A supplier with a crore of turnover and the right authorisations can compete for more of the market than one with five crore and none. We read every attached specification and pre-qualification document — 1,50,086 of them — and measured which parameters actually determine who can bid.
The share of the corpus a supplier could have competed for, by profile. Turnover moves this far less than authorisation does: a supplier at one crore holding OEM letters reaches more of the market than one at five crore without them. Thresholds are the parameter most discussed; authorisation is the parameter that binds.
Share of tenders in which each parameter appears. Manufacturer-specific specification — the parameter most written about — is the least common. An OEM authorisation requirement appears roughly fourteen times as often and has a far larger effect on the qualifying supplier pool. Select any bar to see the tenders.
Every card opens the tenders behind the figure — buyer, deadline, thresholds, and which parameters were recorded. Nothing is modelled or inferred from titles; all of it is read from the document text.
Buyers differ less in how much they narrow a field than in which parameter they use to do it. Energy Department Uttar Pradesh operates largely through Proprietary Article Certificates; Urban Development UP through OEM authorisation. A single composite score would conceal that. Departments with 300+ tenders.
| Department | Tenders | OEM authorisation | Proprietary article | Non-catalogue |
|---|
A composite index across five parameter families that together determine how wide a supplier pool a tender reaches. It is peer-adjusted: each buyer is measured against the rate expected for the categories it actually purchases, not against the platform average — a fertiliser plant buying pumps is not marked down for the fact that pumps have genuine compatibility requirements. Quartiles are calculated across the 43 departments with 200+ tenders. Select a row for the breakdown.
| Department | Score | Tenders | Authorisation | Sample | Named make | Outside range | Readable |
|---|
This measures documents, not intent. A fourth-quartile position is a prompt to look, not a finding of any kind against a buyer — a substantial share of narrow specification reflects genuine technical requirement. Departments below 40% document readability are shown, but their specification figure is not reliable and is marked accordingly.
Turnover required divided by declared contract value, across the tenders stating both. The distribution terminates at 4.00× — a platform constraint rather than a behavioural pattern. The useful question for a supplier is therefore not whether a threshold is high in absolute terms, but where it sits within the range observed for the same category.
Median 0.50×. 30.4% of all tenders sit on a round-number rule (0.25 / 0.3 / 0.4 / 0.5 / 1.0 / 2.0 / 3.0 / 4.0), the signature of a formula applied centrally. Yet within the permitted range, a mean 40.2% of tenders sit more than 2× from the median for their own category — the same service, priced for eligibility completely differently by different buyers.
These findings are not a one-off study. Every one of them is a question that should be asked of every tender before a rupee of EMD is committed — so Tender Matcher runs them as a standing pre-bid gate. Eight checks, answered from the document text, before you decide to bid.
If a tender you were counting on turns out to apply three of these parameters at once, the useful next conversation is not with software. Book a working session and we will go through your eligibility profile against these patterns, and how to read a tender you are looking at now. The analysis on this page is historical; the coaching applies it to your situation.
Your turnover, experience, certifications and OEM authorisations mapped against your live category. Output: the share of your market you are structurally locked out of, and by which lever.
Your current shortlist scored against category norms — which bars are routine, which are outliers, and where the EMD is likely to be wasted.
Where a specification looks written for one supplier, what a pre-bid query should actually say, and when it is worth raising at all.
Opens your email app with the message ready — nothing is sent from this page, and nothing you type here is stored, logged or transmitted anywhere. Coaching is general guidance based on published tender documents; it is not legal, financial or bid-writing advice, and no outcome is promised.
The honest version, including what did not work.
Coverage: tenders closing between 04 Dec 2023 and
08 Sep 2026; 0 are still open,
with a further 26,497 in the archive not yet closed and excluded.
Figures last regenerated on 08 Sep 2026.
Corpus: 73,476 GeM tender folders, 1,83,213 attachment references
deduplicated to 1,50,086 unique documents. Extraction via poppler pdftotext in both layout and raw modes. Metadata joins the
Jun–Aug 2026 GeM export where available (29,533 tenders). Scan bias verified by OCR on a random sample of 166
image-only documents — no significant difference found. This is a cross-section: it describes structure, not change over time.
Before you use this site. The figures published here are produced by automated analysis of published tender documents and can contain errors. They describe tenders that have already closed — they are not live opportunities. Nothing here is legal, financial or bidding advice, and nothing here is an allegation of wrongdoing against any buyer, official or organisation. Verify anything important against the original document on GeM.
Continuing means you accept our Terms of Use. This site sets no cookies of its own; the Privacy Notice sets out what external services such as the web fonts and the visitor counter can see.