Source: https://frntir.ai/guides/autogenai-alternatives AutogenAI vs mytender.io, Bidwell, Loopio, Responsive and an AI colleague for bid and tender writing, plus a UK procurement glossary (PQQ, SQ, ITT). --- Comparison # AutogenAI Alternatives: The AI Bid & Tender Writing Tools UK Teams Should Compare (2026) By **Aidan Dunphy** & **Cyril Le Roux**, Co-founders of Frntir · Last updated: **August 2026** · 16 min read AutogenAI is one of the best-known AI bid and proposal platforms, but it is built and priced for large enterprise and government bid teams, which sends a lot of people looking for something that fits their size, budget or way of working. This guide compares the main alternatives honestly, says who each one is best for, and ends with a plain-English glossary of the UK procurement terms (PQQ, SQ, PSQ, ITT) you will meet along the way. The short version - **AutogenAI** is the enterprise standard: deep, compliance-heavy, built for bid teams of five or more, and priced accordingly. - **UK SME on a budget?** Look at subscription tools like **mytender.io** before an enterprise contract. - **Answering RFPs at volume from an approved library?** **Loopio** or **Responsive** are built for that. - **UK SME that needs to find and answer tenders?** **Bidwell** is UK-public-sector native, from £15 a month. - **Want the bid function owned, not another tool to drive?** An AI colleague such as **Frntir** is a different kind of answer. ## Why teams look for an AutogenAI alternative A size and budget mismatch, rather than a bad product, is what sends most people looking for an AutogenAI alternative. AutogenAI is aimed at large bid teams and enterprise budgets, so smaller teams, occasional bidders and organisations that want less software to run tend to look for something lighter, cheaper, or shaped differently. AutogenAI is a UK-founded, enterprise-grade proposal platform. It has raised around $65 million in venture funding and reports being used by more than 200 organisations, including large government contractors, enterprises and universities. It does not publish pricing; public forum reports put annual contracts at roughly £24,000 (about $30,000) with a five-seat minimum. AutogenAI states that it can cut time-to-submission by around 70% and lift win rates by up to 241%, though those are the vendor's own figures and, as with every tool here, real results depend on your bids and your team. None of that is a criticism. It is a question of fit. If you are a 30-person firm that bids for a handful of contracts a quarter, a five-seat enterprise platform is more than you need. If you sit inside a large, mature bid team, AutogenAI may be exactly right and you should shortlist it. The rest of this guide is for the many teams in between. ## What to look for in an alternative Before comparing tools, get clear on the job. "Bid software" bundles four different jobs together, and most tools are strong at one of them. Pick for the job you have, then filter on team size, budget and UK procurement fit. - **Which job?** Finding tenders, writing responses, managing an answer library, or coordinating a team. AutogenAI and its alternatives are mostly in the writing camp; finding tenders is a separate market (see below). - **Team size and budget.** Enterprise contracts (five figures, multi-seat) versus SME subscriptions are different products, not just price points. - **UK public-sector fit.** If you bid for UK government work, the tool should reflect the Procurement Act 2023 and the current PSQ, not pre-2025 SQ templates. In practice only a short list speaks UK procurement natively (AutogenAI, mytender.io and Bidwell); the big US and Canadian platforms (Loopio, Responsive) do not. - **Library versus memory.** Some tools draft from a governed content library you maintain; others aim to build and reuse organisational memory automatically. - **Compliance checking.** Requirement extraction and compliance matrices are where a lot of bid time goes, so it is worth testing this specifically. - **How much you want to run.** A tool your team drives, versus a colleague that owns the recurring work, is the biggest fork of all. ## AutogenAI alternatives at a glance | Tool | Best for | Team size | Pricing | Core strength | | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | | AutogenAI | Large enterprise, government and consulting bid teams | 5+ (min seat count) | Enterprise; ~£24k/yr (reported ~$30k) | Deep drafting + compliance (Gamma Review), content-library RAG | | mytender.io | UK SMEs and smaller bid teams | 1 to ~20 | Subscription, by demo | Affordable team workflow: section assignment, deadlines, pipeline | | Loopio | Enterprises answering RFPs at volume | 10+ | From ~£16k/yr, 10 seats (~$20k) | Governed answer library, 80+ content sources | | Responsive | Large response teams wanting analytics + control | 10+ | Enterprise, by quote | Response management at scale; now owns Bidhive | | Bidwell | UK SMEs bidding for public-sector contracts | SMEs | From £15/mo | UK-native: monitors UK tender portals, drafts from your past bids | | Frntir | Teams that want the whole bid function owned, not a tool to drive | Any size | £6,000/yr