Supplier · Peer benchmark
Peer comparison
How MITIE WASTE & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES LIMITED stacks up against suppliers competing for the same workloads — based on overlap with its 20 signature CPV codes over the last 24 months. Target HQ: London.
Value band:
/
CohortMITIE WASTE & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES LIMITED(You)PA CONSULTING SERVICES LIMITEDRECONOMY (UK) LIMITEDH W MARTIN TRAFFICSmurfit Kappa RecyclingCarlisle Security Services Limited
iAuto-picked from 20 signature CPV codes · last 24 months overlap
Metric | PC PA CONSULTING SERVICES LIMITED Peer · rank #1 | MW MITIE WASTE & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES LIMITED (You) · target supplier | R( RECONOMY (UK) LIMITED Peer · rank #3 | HW H W MARTIN TRAFFIC Peer · rank #4 | SK Smurfit Kappa Recycling Peer · rank #5 | CS Carlisle Security Services Limited Peer · rank #6 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
01ActivityVolume, scale, freshness | ||||||
| 12-month contractedAward value, last 12m | £308.8m | £2.0m(+577%) | £300k | £116k | — | — |
| Framework headroomPer-supplier share of framework ceilings | £14.7m | £121.0m | — | — | — | — |
| Total awarded (lifetime)All time, all contracts | £1.8bn | £187.3m(+112%) | £12.6m | £504.6m | £25.8m | £88.4m |
| Contracts won (12m)Distinct awards last year | 54 | 4(−27%) | 2 | 9 | ||
How to read a target cell
The target column carries a delta — value compared to the peer median for that row. Direction-of-good varies by metric, so deltas are neutral.
Peer cell£499m(peer median £255m)
→
Target cell£11.7m(−97% vs median)
Money:
£N.Nm, £Nk, £N.NbnPercent: 42% · pp delta: (+12pp)Day delta: (−149 days) · missing: —