Supplier · Peer benchmark
Peer comparison
How CMT bricklaying stacks up against suppliers competing for the same workloads — based on overlap with its 20 signature CPV codes over the last 24 months.
Value band:
/
CohortCMT bricklaying(You)Kier ConstructionBAM Construction LtdIan WilliamsJohn Sisk and Son LtdLIVGREEN FUTURES LIMITED
iAuto-picked from 20 signature CPV codes · last 24 months overlap
Metric | KC Kier Construction Peer · rank #1 | BC BAM Construction Ltd Peer · rank #2 | IW Ian Williams Peer · rank #3 | JS John Sisk and Son Ltd Peer · rank #4 | CB CMT bricklaying (You) · target supplier | LF LIVGREEN FUTURES LIMITED Peer · rank #6 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
01ActivityVolume, scale, freshness | ||||||
| 12-month contractedAward value, last 12m | £4.3bn | £408.3m | £235.3m | £4.6m | — | — |
| Framework headroomPer-supplier share of framework ceilings | — | — | £231k | — | — | — |
| Total awarded (lifetime)All time, all contracts | £12.5bn | £2.6bn | £1.0bn | £271.7m | — | £97.1m |
| Contracts won (12m)Distinct awards last year | 35 | 16 | 27 | 1 | — | 2 |
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: —