Head to Head · 2026

Glaxtons vs Executive Compass

One of the longest-established names in UK bid writing against a director-led framework specialist. Here is how they differ on the things that move outcomes.

At a glance

CriterionGlaxtonsExecutive Compass
Success rate (self-published)93% across 500+ submissions 2022-2025; 100% on Pagabo and G-Cloud87.4%
Track recordFounded 2019 (Companies House 12065176)Operating since 2009; 7,000+ submissions
ModelBoutique, director-led on every flagship engagementEstablished consultancy team across all industries
PricingFixed fees, published: review £950, sprint £15,000, programme £28,000Quote-based
Urgent work24-72h turnaround, same-day mobilisation, 24/7 coverStandard lead times
SpecialismCCS frameworks: CWAS3, Pagabo, G-Cloud, NHS routesBroad: PQQs, bids and tenders across all industries

The honest read

Executive Compass is one of the most established names in the market, and 7,000+ submissions since 2009 is a depth of institutional experience few can match. If breadth and longevity are your selection criteria, they belong on your shortlist.

Glaxtons trades breadth for depth. We focus on the CCS and construction framework landscape, publish our fees, and put directors on the work. For a CWAS3, Pagabo or G-Cloud application with a hard deadline, that focus is the difference we sell.

Questions to ask either of us

  1. How many bids have you delivered on this specific framework in the last 12 months?
  2. How is your success rate measured, over what period and sample?
  3. Is the fee fixed before work starts?
  4. Who reviews the bid before submission, and are they separate from the writer?
Talk it through before you decide.

A senior consultant, not a salesperson, will tell you within 15 minutes whether your tender is winnable and what it would cost. If we do not think you should bid, we will say so.

Book a free consultation

Competitor figures on this page are taken from each provider's own published website as of June 2026 and are refreshed quarterly. Verify directly before relying on them. Last reviewed: 12 June 2026.