per colleague (£500/mo) | An AI colleague with memory that owns bid response end to end | Pricing is indicative. Some tools publish or have reported figures (AutogenAI via forum reports; Loopio, Bidwell, SwiftBid and CleanTender publish theirs); the rest sell by demo or quote. USD-priced tools are shown in approximate GBP, converted at around $1 = £0.79 (July 2026), with the original USD noted. Verify current pricing directly before shortlisting. ## The alternatives, one by one We have described each tool by what it is best at, and where it is not the right fit, because a comparison where one option wins every row is not a comparison worth reading. The incumbent ### AutogenAI The enterprise benchmark for AI bid, proposal, tender and grant writing. Its core differentiator is Gamma Review, an automated pass for requirement extraction, compliance checking and evidence tracing, and it holds FedRAMP High authorisation for US federal work. Deep, thorough, and built to sit inside a large bid function. **Best for:** large enterprise, government and consulting bid teams of five or more. **Less ideal for:** SMEs and occasional bidders, where it is more platform than the job requires. The UK SME pick ### mytender.io A UK, subscription-priced AI bid writer aimed at smaller teams. Its strength is affordable team workflow: section assignment, deadline and milestone tracking, a pipeline overview and performance analytics, with integrations such as SharePoint and Salesforce. The closest like-for-like to AutogenAI for a smaller budget. **Best for:** UK SMEs and lean bid teams that want structure without an enterprise contract. **Note:** pricing is by demo rather than published. The answer library ### Loopio A leading RFP-response platform built around a governed content library, drawing on 80-plus content sources. If your challenge is answering a high volume of RFPs consistently from approved content, Loopio does that job well. It is one of the few in this space to publish entry pricing, starting at roughly £16,000 per year for ten seats (Loopio lists around $20,000). **Best for:** large enterprises answering commercial RFPs at volume from a maintained library. **Less ideal for:** UK public-sector bidding, since it is a global enterprise tool with no specific UK procurement focus and is overkill for a handful of council tenders a year. Response management at scale ### Responsive (formerly RFPIO) Positions itself as a strategic response-management platform with strong analytics and process control, and is a G2 category leader. In 2025 it acquired Bidhive, folding bid-pipeline visibility into its offering. A serious option for large, established response teams. **Best for:** large, mostly commercial response teams wanting analytics and governance. **Less ideal for:** UK public-sector work, since like Loopio it is US-headquartered and not UK-procurement-native. The UK public-sector SME pick ### Bidwell A UK tool built around the public-sector bidding workflow. It monitors the main UK portals (Find a Tender, Contracts Finder, Public Contracts Scotland, Sell2Wales, eTendersNI and CCS frameworks), then drafts responses from your own past bids, policies and accreditations. If you already have a body of previous submissions to draw on, it is one of the most practical UK options, and it covers both finding and writing. **Best for:** UK SMEs that need to find and answer public-sector tenders. **Pricing:** from £15 per month. **Less ideal for:** teams with no past-bid material to draw on yet. A different kind of option ### Frntir (the AI-colleague approach) Frntir is not a like-for-like AutogenAI competitor, and it is worth being straight about that. The tools above are things your team operates to write a bid faster. Frntir builds AI Synths: named [AI colleagues](https://frntir.ai/guides/ai-agents-vs-copilots-vs-chatbots) with persistent memory that are given a job rather than a task. A Synth can watch for relevant tenders, draft responses using your organisation's memory of past bids, keep the answer library current as a by-product of doing the work, and escalate to a human when unsure. The honest trade-off: the specialist tools are deeper and more proven at the drafting-and-compliance task itself; Frntir is broader and earlier, and aims to remove the coordination work around the whole bid function rather than speed up one step of it. **Best for:** teams whose real problem is that no one owns the bid-response function end to end. **Less ideal for:** teams that just want a faster drafting tool and nothing more. **Pricing:** £500/mo per full-time colleague (£6,000/yr), no setup fee, whole team included. ### Two more UK options: budget and niche If budget or sector is the deciding factor, two more UK names are worth knowing. **SwiftBid** prices per bid rather than by subscription (from £149 a bid, with optional human expert review at its top tier), which suits firms that bid only a few times a year and do not want a licence to maintain. **CleanTender** is narrower still: it is built only for UK soft facilities management (cleaning, security, grounds, waste, catering) at £99 a month, and speaks that sector's language natively, so