Website redesign proposals are comparable only when you can see what each supplier will deliver, what your team must provide and what happens to the existing site. Two similar totals can cover very different work. Put the proposals against the same brief, mark every assumption and ask for missing detail before you choose.

This is about comparing the offers in front of you. If you are still deciding which people or working style would suit the business, read our guide to choosing a web design agency. A good supplier and a well-scoped proposal are related, but separate, judgements.

Make the starting brief consistent

Give every prospective supplier the same outline: what the current website contains, who it serves, the main business problem, required functions and any known deadline or constraint. Include the current URL and say which materials you can provide. If one supplier has had a detailed conversation and another has only received a one-line enquiry, their proposals are not yet answering the same question.

You do not need a finished specification. You do need to identify major unknowns. A supplier should be able to state where further discovery would change the scope. The website brief guide offers a useful starting format.

Compare deliverables rather than labels

“SEO”, “bespoke design” and “content support” can each describe a wide range of work. Ask what will actually be handed over. A comparison note can use five rows:

  • Structure and content: which pages are planned, who decides the hierarchy, and who writes or edits each page?
  • Design and build: which page types are designed, what can be reused, and how will mobile behaviour be reviewed?
  • Transition: who inventories current URLs, handles redirects and checks important pages after launch?
  • Operations: which forms, integrations, accounts, editing tools and training are included?
  • Acceptance and support: what is tested, how many revision rounds are included, and what happens after handover?

Mark each item as included, client-supplied, optional or unanswered. This is more useful than ticking a box simply because the word appears somewhere in the document. A mention of accessibility, for instance, should lead to a discussion of what will be checked and by whom. Automated checks are useful, but the W3C notes the value of involving users in accessibility evaluation.

Price the missing work in time and responsibility

An omission is not necessarily a defect. A business with an experienced internal marketing team may prefer to write its own copy. Another may need the supplier to organise interviews and shape the content. The first proposal may cost less externally while requiring more internal time.

Ask who sources images, secures permissions for project photography, checks technical accuracy and signs off copy. If the answer is “the client”, put names and dates against those tasks. A lower fee is not a saving if the work is essential but has been left unowned. Our guide to redesign responsibilities helps make that internal commitment visible.

Test the comparison with a realistic example

Imagine two proposals for a specialist service business. Proposal A includes a new homepage and five service pages, with the client supplying approved copy. Proposal B includes the same page count plus interviews, copy editing and a review of the existing service structure. Neither is automatically better. If the current copy is accurate and the structure is sound, A may be sufficient. If customers routinely misunderstand the services, B addresses a problem A leaves with the client.

Now add an existing page that receives relevant enquiries. If A has no provision for preserving its URL or mapping a replacement, its apparent simplicity may conceal transition work. If B includes a migration review, ask which pages it covers and who approves the mapping. The point is to compare responsibility and outcome, not to award points for the longest proposal.

Read exclusions and assumptions as carefully as inclusions

Check whether the fee includes content migration, third-party fees, hosting, software licences, ongoing maintenance, training and changes after sign-off. Ask what happens if the number of pages changes or an integration proves more complicated than expected. Confirm whether the timeline assumes prompt client feedback, supplied assets or access to another provider's systems.

A useful follow-up question is: “What work would we still need to arrange separately for the site to be ready to launch?” Another is: “Which part of this price depends on an assumption you have not yet verified?” Clear answers let you compare unlike proposals on more equal terms.

Choose against the brief, then confirm the agreement

Record why the preferred proposal meets the business's main needs, what remains open and who will settle those points. You may choose the more expensive offer, the less expensive one or ask for a revised scope. None of those outcomes is inherently more prudent; the right choice depends on the work and the business's capacity to contribute.

Before signing, turn the chosen scope into clear deliverables and ownership terms. Our guide to redesign contract questions addresses that next decision. The strongest comparison leaves you able to explain what the business is buying and what it has agreed to contribute.