firm or a real tender.
You already price with a gut-feel number. Here is what that number is hiding.
You bid one number.
Takeoff, subs, quotes, and a contingency you picked because it felt about right.
A single narrow vertical bar on a baseline, marked one million dollars: one bid price, with no width to it.It was always a range.
Every line could land high or low, and some move together — the wet spring that hurts earthworks hurts drainage too.
The same bar has widened into a broad bell-shaped curve centred on that number: the range of costs the job could actually land at.Your contingency covers this much of it.
Everything past the marker is a job that costs more than you bid. We show you where that marker actually sits, on a tender you’re already looking at.
A vertical marker stands to the right of the curve's centre, and the whole tail beyond it is shaded red: the share of outcomes that cost more than the bid.Four things happen between finding a job and winning one worth having
We do three of them. The one we don’t is the one you’re best at.
Find the work
Every open tender in Ontario and Québec, ranked against the work your firm actually bids — not keyword alerts you delete unread.
Price it
Yours. Your takeoff, your subs, your read of the site. We don't estimate jobs and won't pretend we can.
Know what you're risking
The range behind your number, and what your contingency is actually buying you on this job.
Don't get thrown out
Mandatory requirements pulled from the tender document, quoted word for word with the page number. If we can't point at the line, we don't show it.
One contingency, twenty jobs
Move the dial and watch the trade-off move with it. This is a made-up model on made-up jobs — it exists to show that no single contingency is right for all of them, not to tell you what yours should be.
Illustrative model — invented numbers
added to every estimate, on twenty $1M jobs you bid in a year
No setting here is right for all twenty jobs.
These numbers are illustrative, not a forecast. They assume twenty $1M jobs, estimates landing within about 12% of true cost either way, and an assumed decline in competitiveness as price rises. Nothing here comes from your firm or a real tender — it shows the shape of the trade-off, not a price.
What would you want it to tell you?
We’re building this now, and the defaults matter more than the maths. If you price civil work in Ontario or Québec, tell us how far off your numbers usually run and on which trades. We’ll use it, and you’ll get it first.
The rest of the product