it fits perfectly inside that niche and not at all outside it. ## A different job: finding tenders versus writing them One common mix-up is worth clearing up. Tools that help you find and qualify tenders are a separate category from tools that help you write them. If your gap is knowing which contracts to chase, a writing tool will not fix it. For UK public-sector market intelligence, finding and tracking opportunities before you write anything, the names to look at are **Stotles** and **Tussell**. They are complementary to, not competitors of, the writing tools above: use one to decide what to bid for, and another to respond. Some teams need both. A few tools blur the line: Bidwell, above, both monitors the UK portals and drafts responses, so it can cover discovery and writing for an SME in one place. ## UK bid and tender glossary (2026) If you bid for UK public-sector work, these are the acronyms you will meet. They changed under the Procurement Act 2023, which applies to procurements starting on or after 24 February 2025, so older guides may use out-of-date terms. **PQQ (Pre-Qualification Questionnaire)** The original selection-stage questionnaire that checks whether a supplier is suitable to bid (finances, capability, experience, compliance). It was replaced by the SQ in 2016, but the term is still used loosely. **SQ (Standard Selection Questionnaire)** Introduced in 2016 to replace the PQQ as the standard selection-stage tool for UK public buyers, used before they read your priced bid. **PSQ (Procurement Specific Questionnaire)** The Procurement Act 2023's replacement for the SQ, for new procurements from 24 February 2025. Same purpose (proving suitability at the selection stage), updated framework. **ITT (Invitation to Tender)** The tender stage that follows selection: shortlisted suppliers submit their actual proposal, which is evaluated on quality and price. **PPN (Procurement Policy Note)** How the Cabinet Office communicates new procurement policy and guidance to public buyers. Worth watching, because PPNs are where rule changes land first. ## Which should you choose? Match the tool to your situation, not to a leaderboard. There is no single winner here, because these tools are built for different teams and different jobs. - **Large enterprise or government bid team:** shortlist AutogenAI and test its compliance features (Gamma Review) on a real tender. - **UK SME or lean bid team:** start with mytender.io, or Bidwell if you also need to find public-sector tenders; SwiftBid if you bid only a few times a year and prefer paying per bid. - **High-volume commercial RFP responses from a library:** Loopio or Responsive (global enterprise tools, not UK-procurement-native). - **UK soft FM (cleaning, security, catering):** CleanTender is built only for that sector. - **You do not know which tenders to chase yet:** begin with Stotles or Tussell, then add a writing tool. - **The real gap is ownership, not drafting speed:** look at an AI colleague such as Frntir that can own the recurring bid work. The question underneath the tool choice Every tool here makes bid writing faster. The deeper question is whether you want a faster tool or an owned function. If your bids slip because someone has to remember to start them, chase the inputs and keep the library current, more drafting speed will not fix that. That is the gap an AI colleague is built for, and it is a different decision from picking the best drafting tool. Related guide: [AI agents vs copilots vs chatbots vs digital workers](https://frntir.ai/guides/ai-agents-vs-copilots-vs-chatbots) → ### Sources and method Vendor capabilities and positioning are drawn from each company's own site and from 2026 third-party comparison write-ups; performance figures attributed to a vendor (for example AutogenAI's time-saving and win-rate numbers) are that vendor's own claims, not independently verified. AutogenAI pricing is from public forum reports, as the company does not publish prices; Loopio entry pricing is Loopio's published figure. USD prices are converted to GBP at approximately $1 = £0.79 (July 2026) and rounded, with the original USD shown alongside; AutogenAI's $65 million funding total is left in USD, as it is a funding round rather than a price. Frntir pricing (£500/mo, or £6,000/yr, per full-time colleague) is our own list price. UK procurement definitions and dates follow the Procurement Act 2023 and Cabinet Office guidance on GOV.UK. Last reviewed August 2026. If you spot anything out of date, tell us and we will correct it. ## Frequently asked questions What is the best alternative to AutogenAI? There is no single best alternative, because these tools do different jobs. For a UK SME that wants an affordable AI bid writer, mytender.io is the closest like-for-like, and Bidwell adds UK public-sector tender discovery on top of drafting. For enterprises answering high volumes of commercial RFPs from a governed content library, Loopio or Responsive fit better, though neither is UK-procurement-native. And if the real problem is that no one owns the bid-response function, an AI colleague such as Frntir is a different kind of answer. Match the tool