Prop Firm Software Selection Scorecard: Weight Fit and Evidence Separately
A scorecard should stop a polished demo or cheap headline price from deciding the procurement. Set knockout criteria and weights before final proposals, then record how strong the evidence is behind every score.
Gate zero: knockout criteria
Do this before points. A vendor that fails a true mandatory requirement does not advance regardless of aggregate score. Typical knockouts can include required trading platform, exact risk-rule behavior, API/data-export right, maximum fixed commercial exposure, security requirement or migration constraint.
100-point baseline
| Category | Weight | Best evidence |
|---|---|---|
| Challenge/lifecycle fit | 15 | Live configured workflow |
| Risk engine | 15 | Breach/failure tests + audit evidence |
| Trading/integrations | 15 | Production scope, docs and responsibility map |
| Reliability/support | 15 | SLA, incident process and support scope |
| Total cost at scale | 15 | Written launch/base/growth/downside scenarios |
| Migration/exit | 10 | Exports, plan, contract and cutover scope |
| Data/security/permissions | 10 | Terms, controls and live demo |
| Roadmap/optional features | 5 | Current and future scope clearly separated |
Score 0–5 for fit
- 0: requirement not supported.
- 1: major gaps/custom dependency.
- 2: partial fit with material workaround.
- 3: meets baseline.
- 4: strong fit with evidence.
- 5: exceptional fit backed by production/contractual evidence.
Weighted fit = category score ÷ 5 × category weight.
Add evidence confidence separately
| Confidence | Typical evidence |
|---|---|
| High | Demonstrated against buyer scenario and supported by docs/signed scope |
| Medium | Documentation or credible written response, not yet demonstrated |
| Low | Marketing claim, verbal promise, roadmap or unclear dependency |
Do not hide low-confidence assumptions inside a precise numerical total. Resolve material low-confidence items before contract.
Use different weights for different buyers
A startup may increase commercial flexibility and implementation weight. A live high-volume firm should usually increase reliability, migration, support, data and architecture. The weights should reflect the buyer—not the categories a vendor markets most aggressively.
Do not score public popularity as product fit
Customer counts, awards, testimonials and brand recognition can be diligence signals, but they are not substitutes for the buyer's own requirements testing. Likewise, public pricing is a commercial input, not a verification or matcher signal.
Recommended decision sequence
- Write requirements and knockout criteria.
- Set weights before final proposals.
- Use a status-safe shortlist.
- Send identical RFP requirements.
- Run identical demo tests.
- Normalize launch/base/growth/downside economics.
- Score fit and evidence confidence separately.
- Resolve low-confidence material items.
- Review contract, data and exit.
- Require implementation acceptance before go-live.
Supporting resources: buying process, RFP framework, 30-test demo checklist, quote comparison and due diligence.