← Tender-alert comparison
Deep provider audit

TenderLedger

TenderLedger sells a self-serve UK tender, award and renewal-intelligence layer aimed at SMEs and public-sector sales teams, with public monthly pricing and an Enterprise tier for teams and integrations. Its clearest depth is the award-backed 90-day renewal radar, source-linked buyer and competitor context, and controlled Slack/MCP delivery; legal-counterparty disclosure, identity resolution and enterprise assurance remain thin publicly.

At a glance

What is publicly established

Public pricingStarter: £99/month or £990/year. Pro: £249/month or £2,490/year. Enterprise: custom. Monthly plans have no annual lock-in; annual billing saves two months.
Billing basisunknown
Named portals5
Official productOpen provider site ↗
Normalized features

Capability-by-capability evidence

Yes means the complete normalized capability is available in at least one current plan. Partial means the implementation is adjacent, incomplete or materially narrower. Missing public evidence defaults to not offered.

AI or semantic matching

Yes

TenderLedger applies AI summarisation and opportunity scoring against supplier fit for bid/no-bid qualification. Its saved-search alerts remain criteria-based, but the current AI qualification workflow satisfies profile-based relevance matching.

TenderLedger features ↗TenderLedger MCP tools ↗

Buyer profiles

Partial

Buyer intelligence covers procurement rhythm, category behaviour and award outcomes, and the MCP service exposes a compact cross-notice buyer profile. The provider does not document authority-name canonicalisation, aliases, deduplication or entity-resolution controls.

TenderLedger buyer intelligence ↗TenderLedger MCP tools ↗

Supplier profiles

Partial

Supplier intelligence includes recent winners, market share, comparisons and compact cross-notice competitor profiles. The provider does not document supplier-name canonicalisation, company-number matching, aliases, deduplication or entity resolution.

TenderLedger award tracking ↗TenderLedger MCP tools ↗

Buyer document corpus

Not offered

The reviewed first-party pages did not establish a library of buyer plans, strategies, minutes, budgets or other buyer-authored documents beyond procurement notices.

Buyer requirements

Not offered

AI summaries and qualification are advertised, but the reviewed pages did not establish structured extraction of participation conditions, certifications, policies or evaluation criteria.

Requirements planning

Not offered

Bid/no-bid qualification support is advertised, but no requirements-gap, readiness-action or evidence-planning workflow was established on the reviewed pages.

Award history

Yes

Historical award data includes award notices, contract values, winning suppliers, incumbents and buyer information, filterable by sector, buyer or supplier.

TenderLedger award tracking ↗

Competitor tracking

Yes

Pro includes complete named competitor, incumbent and buyer tracking, including supplier comparisons and alerts for competitor wins. The higher-tier restriction is recorded as plan gating rather than an incomplete feature.

TenderLedger pricing ↗TenderLedger Slack integration ↗

Team workflow

Yes

Enterprise includes multi-user access, and Pro includes saved-market Slack alerts routed to a configured team channel. Public seat counts and task-assignment depth are not stated, but a complete multi-user capability exists on a current plan.

TenderLedger pricing ↗TenderLedger Slack integration ↗
Comparable pricing

Monthly and annual plans

PlanPay monthly
per month
Pay annually
per year
Annual effective
per month
BasisIncluded usersNotes
Starter£99£990£82.50unknownNot publicly statedUp to five saved searches and alerts. VAT treatment and included-user count are not stated.
Pro£249£2,490£207.50unknownNot publicly statedUnlimited saved searches and alerts; competitor, incumbent and buyer tracking; renewal signals. VAT treatment and included-user count are not stated.
EnterpriseNot publishedNot publishedNot publishedunknownMulti-user team access; count not publicly statedCustom price with exports, integrations and onboarding; no numeric billing option is published.

Trial: 14-day Starter or Pro trial; cancel anytime. Card requirement is not publicly stated. VAT: VAT treatment is not publicly stated on the reviewed pricing page.

TenderLedger pricing ↗
Deep audit

Business and product

Legal identity and maturity

Weak evidence

The Terms and Privacy Policy are dated 14 July 2026 and identify only the TenderLedger brand and a contact email; they do not name an incorporated operator, company number, registered office or VAT number. The reviewed first-party pages therefore establish a recently documented B2B service but not the legal counterparty or corporate operating history.

TenderLedger Terms of Service ↗TenderLedger Privacy Policy ↗

Target customer and use case

Strong evidence

The service is positioned for bid managers, public-sector BD and sales leads, consultancies and SMEs that need to discover tenders, qualify them with incumbent and buyer context, and approach buyers before a re-tender. Starter is market visibility, Pro adds renewal and competitor tracking, and Enterprise adds teams and custom workflows.

TenderLedger overview ↗TenderLedger pricing ↗

Commercial model

Strong evidence

Starter is £99 monthly or £990 yearly; Pro is £249 monthly or £2,490 yearly; Enterprise is custom. A 14-day trial is offered, monthly plans run to the billing-period end after cancellation, fees are exclusive of tax and non-refundable, subscriptions auto-renew, and the terms cap aggregate liability at the lower of the previous month's fees or £50.

TenderLedger pricing ↗TenderLedger subscription terms ↗TenderLedger refund policy ↗

Security, support and onboarding

Moderate evidence

The provider claims UK-based hosting, encryption in transit and at rest, private account workspaces and GDPR alignment; its Privacy Policy describes generic risk-appropriate controls and international-transfer safeguards. Enterprise includes dedicated onboarding and support, while standard setup is self-serve in about two minutes. No public ISO/SOC certification, DPA, subprocessor register, SSO/MFA statement, backup/RTO/RPO, security whitepaper or status page was found.