to the job, not to a ranking. How much does AutogenAI cost? AutogenAI does not publish pricing. Public forum reports put annual contracts at around £24,000 (roughly $30,000) with a five-seat minimum, which places it firmly in the enterprise bracket. Treat that as an indicative, unofficial figure and get a current quote directly, since bid-tool pricing changes and is usually tailored to team size and usage. Is there a cheaper AutogenAI alternative for small businesses? Yes. AutogenAI is built and priced for large bid teams, so UK SMEs often find it heavy. Subscription tools such as mytender.io are aimed at smaller teams and sell on a per-seat or per-team basis rather than a five-figure enterprise contract. Most of these tools sell by demo rather than listing prices, so shortlist two or three and compare quotes for your actual team size. What is the difference between an AI bid-writing tool and an AI colleague? An AI bid-writing tool is something your team operates: you open it, feed it the tender, and drive it to produce a draft. An AI colleague (what Frntir calls a Synth) is given the job rather than the task: it can watch for relevant tenders, draft responses using your organisation’s memory of past bids, keep the answer library current as a by-product of doing the work, and escalate to a human when it is unsure. One is a faster tool; the other owns a recurring function. Specialised tools are usually deeper at the drafting task itself; an AI colleague is broader and aims to remove the coordination work around it. Can AI write a full PQQ, SQ or tender response on its own? Not to a submittable standard without a human. Current AI tools are genuinely good at a strong first draft, at extracting requirements, and at checking compliance against the question set, which is where most of the time goes. They still need a bid professional to verify facts, confirm evidence, set win themes and sign off. The honest framing across every tool on this page is human-led, AI-accelerated, not AI-only. Does the Procurement Act 2023 change how I respond to UK tenders? Yes, in terminology and process. For procurements starting on or after 24 February 2025, the Procurement Act 2023 replaces the Standard Selection Questionnaire (SQ) with the Procurement Specific Questionnaire (PSQ), and changes how notices and stages work. The underlying task is unchanged: prove you are suitable at the selection stage, then win on quality and price at the tender (ITT) stage. Any tool you pick should reflect the current Act rather than pre-2025 templates. How does AutogenAI pricing scale as you add users? AutogenAI is sold as an annual enterprise contract with a reported five-seat minimum, so the entry cost is high and it climbs as you add seats. Public forum reports put a starting contract around £24,000 a year (roughly $30,000). There is no published per-user list price, so the only reliable figure is a current quote for your exact seat count. Do AutogenAI alternatives publish their pricing? Only some do. Bidwell (from £15 a month), CleanTender (£99 a month), SwiftBid (from £149 a bid) and Loopio (around £16,000 a year for ten seats, which Loopio lists near $20,000) publish or have clearly reported entry figures. AutogenAI, mytender.io and Responsive sell by demo or quote, so you have to ask. A published price is not the same as a cheap one, and a quote-only tool is not automatically expensive; it usually means pricing is tailored to team size and usage. Shortlist two or three tools for the job you actually have, then compare real quotes for your team size rather than list prices. What is the cheapest way to write bids with AI? It depends entirely on how often you bid. For an occasional bidder, per-bid pricing is usually cheapest: SwiftBid starts at £149 a bid with no subscription to maintain. For a UK SME bidding regularly, Bidwell from £15 a month or CleanTender at £99 a month (soft facilities management only) are the lowest published subscriptions. A general-purpose chatbot is cheaper still, but it remembers nothing between bids, so you re-explain your business every time, which is where the hidden cost sits. Can I pay per bid instead of an annual subscription? Yes. SwiftBid prices per bid (from £149, with optional human expert review at its top tier) rather than by subscription, which suits firms that bid only a few times a year and do not want a licence to maintain. Most other tools here, including AutogenAI, mytender.io, Loopio and Responsive, are subscription or annual-contract only. Work out your realistic annual bid count first, then compare a per-bid total against a year of subscription for the same volume: per-bid wins when your bidding is lumpy, and loses once the fees add up past a subscription. What do AI bid-writing tools integrate with? It varies by tool. mytender.io integrates with SharePoint and Salesforce; Bidwell connects to the main UK tender portals (Find a Tender, Contracts Finder and others) to pull opportunities in; Loopio draws on many content sources for its answer library. The integration that matters most for a bid tool, though, is not the CRM connector, it is how easily it ingests your past