Supplier Evaluation Scorecard
Score suppliers across eight weighted criteria and get a comparable result out of 100 — with a verdict and the breakdown behind it.
Calculator
Weighted scoring across eight criteria — a comparable score out of 100.
Result
The calculation runs entirely in your browser; nothing you type is sent to our servers. Only if you press “Turn this into a quote request” is the result written to your browser’s session storage, so it can be carried into the quote form.
Worked example
Opened with its default case — Price and total cost of ownership — weight %: 20 · Price and total cost of ownership — score: 3 — Average · Product quality and certification — weight %: 20 — the calculator returns the figures below. The headline result is 60 / 100 (weighted score). They are written out here so the output is readable without running JavaScript: in print, with scripts disabled, or by a search engine.
| Input | Value |
|---|---|
| Price and total cost of ownership — weight % | 20 |
| Price and total cost of ownership — score | 3 — Average |
| Product quality and certification — weight % | 20 |
| Product quality and certification — score | 3 — Average |
| Lead-time reliability — weight % | 15 |
| Lead-time reliability — score | 3 — Average |
| Range covered / single-source capability — weight % | 10 |
| Range covered / single-source capability — score | 3 — Average |
| Responsiveness and a clear point of contact — weight % | 10 |
| Responsiveness and a clear point of contact — score | 3 — Average |
| Payment terms and credit period — weight % | 10 |
| Payment terms and credit period — score | 3 — Average |
| Paperwork discipline (invoice, delivery note, SDS/CE) — weight % | 8 |
| Paperwork discipline (invoice, delivery note, SDS/CE) — score | 3 — Average |
| After-sales, returns and warranty — weight % | 7 |
| After-sales, returns and warranty — score | 3 — Average |
| Result | Value |
|---|---|
| Weighted score | 60 / 100 |
| Total weight | 100 |
| Verdict | Improvement needed — request the gaps in writing |
Change any field above and the calculator recomputes; this table is the default case only.
How is a supplier evaluation score calculated?
Each criterion gets a weight (totalling 100) and a score of 1–5. The sum of weight × score is divided by the maximum possible (weight × 5) and multiplied by 100, which puts every supplier on the same scale. As a working rule: above 80 is an approved supplier, 65–80 is conditional approval starting with a pilot order, and below 50 is a decline.
Why weighted scoring beats a price comparison
Choosing a supplier on price alone is the most expensive habit in procurement: when a late delivery stops a line, the two points of discount stop mattering the same morning.
A weighted scorecard does two jobs at once. It makes the decision objective — everyone scores on the same scale — and it makes the decision documented, which is what an internal audit or a post-incident review actually asks for.
The eight criteria and what each measures
| Criterion | Default weight | What you are really scoring |
|---|---|---|
| Price and total cost of ownership | 20 | Landed cost including freight, packaging and payment terms — not the unit price |
| Product quality and certification | 20 | Conformity documents, batch consistency, whether the CE or EN marking can be evidenced |
| Lead-time reliability | 15 | Not the promised date — the variance between promised and actual |
| Range covered / single-source capability | 10 | How many separate orders one supplier removes from your week |
| Responsiveness and a clear point of contact | 10 | Time to a quote, and whether one named person owns your account |
| Payment terms and credit period | 10 | Terms offered, and whether they hold once volume grows |
| Paperwork discipline | 8 | Invoice and delivery note accuracy, SDS/CE files supplied without chasing |
| After-sales, returns and warranty | 7 | What happens on the day something arrives wrong |
Weights are a starting point, not a rule. A site with a stopped line raises lead-time reliability; a regulated operation raises certification. Change them — the calculator warns if the total is not 100.
A scoring guide that survives an audit
| Score | Meaning | Evidence you should be able to point at |
|---|---|---|
| 1 — Inadequate | Fails the requirement | A documented failure, or the requirement simply not met |
| 2 — Weak | Meets it unreliably | Repeated slippage or repeated chasing |
| 3 — Average | Meets the requirement | Ordinary performance, nothing notable either way |
| 4 — Good | Meets it consistently | A track record over several orders |
| 5 — Very good | Better than the alternatives on this point | Something measurable that competitors do not do |
The discipline is the evidence column. A score you cannot justify in one sentence is a preference, not an evaluation.
Turning the score into a decision
| Score | Verdict | What to do next |
|---|---|---|
| 80–100 | Approved supplier | Suitable for a framework agreement |
| 65–79 | Conditional approval | Start with a pilot order and re-score after it |
| 50–64 | Improvement needed | Request the specific gaps in writing with a date |
| Below 50 | Not suitable | Look for an alternative |
Re-score after each significant order rather than annually. A scorecard that is filled in once at onboarding measures a sales pitch; one that is updated measures a supplier.
Extra checks when the supplier is abroad
Scoring a supplier in another country adds a few checks that are cheap to make and expensive to skip:
- Ask for the company’s tax number and trade registry number, and confirm the legal entity name matches the one that will issue the invoice
- Agree the Incoterms 2020 rule before comparing prices — an EXW price and a DAP price are not comparable numbers
- Ask which documents accompany the goods and who issues them; on shipments from Türkiye see our export shipping guide
- Ask for a reference from a customer in your own market, not a general one
- Check that quoted lead time includes export documentation, not just production
Three mistakes that make scorecards useless
1. Scoring everyone a 3. If the spread is narrow the weights do nothing and the total is noise. Force a difference where one exists.
2. Scoring the sales conversation. Responsiveness before the first order tells you about the sales process; responsiveness after the third order tells you about the company.
3. Never re-scoring. Suppliers change — staff leave, owners change, capacity shifts. A score more than a year old is history, not information.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is a good supplier score?
Above 80 out of 100 is normally treated as an approved supplier, 65–80 as conditional approval that starts with a pilot order, and below 50 as a decline. The thresholds are conventions, not standards — what matters is using the same ones for every supplier you compare.
Should the weights always add up to 100?
Yes, otherwise scores from different evaluations are not comparable. The calculator shows the total weight and flags it when it is not 100.
Can I add my own criteria?
The calculator uses eight fixed criteria so results stay comparable, but you can zero the weight of one that does not apply and move that weight to another. If you need a criterion that is genuinely missing, tell us — it is the kind of change we make.
How often should suppliers be re-scored?
After each significant order rather than on a calendar. A scorecard filled in once at onboarding records a sales pitch; one updated with delivery performance records a supplier.
Is this scorecard tied to any standard?
No. It is a practical weighting model, not an ISO or regulatory instrument. It is designed to make a decision comparable and documented, which is what most internal audit questions are actually about.
Send your list — your quote is ready within 1 business day.
A list, a photo or an Excel file — whatever is easiest. On standard items most quotes go out the same business day. Custom production, imports or 50+ line lists can take longer; when they do, we tell you the timeline in writing on the day we receive the request.