---
title: "Vendor Evaluation Template: A Software Scorecard You Can Copy"
url: "https://goremy.ai/blog/articles/how-to-evaluate-a-software-vendor"
author: Luis Chavez-Mattos
editor: Luis Chavez-Mattos
editor_title: Director, Product
published: "2026-11-13T22:00:11.821Z"
updated: "2026-11-13T22:00:13.889Z"
topic: Operations and Procurement
description: Copy a vendor evaluation template with weighted criteria, pass/fail gates, a worked example and an AI prompt to score software vendors fairly.
---

# Vendor Evaluation Template: A Software Scorecard You Can Copy

> Copy a vendor evaluation template with weighted criteria, pass/fail gates, a worked example and an AI prompt to score software vendors fairly.

Edited by Luis Chavez-Mattos, Director, Product · Published 2026-11-13

## What is a vendor evaluation template?

A vendor evaluation template is a scorecard that lets you compare software vendors against the same criteria, with the same weights, before anyone falls in love with a demo. It has three parts: pass/fail gates (requirements a vendor must meet to stay in the running), weighted scoring categories (functionality, security, cost, support and so on), and a place to record evidence for every score. The template below is ready to copy. Fill in the weights first, score each vendor independently, then compare.

## TL;DR

- **Set weights before you see any demos.** If you decide what matters after the vendor presents, the best presenter wins, not the best product.
- **Use pass/fail gates first.** A vendor that fails on a security or legal must-have should never reach the scoring stage.
- **Score on a 0 to 5 scale with written definitions**, so a "4" means the same thing to every reviewer.
- **Every score needs evidence**: a document, a demo moment, a reference call. "Felt strong" is not evidence.
- **Compare total cost of ownership, not the quote.** Implementation, integration, training, admin time and renewal increases belong in the math.
- **AI can draft the scorecard and summarize vendor documents**, but a person must verify certifications, pricing and contract terms against the source.

## What does the vendor scorecard template look like?

Copy this into a spreadsheet or document. It has two sections: gates, then weighted scoring.

### Section 1: Pass/fail gates

Answer Yes or No. One "No" on a mandatory gate removes the vendor, or triggers a written exception approved by the budget owner and the relevant reviewer (security, legal, IT).

| # | Gate | Mandatory? | Vendor A | Vendor B | Vendor C | Evidence/source |
|---|------|-----------|----------|----------|----------|-----------------|
| G1 | Meets our must-have functional requirements (list them) | Yes | | | | |
| G2 | Provides current independent security attestation (for example a SOC 2 report) or equivalent | Yes | | | | |
| G3 | Supports single sign-on with our identity provider | Yes/No | | | | |
| G4 | Stores data in an acceptable region for our legal requirements | Yes | | | | |
| G5 | Will sign our data processing terms | Yes | | | | |
| G6 | Lets us export our data in a usable format | Yes | | | | |
| G7 | Price is within the approved budget range | Yes | | | | |

Adjust the list to your situation. Keep it short. Gates are for deal-breakers, not preferences.

### Section 2: Weighted scoring

Weights must add up to 100. Score each criterion from 0 to 5, then multiply: (score ÷ 5) × weight.

| Category | Weight | What you are judging | Vendor A | Vendor B | Vendor C |
|----------|--------|----------------------|----------|----------|----------|
| Functional fit | 25 | Does it do the actual job, with our real data and workflow? | | | |
| Security and compliance | 20 | Access controls, audit logs, attestations, incident history, subprocessors | | | |
| Integration and technical fit | 15 | Works with our identity provider, existing systems, API quality | | | |
| Total cost of ownership | 15 | Three-year cost including all add-ons and people time | | | |
| Vendor viability and support | 10 | Financial stability, support quality, references | | | |
| Implementation and adoption | 10 | Time to value, training burden, change management | | | |
| Exit and portability | 5 | Data export, contract terms, lock-in | | | |
| **Total** | **100** | | | | |

### The 0 to 5 scale

Write these definitions at the top of the sheet so every reviewer scores the same way.

| Score | Meaning |
|-------|---------|
| 0 | Does not meet the need, or no answer given |
| 1 | Major gaps; would need a workaround or custom work |
| 2 | Partly meets the need; notable gaps |
| 3 | Meets the need adequately |
| 4 | Meets the need well, with evidence |
| 5 | Exceeds the need, with strong evidence (references, documents, a successful trial) |

Add one rule: **no evidence means a maximum score of 2.** A vendor's claim in a sales call is a claim, not evidence.

