Compare two radon mitigation quotes
A price gap between two radon quotes almost always traces to a specific line item rather than to one contractor being greedy. This worksheet reviews both bids on the lines that drive both price and outcome.
It deliberately does not tell you which quote is cheaper per unit of anything. It tells you what each quote actually covers, which is the question worth answering before you sign.
Work it through
Everything below runs in your browser. Nothing you enter is sent to us or to anyone else — this page has no server to send it to.
Basement slab, crawl space, slab addition — count what the scope names.
Same count for the second bid.
Pressure field extension measured before suction points are chosen.
Same for the second bid.
Post-mitigation measurement inside the price.
Same for the second bid.
A clause committing to an outcome and what happens if it is not met.
Same for the second bid.
What this indicates
Reading your inputs…
Why this says what it says
The full working, shown rather than summarised. Nothing below is hidden behind a toggle, because reasoning that takes a click to reach has not really been shown.
What you told us, and what each answer did
| Your answer | Value | What it influences |
|---|---|---|
| Quote A — soil-contact zones covered | 1 zones | Basement slab, crawl space, slab addition — count what the scope names. |
| Quote B — soil-contact zones covered | 1 zones | Same count for the second bid. |
| Quote A includes a sub-slab diagnostic | No | Pressure field extension measured before suction points are chosen. |
| Quote B includes a sub-slab diagnostic | No | Same for the second bid. |
| Quote A includes the verification test | No | Post-mitigation measurement inside the price. |
| Quote B includes the verification test | No | Same for the second bid. |
| Quote A names a remedy if verification fails | No | A clause committing to an outcome and what happens if it is not met. |
| Quote B names a remedy if verification fails | No | Same for the second bid. |
What we took on trust
- The figures you enter (quote a — soil-contact zones covered, quote b — soil-contact zones covered) are taken exactly as typed. We have no way to check them against a device or a laboratory record.
- The yes/no conditions (quote a includes a sub-slab diagnostic, quote b includes a sub-slab diagnostic, quote a includes the verification test, quote b includes the verification test, quote a names a remedy if verification fails, quote b names a remedy if verification fails) are accepted exactly as you set them. Nobody has confirmed any of them, and the output assumes each is as stated.
What is still unknown
- Which of your two quotes is better value in dollars, because we hold no quote observations and publish no price benchmark.
- Whether either contractor does good work. Scope completeness is a necessary condition, not a sufficient one.
- What a fair price is in your market. Local labour rates and competition vary and we have no basis to quantify them.
Why this stops short of a decision
This runs entirely on what you typed. Nobody has been to your house, nobody has seen the device or the laboratory record, and the choice between courses of action follows from diagnostics performed on the building. What you have here is a reading of what you reported, which is a different thing from a decision and a good basis for making one.
What would change this
- The quote line-item collection instrument in our Research Center specifies exactly what would need to be gathered — 250 written quotes normalised to a fixed schema — before any real spread could be published. It currently holds zero observations.
- Linking scope completeness to post-mitigation outcomes across many jobs would establish whether the lines this worksheet weights are the ones that actually predict success.
- Correcting any answer above. Change an input and the output changes, which is the honest behaviour of something working from a description.
The logic, in full
These are the rules the tool applies — not a summary of them. The interactive panel above evaluates exactly this list, and a build check fails if the two ever diverge. A decision tool whose reasoning you cannot inspect is a black box, and a black box is not authority.
| When | Then |
|---|---|
| One quote covers fewer soil-contact zones | The bids are not comparable. A quote that omits a crawl space or a slab addition has priced a different house, and the gap is scope rather than value. |
| Only one quote includes a sub-slab diagnostic | One contractor is measuring and the other is guessing at suction-point count. The measured quote may be higher and is the one with a basis. |
| A quote omits the verification test | It omits the deliverable. Without a post-mitigation measurement you own equipment rather than a documented result — this is the single most common reason a bargain bid is cheaper. |
| A quote has no remedy clause | The risk of a failed verification sits with you. A scope committing to an outcome prices that risk; a scope committing only to an installation moves it. |
| Both quotes are complete and close in price | A narrow gap between two complete scopes is normal and healthy. Choose on credential, references, written detail, and warranty terms rather than on the difference. |
| Both quotes omit diagnostics and verification | Get a third quote. Two incomplete scopes do not average into a good decision. |
What this tool cannot do
- This worksheet compares scope, not price. We hold no quote data and publish no cost benchmark — see the quote line-item collection instrument for what would be required to publish one.
- A complete scope is not a guarantee of good work. Verify the credential with the issuing agency before signing.
- Some legitimate differences are not on this list, including scheduling, warranty length, and how a contractor handles making good on opened surfaces.
Related
- Is my system working? — The safe checks, in order, and where they stop.
- Selling or buying? — Your side, your timeline, your result — and what should be in the amendment.
- Comparing radon contractors — Compare scopes, not totals. Most bid gaps are scope gaps.
- Cost drivers — Seven variables that explain nearly every price difference.
- Cheapest isn't always best — The three omissions that turn a bargain into a repeat job.
- Warranty questions — What the warranty covers, for how long, and what triggers a claim.
- Radon Mitigation Cost Driver Index — The variables that move a quote, their direction, and their relative magnitude — no invented dollar figures.
- Radon Quote Line-Item Comparison Dataset — Instrument published, N = 0. What we will collect, and why we will not estimate first.
- All tools — every calculator and decision tool.
Confidence and limits of this page
Every decision resource on this platform states its own boundaries. This is not a disclaimer — it is the part of this tool you should read before relying on it.
- What we knowClaims on this page we stand behind, each traceable to an approved source or to observable structure.
- The eight scope lines this worksheet compares each change either the price or the outcome of a mitigation job. They are derived from what a competent written scope must specify.
- A quote omitting the post-mitigation verification test omits the deliverable, and its absence is a common reason a bargain bid is cheaper.
- A scope committing to an outcome prices the risk of returning; a scope committing only to an installation moves that risk to the homeowner.
- What we do not knowQuestions you may reasonably have that this page does not answer.
- Which of your two quotes is better value in dollars, because we hold no quote observations and publish no price benchmark.
- Whether either contractor does good work. Scope completeness is a necessary condition, not a sufficient one.
- What a fair price is in your market. Local labour rates and competition vary and we have no basis to quantify them.
- What research would settle itWhat it would actually take to answer the above — naming it is the difference between honesty and hedging.
- The quote line-item collection instrument in our Research Center specifies exactly what would need to be gathered — 250 written quotes normalised to a fixed schema — before any real spread could be published. It currently holds zero observations.
- Linking scope completeness to post-mitigation outcomes across many jobs would establish whether the lines this worksheet weights are the ones that actually predict success.
- What we do not claimClaims you might expect to find here and will not, with the reason.
- We do not rank contractors, score them, or recommend companies. There is no leaderboard here to win.
- We do not claim a price per suction point or per square foot, because any such figure would be invented.
- We do not claim a complete scope guarantees a good outcome, only that an incomplete one hides risk.
- What we cannot independently verifyFacts this page relies on that we could not confirm ourselves.
- Whether the quotes you entered say what you think they say. Scope language is frequently ambiguous, which is part of the problem this worksheet exists to expose.
Sources
- U.S. EPA — Radon
- U.S. EPA — Consumer’s Guide to Radon Reduction
Need a third quote?
Free to request and no obligation. We introduce homeowners to independent credentialed contractors who quote the property directly.