submissions, policies, accreditations and case studies, because that is what turns generic AI writing into something specific to you. Before shortlisting, ask each vendor exactly how your back catalogue gets in and how it stays current as you win new work. Which AutogenAI alternatives are built specifically for UK public-sector procurement? A short list speaks UK procurement natively: AutogenAI, mytender.io and Bidwell reflect the Procurement Act 2023 and the current PSQ, and Bidwell also monitors the UK tender portals. CleanTender is UK-native but only for soft facilities management. The large US and Canadian platforms, Loopio and Responsive, are strong tools but not UK-procurement-specific. UK fit is not a marketing checkbox: it shows up in whether the tool uses current terminology (PSQ rather than the retired SQ), understands selection versus award stages, and tracks the UK portals where work is advertised. If you bid for UK government contracts, weigh that fit ahead of raw drafting power. What is the best AutogenAI alternative for a one or two person bid team? For a very small team, mytender.io (subscription, built for lean bid teams) or Bidwell (from £15 a month, UK public-sector native) are the most natural fits, and SwiftBid (from £149 a bid) suits you if bidding is occasional. AutogenAI’s reported five-seat minimum makes it an awkward fit at this size. A one or two person bid function has a different problem from a large team: the constraint is not drafting horsepower, it is that one person is finding, writing, checking and submitting, so the coordination and the remembering are what slip. A lighter tool may fit the budget and still leave that ownership gap. How hard is it to switch from AutogenAI to another tool? The drafting itself transfers easily, since every tool works from the same raw material: your past bids, policies and case studies. The friction is rebuilding any curated content library and re-learning a new interface. Export your source documents and best past answers first, then rebuild the library in the new tool from that. Switching cost is lower than it feels, because your real asset is your body of past submissions, not the tool that held them. A tool that makes your own past bids hard to get out is one worth leaving sooner rather than later. Will I lose my content library if I move away from AutogenAI? Your source material is yours, so the underlying bids, policies and answers can move with you. What does not transfer is any structure or tagging a specific tool layered on top. Before cancelling, export everything and check the format is usable elsewhere. The safest position is to keep your master content in your own store, not locked inside one vendor: if your winning answers live only inside a proposal platform, every switch is painful and every renewal has leverage over you. An AI-colleague approach leans this way by design, since the memory is the organisation’s rather than the tool’s. How long does it take to implement an AI bid-writing tool? A lightweight SME tool can be usable the same day: you sign up, upload a few past bids and start drafting. Enterprise platforms take longer because they involve procurement, security review and library setup. The real time cost is not installation, it is loading enough of your past material for the AI to sound like you rather than generic. Ask a vendor two separate questions: how long until I can log in and draft, and how long until the output is good enough to submit with light editing. A tool that forgets between sessions never really finishes implementing. Where is my bid data stored, and is it used to train AI models? It depends on the vendor, so read the data processing agreement rather than the marketing page. Most enterprise bid tools commit contractually not to train public models on your content and store data in named regions, but the only reliable answer is the one in the contract. Bid material is sensitive: it holds pricing, win themes and sometimes client information. Two questions settle most of it: is my content used to train shared models, and where physically is it stored and processed. Get both in writing, and for UK public-sector work ask specifically about data residency. Are AI bid tools safe to use for confidential or government bids? They can be, if the tool’s security posture matches the work. For sensitive or government bids, look for named data residency, a clear no-train commitment, access controls and relevant certifications. AutogenAI holds FedRAMP High authorisation for US federal work, which is a strong signal for that market, though it is a US federal standard rather than a UK one. The risk is rarely the writing quality, it is putting confidential requirements or your pricing into a system you have not vetted. If a bid carries security clearance or handling conditions, those conditions apply to the tool too. Do AI bid-writing tools actually improve win rates? They reliably save time on drafting, requirement extraction and compliance checking, which is where most bid hours go. Win-rate gains are harder to prove independently. AutogenAI states it can cut time-to-submission by around 70% and lift win rates by up to 