Supplier · Peer benchmark
Peer comparison
How Cedar Garden Rooms stacks up against suppliers competing for the same workloads — based on overlap with its 1 signature CPV code over the last 24 months.
Value band:
/
CohortCedar Garden Rooms(You)Bowmer + Kirkland LimitedReds10 UK LtdLAING O'ROURKE EXPLOREKIER METEK CONSORTIUMKIER McAVOY CONSORTIUM
iAuto-picked from 1 signature CPV code · last 24 months overlap
Metric | B+ Bowmer + Kirkland Limited Peer · rank #1 | RU Reds10 UK Ltd Peer · rank #2 | CG Cedar Garden Rooms (You) · target supplier | LO LAING O'ROURKE EXPLORE Peer · rank #4 | KM KIER METEK CONSORTIUM Peer · rank #5 | KM KIER McAVOY CONSORTIUM Peer · rank #6 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
01ActivityVolume, scale, freshness | ||||||
| 12-month contractedAward value, last 12m | £818.5m | £82.2m | — | — | — | — |
| Framework headroomPer-supplier share of framework ceilings | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Total awarded (lifetime)All time, all contracts | £2.7bn | £683.3m | £102k(−100%) | £220.0m | £220.0m | £220.0m |
| Contracts won (12m)Distinct awards last year | 38 | 8 | — | — | — | |
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: —