Tools · Workflow Flowsheet
Every tool states what it solves, what you provide, what it produces, whether it is free or paid, and what it cannot guarantee. Where a tool works without registration, it does. Saving work to an account is explained where it applies.
Fit Score · bid/no-bid · eligibility
Extractor · amendments · analysis
Planner · completeness · deadlines
Capability profile · evidence
Awards · buyers · markets
Evaluate
Problem: Spending bid effort on tenders you cannot credibly win.
Who: Any supplier considering a listed tender.
You provide: A tender title from Explore, your industry, geography, experience, certifications, financial capacity.
You get: A transparent 0–100 indicative score with matching factors, gaps, missing information, risks and a next action.
Free
Limit: Indicative only — NOT an official eligibility determination and not a win prediction.
Evaluate
Problem: Gut-feel bid decisions with no recorded reasoning.
Who: Bid managers doing a first screen.
You provide: Deadline time, experience, eligibility, certifications, capacity, incumbent and margin answers.
You get: An indicative score, verdict and the evidence still missing.
Free
Limit: Uses your answers only; it does not read the tender documents.
Evaluate
Problem: Missing a mandatory eligibility condition until late.
Who: Suppliers before they invest in a response.
You provide: Short structured answers about registration, exclusions and capacity.
You get: A pre-check result with the conditions still to verify on the source notice.
Free
Limit: A pre-check, not a determination — the notice itself governs.
Methodology: geography 20 · industry 20 · experience 20 · certifications 15 · financial 15 · time 10. Missing inputs score 0 and are listed — never assumed.
Understand
Problem: Notices bury mandatory requirements across dozens of pages.
Who: Anyone holding a tender document.
You provide: A PDF, DOCX, TXT or MD file (max 10 MB).
You get: Cited deadlines, requirements, risks, clarification questions and an exportable compliance matrix.
Free
Limit: Automated extraction, not human review. Scanned-image PDFs need OCR, which this tool does not do.
Understand
Problem: Requirements arrive as prose, not a checklist.
Who: Bid teams structuring a response.
You provide: Pasted tender text.
You get: Requirements grouped as mandatory / technical / administrative / financial / eligibility / submission, each with its line citation.
Free
Limit: Keyword-based grouping — verify each item against the source document.
Understand
Problem: Amendments quietly change deadlines and requirements.
Who: Teams already working a tender that was amended.
You provide: Original text and amended text.
You get: New, removed and modified requirements plus changed deadlines, with an impact warning.
Free
Limit: Text comparison of what you paste; obtain the full official amendment set from the source.
Prepare
Problem: A deadline with no work plan behind it.
Who: Bid leads turning a tender into tasks.
You provide: Tender title, deadline and jurisdiction.
You get: Work packages, tasks and review checkpoints on working-day milestones.
Free
Limit: Milestones use a starter holiday set per jurisdiction — verify regional holidays.
Prepare
Problem: Discovering a missing mandatory document at submission.
Who: Teams assembling a bid package.
You provide: The documents the tender requires (or pasted tender text) plus the documents you mark present.
You get: Present / missing list with source references and the action for each gap.
Free
Limit: Presence is what you marked — it does not validate that a document is current or compliant.
Prepare
Problem: Calendar-day maths that ignores weekends and holidays.
Who: Anyone planning backwards from a deadline.
You provide: Deadline date and jurisdiction.
You get: Working days remaining plus internal draft, red-team and QA milestones.
Free
Limit: Starter federal holiday sets only, disclosed in the result.
Prepare
Problem: No structured final check before submission.
Who: Bid teams in the last week.
You provide: Guided checklist answers in the tool on the dashboard workflow.
You get: A readiness view and a downloadable checklist.
Free
Limit: A checklist supports — never replaces — reading the actual submission instructions.
Prepare
Problem: Generic checklists that miss tender-specific items.
Who: Teams preparing one specific tender.
You provide: Requirements extracted from your tender (use the Extractor first).
You get: A tender-specific checklist you can work through and export from your analysis.
Free
Limit: Quality depends on the completeness of the extraction — cross-check the source.
Prepare
Problem: Deadlines scattered across inboxes and spreadsheets.
Who: Account holders tracking saved tenders.
You provide: Saved tenders and completed analyses in your account.
You get: One calendar of tender and analysis deadlines, exportable as .ics.
Included with a free account
Limit: Only includes what you saved or analysed here — external deadlines must be added by you.
Your saved-tender deadlines and analysis deadlines in one list, with an .ics download for your own calendar app.
Documents
Problem: Rebuilding a capability statement from scratch for every bid.
Who: Suppliers who bid repeatedly.
You provide: Your own company facts — entered by you, never auto-filled.
You get: A saved profile exportable as a printable capability statement.
Included with a free account
Limit: Bidwise never invents certifications, references or experience. Empty fields stay empty.
Documents
Problem: A blank page when a buyer asks who you are.
Who: Small suppliers preparing a first statement.
You provide: Your company description, services and evidence you actually hold.
You get: A structured, printable capability statement draft.
Free
Limit: A draft from your inputs only — check every claim before sending it.
Documents
Problem: Expiry dates and evidence files scattered across drives.
Who: Growing bid teams.
You provide: Your certification and evidence records.
You get: A tracker view inside your supplier profile and dashboard.
Proposed
Limit: Designed, not yet built as a standalone tracker — expiry fields currently live in your profile notes.
Open your Supplier Capability Profile
Intelligence
Problem: Not knowing who wins work in your market.
Who: Suppliers planning recompete and market entry.
You provide: Search terms over published award/closed records.
You get: Awarding authority, title, date, value where published, and the original source link — labelled as awards.
Free
Limit: Only records present in the snapshot; a closed notice alone is not proof of an awardee.
Intelligence
Problem: Researching a buyer one notice at a time.
Who: Suppliers targeting specific authorities.
You provide: A buyer name from the snapshot.
You get: Aggregated records, open vs award counts, categories, markets and snapshot freshness for that authority.
Free
Limit: Aggregates only the 721-record snapshot — partial coverage, stated on the page.
Intelligence
Problem: Entering a market blind to its history.
Who: Suppliers assessing a category.
You provide: Award history where the source publishes it.
You get: Previous awards and known awardees where — and only where — reliable data exists.
Planned — not yet available
Limit: Not built: where data is insufficient we will show that limitation rather than estimate competitors.
Intelligence
Problem: Pricing a bid without a structured cost build-up.
Who: Suppliers pricing a specific opportunity.
You provide: Your labour, materials, logistics, equipment, subcontracting and overhead assumptions.
You get: An editable estimate with margin — exportable.
Proposed
Limit: Designed, not yet built. Any future version will state it is an estimate, not financial advice.