## How do you use the template step by step?

1. **Write the problem in two sentences.** What job must the software do, for whom, and what happens if you do nothing? This keeps the evaluation from drifting into feature shopping.
2. **List must-haves and nice-to-haves.** Must-haves become gates. Nice-to-haves feed the "functional fit" score.
3. **Pick the reviewers.** Usually the budget owner, a day-to-day user, IT, security, and procurement or legal. Each reviewer scores only the categories they are qualified to judge, with the budget owner holding the final call.
4. **Set the weights before contacting vendors.** Get sign-off from the budget owner. Changing weights after you see results is how teams justify a decision already made.
5. **Send every vendor the same questions.** A standard questionnaire or RFP makes answers comparable. Ask for the security documents up front.
6. **Run the demo from your script, not theirs.** Give each vendor the same three to five real scenarios and your own sample data if possible.
7. **Score independently, then compare.** Reviewers fill in their scores alone before any group discussion. Large disagreements (two or more points apart) are the most useful thing to talk about.
8. **Call references.** Ask for customers of similar size and use case. Ask what went wrong during implementation, not whether they are happy.
9. **Run a pilot for the top one or two.** Even two weeks with real users will tell you things no demo will.
10. **Record the decision.** Keep the scorecard, the evidence and the reason for the choice. You will need it at renewal, and in any audit.

## What should you ask about in each category?

Use these prompts to fill in the evidence column.

**Functional fit**
- Can the vendor complete each of your scripted scenarios live, without a "we'll follow up"?
- What requires configuration, and what requires custom development or paid services?
- What does the roadmap promise that doesn't exist today? Score what exists now.

**Security and compliance**
- Do they provide an independent audit report, and is it current? Read the scope, not just the badge.
- How do they handle access control, encryption, logging and single sign-on?
- Who are their subprocessors, and where is data stored?
- What is their breach notification commitment in the contract?
- Have they had public security incidents, and how did they respond?

Your own security team will have its standard questionnaire. Use it. This template does not replace it.

**Integration and technical fit**
- Is there a documented API, and does it cover what you need, or only a subset?
- Which integrations are native and which need a third-party connector?
- What are the rate limits, and are there fees for API access?

**Total cost of ownership**
- License fee at your actual user count and usage, not the starter tier.
- Implementation, data migration, training and integration costs.
- Add-ons you will need (premium support, extra environments, SSO tiers, extra storage).
- Overage charges and what happens when you grow.
- Renewal terms: how much can the price rise each year, and is there a cap?
- Internal time: who administers it, and how many hours a month?

**Vendor viability and support**
- How long have they operated, and how are they funded? For a smaller vendor, ask what happens to your data if they are acquired or shut down.
- What do support hours and response times look like in the contract, not the brochure?
- What do reference customers say about support after the sale?

**Implementation and adoption**
- Realistic timeline from signature to first real use.
- Who does the work: you, the vendor or a partner?
- How much training do end users need?

**Exit and portability**
- Can you export all your data, in what formats, and at what cost?
- What are the termination terms and notice period?
- Is there auto-renewal, and how do you stop it?

## What does a worked example look like?

Say a legal operations manager is choosing a contract management tool. The budget owner sets the weights from the template above. Three vendors pass the gates. Three reviewers score independently, then agree on consensus scores after discussing differences.

| Category | Weight | Vendor A | Vendor B | Vendor C |
|----------|--------|----------|----------|----------|
| Functional fit | 25 | 4 | 5 | 3 |
| Security and compliance | 20 | 5 | 3 | 4 |
| Integration and technical fit | 15 | 3 | 4 | 4 |
| Total cost of ownership | 15 | 3 | 2 | 5 |
| Vendor viability and support | 10 | 4 | 3 | 3 |
| Implementation and adoption | 10 | 3 | 4 | 3 |
| Exit and portability | 5 | 4 | 2 | 3 |
| **Weighted total (out of 100)** | | **76** | **71** | **73** |

The math for Vendor A: (4×25 + 5×20 + 3×15 + 3×15 + 4×10 + 3×10 + 4×5) ÷ 5 = 380 ÷ 5 = 76.

What the numbers say:

- **Vendor A wins narrowly**, mainly on security and support.
- **Vendor B has the best features** but the weakest cost picture and a poor exit score. Its security score of 3 only just clears the team's rule that any security score below 3 disqualifies a vendor.
- **Vendor C is the cheapest and integrates well**, but is weakest on functional fit, the most heavily weighted category.

A spread of five points is small. When totals are this close, don't pick the winner by the decimal. Look at the lowest individual scores, run the pilot with A and C, and ask B for a revised price and better export terms. The scorecard narrowed three vendors to a clear shortlist and told the team what to negotiate. That is its job.

## Can AI help you build and fill in a vendor scorecard?

Yes, for the drafting and reading work. AI is good at turning a messy list of requirements into criteria, writing the questionnaire, and summarizing long vendor documents against your criteria. It is not a good judge of whether a vendor is telling the truth.