TenderLedger security and hosting claims ↗TenderLedger Privacy Policy ↗TenderLedger onboarding boundary ↗
Deep audit

Data and discovery engine

Sources and coverage method

Strong evidence

TenderLedger explicitly names five official UK sources: Contracts Finder, Find a Tender, Public Contracts Scotland, Sell2Wales and eTendersNI. It says it uses official public data only and links every incumbent, value and expiry signal back to its source notice; the public coverage is narrower and more inspectable than aggregators claiming hundreds of portals.

TenderLedger source coverage ↗TenderLedger procurement-intelligence method ↗

Ingestion and freshness

Moderate evidence

The main product page says five portals are ingested hourly, deduplicated and tagged by sector, with freshness timestamps and source attribution also exposed through MCP. Separate Find a Tender and Contracts Finder pages say listings refresh daily, so the exact per-source schedule, failure handling, backfills and amendment latency require confirmation.

TenderLedger hourly-ingestion claim ↗TenderLedger Find a Tender refresh claim ↗TenderLedger Contracts Finder refresh claim ↗TenderLedger MCP attribution and freshness ↗

Matching and qualification

Moderate evidence

Users define sectors, regions, value bands and keywords; TenderLedger then supplies saved alerts, AI summaries and opportunity scoring for bid/no-bid qualification. The provider says explanations are human-readable and grounded in official data, but does not publish model/provider details, evaluation sets, precision/recall, confidence calibration or how user outcomes tune scoring.

TenderLedger features ↗TenderLedger AI opportunity workflow ↗TenderLedger MCP qualification tool ↗

Historical and award depth

Moderate evidence

The platform exposes historical award notices, values, winning suppliers, incumbents and buyer information and attaches relevant award history to open tenders. No public corpus start date, award count, amendment history, missing-award rate or per-portal retention period was found, limiting quantitative comparison.

TenderLedger award tracking ↗TenderLedger overview ↗
Deep audit

Intelligence depth

Buyer entity investment

Moderate evidence

Buyer intelligence aggregates procurement rhythm, category behaviour, award outcomes and value ranges into buyer-focused analysis, and MCP exposes a compact buyer profile from indexed notices. Notice deduplication is claimed, but no authority canonicalisation, alias table, hierarchy handling, identifier strategy or entity-resolution quality measure is documented.

TenderLedger buyer intelligence ↗TenderLedger MCP buyer profile ↗TenderLedger ingestion and deduplication claim ↗

Supplier entity investment

Moderate evidence

Award tracking aggregates winning suppliers, values, incumbency and market share and supports supplier filters, comparisons and compact MCP competitor profiles. No Companies House linkage, supplier aliases, group-company mapping, canonical identifiers or supplier-resolution error controls are published.

TenderLedger award tracking ↗TenderLedger MCP supplier intelligence ↗

Renewal-signal method

Strong evidence

The published method works backwards from award start dates, durations and extension options, then flags contracts entering their final months with an estimated re-tender window and source-award link. The 90-day radar is a forecast from award history, not confirmation that a buyer will re-procure; public material does not explain treatment of exercised extensions, termination, framework call-offs or confidence thresholds beyond illustrative examples.

TenderLedger renewal methodology ↗TenderLedger award tracking ↗

Requirements-planning method

Not found

AI summaries and bid/no-bid scoring support qualification, but the reviewed material does not establish structured requirement extraction or a durable readiness workflow joining gaps, evidence, owners, actions and deadlines. TenderLedger explicitly says it is not bid-writing software or a compliance suite.

TenderLedger product boundaries ↗TenderLedger features ↗
Coverage evidence

Named portals and broader claims

  • The provider says the five named UK portals are ingested hourly, deduplicated and tagged, and every signal links to the source notice.TenderLedger overview ↗
Buyer diligence

Limitations, contradictions and questions

Material limitations

  • The public legal terms do not identify the incorporated operator or company number, so procurement, credit and contracting checks cannot be completed from the brand site alone.TenderLedger Terms of Service ↗
  • Buyer and supplier intelligence is cross-notice but has no published entity-resolution method; name variants and group structures may therefore distort counts, market share and incumbency.TenderLedger buyer intelligence ↗TenderLedger award tracking ↗
  • Renewal windows are estimates from award data, not confirmed future procurements, and public pages do not publish validation or false-positive rates.TenderLedger renewal methodology ↗
  • MCP/API access is capped and gated and does not expose raw tables or the full intelligence graph; production keys and enterprise audit requirements require discussion.TenderLedger MCP limits ↗
  • The terms grant broad, perpetual rights to process, train on, commercialise and retain anonymised or aggregated customer content and telemetry, while liability is capped at one month of fees or £50.TenderLedger Terms of Service ↗

First-party contradictions

Questions to ask

  1. What is the full legal name, company number, registered office and VAT status of the contracting operator?
  2. Provide the current per-source ingestion schedule, last-success monitoring, amendment handling, backfill process and measured end-to-end latency.
  3. How are buyer and supplier names canonicalised across aliases, subsidiaries, departments and Companies House identities, and what merge-error rate is measured?
  4. How are extensions, modifications, early terminations and framework call-offs incorporated into renewal predictions, and what historical precision and recall does the 90-day radar achieve?
  5. Which AI and embedding providers process customer profiles or tender documents, is customer data used for model training, and can training/retention be contractually disabled?
  6. Can TenderLedger provide a DPA, subprocessor register, penetration-test summary, backup and disaster-recovery targets, security-incident process, SSO/MFA roadmap and uptime history?
  7. What exact seats, export formats, API quotas, rate limits, fields, audit logs and support response times are included in Enterprise?
Verification boundary: This profile organises provider statements and official records. It is not an independent product test. Verify live notices, data completeness, contract terms and a real workflow before purchase.