241%, but those are the vendor’s own figures. Be sceptical of any headline win-rate number, including a flattering one, because win rate depends far more on whether you should have bid at all and how strong your proposition is than on drafting speed. Where AI clearly helps is freeing your best people from first-draft grunt work to spend time on strategy, evidence and win themes. Will using AI to write a bid get me disqualified? There is no general rule against using AI to help write a UK tender response, and most tools here are built precisely for that. What matters is the individual tender’s instructions: some buyers now ask you to declare AI use, and all of them expect the submission to be accurate and genuinely yours. The real risks are not the tool but the output: unverified claims, fabricated evidence, or boilerplate that does not answer the question. A human still has to check facts, confirm evidence and sign off. Read each tender’s terms, follow any disclosure requirement, and never submit AI-drafted content you have not verified. What is Gamma Review, and do the alternatives have an equivalent? Gamma Review is AutogenAI’s automated pass for requirement extraction, compliance checking and evidence tracing, and it is one of the platform’s main differentiators. Several 2026 alternatives now compete specifically on this analysis-and-verification step rather than on drafting, positioning around tender analysis and compliance. If compliance checking is where your time goes, test this feature directly: give each tool a real, messy tender document and see how accurately it pulls out the mandatory requirements and maps your evidence to them. That test separates the serious tools faster than a writing sample does. mytender.io vs AutogenAI: which should a UK SME pick? For most UK SMEs, mytender.io is the closer fit: it is subscription-priced and built for smaller teams, where AutogenAI is an annual enterprise contract with a reported five-seat minimum. Pick AutogenAI only if you are a large, mature bid team that needs its depth and compliance tooling and can use five or more seats. The decision is mostly about team size and how you buy, not about which writes better sentences. A lean team usually values affordable structure (section assignment, deadlines, a pipeline view) over enterprise-grade depth it will not fully use. Shortlist both, and weigh each on fit for how your team actually works. Loopio vs Responsive: what is the difference? Both are enterprise RFP-response platforms built around a governed answer library, and both are US-headquartered rather than UK-procurement-native. Loopio centres on a content library drawing on 80-plus sources and publishes entry pricing near £16,000 a year for ten seats. Responsive positions more around strategic response management and analytics, and acquired Bidhive in 2025 to add bid-pipeline visibility. For a UK team the more useful question is whether either is right at all: both are built for high-volume commercial RFP responses, so they earn their price at volume and are heavier than you need for a handful of council or government contracts a year. Is Frntir a direct replacement for AutogenAI? No, and it is worth being straight about that. AutogenAI and the other tools here are software your team operates to write a bid faster. Frntir builds AI Synths: named AI colleagues with memory that are given the bid function rather than a drafting task. The specialist tools are deeper at drafting and compliance; Frntir aims to own the recurring work around the whole function. They answer different questions. If drafting is slow, a specialist bid tool is the direct fix. If bids slip because no one owns starting them, chasing inputs and keeping the library current, more drafting speed will not solve it, and that ownership gap is what an AI colleague is built for. Who should not use an AI bid-writing tool at all? If you bid once or twice a year, a good template and a careful human write-up often beat paying for and learning any tool. AI bid tools earn their keep on repetition: the more often you bid and the more past material you have, the more they save. Below that threshold, the setup and subscription cost more than they return. The other case for staying manual is a bid so specialised or high-stakes that every word needs a senior expert anyway, where a first draft saves little. Be honest about your volume before you buy: a tool that sits idle between rare bids is a cost, not a capability. ![Aidan Dunphy](https://frntir.ai/images/Aidan-Dunphy-Profile.webp) ![Cyril Le Roux](https://frntir.ai/images/Cyril-Le-Roux-headshot.webp) **Aidan Dunphy & Cyril Le Roux** are the co-founders of Frntir. Aidan has 25+ years in product strategy and technology leadership (B.Sc. Mathematics, Executive MBA). Cyril has 20+ years scaling product organisations, including as VP Product at TransferGo (MBA, The Open University). Frntir builds AI Synths for mid-sized businesses. ## Want the bid function owned, not just faster? Tell us how your team responds to tenders today, and we'll show you what an AI colleague could own, inside the tools you already use. [Book a call](https://frntir.ai/contact)