Paste this prompt into your company's approved AI tool:

```
You are helping a procurement team evaluate software vendors.

Context:
- What we need the software to do: [two-sentence problem statement]
- Who will use it and how many users: [details]
- Must-have requirements: [list]
- Nice-to-have requirements: [list]
- Constraints (budget, region, systems it must integrate with, security requirements): [list]

Tasks:
1. Propose 5 to 8 pass/fail gates based on the must-haves and constraints.
2. Propose weighted scoring categories that add up to 100, with a one-line explanation of each weight. Suggest how I might adjust the weights if cost or security matters more.
3. For each category, write 4 to 6 specific questions to send to every vendor.
4. Write a 0 to 5 scoring scale with a definition for each level, tailored to this purchase.
5. List the hidden costs I should ask about for this type of software.
6. List red flags specific to this type of vendor.

Output as tables I can paste into a spreadsheet. If any information is missing, ask me before guessing.
```

Once vendors respond, use a second prompt:

```
Below are our evaluation criteria and the documents from [Vendor name]: [paste criteria and relevant excerpts].

For each criterion, tell me:
- What the documents say, with a quote or section reference
- Whether the evidence is strong, weak, or missing
- A suggested score from 0 to 5, labelled as a draft
- Follow-up questions I should ask the vendor

Do not fill gaps with assumptions. If the documents don't answer something, write "Not addressed."
```

### What to check in the AI's answer

- **Quotes and references.** Open the source and confirm the text exists. AI can paraphrase confidently and incorrectly.
- **Certifications and compliance claims.** Never accept an AI statement that a vendor "is SOC 2 compliant" or "meets GDPR." Ask the vendor for the report or documentation, and have your security team read it.
- **Pricing.** Take prices only from written quotes. AI has no reliable knowledge of current pricing, and it may be out of date.
- **Contract terms.** Legal reviews contracts. An AI summary of a contract is a reading aid, not advice.
- **The scores.** Treat them as a first draft. The reviewer who watched the demo and called the reference owns the score.

### Where to be careful with data

Don't paste confidential vendor pricing, unreleased contract language or your customers' data into a consumer AI tool. Use whatever your company has approved, and ask IT if you're unsure.

## What are the red flags when evaluating a vendor?

- They won't share security documentation until after you sign, or only under an NDA that is never followed up.
- Demos use their sample data, and they resist using yours.
- Answers to direct questions arrive as links to marketing pages.
- The price is "custom" until the last moment, then rises with every added requirement.
- Key features are described as "coming soon" or "on the roadmap."
- They can't provide references that match your size or use case.
- Data export is described vaguely, or it costs extra.
- Heavy pressure to sign before quarter end.
- Auto-renewal with a long notice window and uncapped price increases.
- Support is excellent during the sales process and unreachable in the reference calls.

One red flag is a question to ask. Several are a score.

## What mistakes make vendor scorecards fail?

- **Too many criteria.** Thirty categories dilute the ones that matter. Stay under ten.
- **Equal weights.** If everything counts the same, nothing counts. Force trade-offs.
- **Group scoring in the room.** The loudest person sets the number. Score alone first.
- **Scoring the demo, not the product.** Use your scenarios and your data.
- **Ignoring the cost of switching.** Include implementation and exit in the comparison.
- **Treating the scorecard as the decision.** It structures the decision. If the result feels wrong, find out why. Either a weight was off or a score was, and fix that openly rather than overriding quietly.

## Should you buy a vendor's product or build your own tool?

Sometimes the evaluation reveals that what you need is small and specific: an intake form, an approval tracker, a vendor review dashboard. Buying a full platform for that can mean paying per seat for features you will never use. If you run many evaluations, you could build the scorecard itself as an internal app. [Remy](https://goremy.ai) builds and deploys full-stack apps from a plain-English description, with sign-in, a database and role-based access included. You could describe a vendor review tool where each reviewer logs in, scores only their categories, attaches evidence, and sees weighted totals update. Remy has a 30-day free trial, and the code is standard TypeScript in a git repo you own. Still buy the things that need dedicated support, security certification or deep integrations.

## Frequently Asked Questions

### How many vendors should I evaluate?

Start with a long list, apply the pass/fail gates, and score the vendors that remain. The template and worked example compare three vendors (A, B and C), and a small, low-risk purchase can use fewer.

### Who should be involved in a vendor evaluation?

At minimum, the budget owner, a person who will use the software daily, and IT or security if the tool touches company data. Add procurement and legal for anything with a contract. Involve fewer people on small purchases, but don't skip security review because the price is low. Small tools can still hold sensitive data.

### How do I set the weights?

Ask the budget owner what failure would look like in a year, and weight the categories that prevent it. A tool holding sensitive data should weight security higher. A tool every employee uses should weight adoption higher. Write the reasoning next to each weight so the logic survives a change in team members.

### Is a vendor evaluation the same as an RFP?

No. An RFP is a document you send to vendors to collect their answers. The evaluation template is how you judge those answers once they come back. Many teams use an RFP or standard questionnaire to gather the evidence, then the scorecard to compare vendors.

### How often should I re-evaluate an existing vendor?

Review at least once before each renewal, and sooner if the vendor is acquired, has a security incident, or your needs change. Reuse the same scorecard with your current vendor as one of the contenders. It keeps your negotiating position honest.