Sample comparison · Cloud Provider RFP
Cloud Provider RFP — Production workload migration
Generated by POCsheet in 47 seconds from 3 vendor PDFs · 3 documents analysed
AWS_Proposal_2026.pdf
vendor proposal
Azure_Proposal_2026.pdf
vendor proposal
GCP_Proposal_2026.pdf
vendor proposal
Vendor scorecard
| Vendor | Total | Cost | Security | Performance | Ease |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A.AWS | 8.2 | 6.5 | 9.0 | 9.5 | 7.8 |
| B.Azure | 8.0 | 7.5 | 8.8 | 8.5 | 8.2 |
| C.GCP | 7.6 | 9.0 | 8.5 | 8.0 | 5.0 |
Executive summary
All three providers meet the baseline functional and security requirements (SOC 2 Type II, ISO 27001, GDPR DPA). AWS leads on raw performance and ecosystem breadth but is the most expensive at the proposed 3-year commit. Azure offers the strongest enterprise integration story (Active Directory, Microsoft 365 alignment) at a 12 % discount versus AWS list. GCP is the most cost-competitive (-22 % vs AWS) and the technical proposal is the cleanest, but the support tier requires a paid upgrade to match AWS / Azure parity.
Red flags detected
AWS: Auto-renewal clause (MSA §11.2) defaults to a fresh 36-month term unless cancelled with 90 days' notice — narrow window.
Azure: Annual price escalator capped at CPI + 3 %, applied at vendor's sole discretion (MSA §6.4). Push for a fixed cap of 5 %.
GCP: Liability cap is 12 months of paid fees with no carve-out for data-breach indemnification (MSA §9.3). Below industry norm.
Key differences
- Pricing structure: AWS is per-second billing with reserved instances; Azure offers 3-year commits with Hybrid Benefit; GCP includes sustained-use discounts that apply automatically.
- Support: AWS Business Support included; Azure Standard included; GCP requires a paid upgrade ($150 / user / month) to reach equivalent response SLAs.
- Data residency: All three offer EU regions, but only Azure commits in writing to no cross-border processing for the proposed workloads.
- Egress costs: AWS quotes $0.09/GB after 100 TB; Azure $0.087/GB; GCP $0.08/GB — material at the projected 2 PB / month volume.
Aligned comparison
| Feature | A. AWS | B. Azure | C. GCP |
|---|---|---|---|
Annual cost (proposed 3-year commit) List vs. proposed discount; excludes egress | $1.42M / yr (list $1.78M, 20% commit discount) | $1.25M / yr (list $1.55M, 19% commit discount) | $1.10M / yr (list $1.32M, 17% commit discount) |
Compute SLA Monthly uptime, full credit threshold | 99.99% (4.32 min / month) | 99.95% (21.6 min / month) | 99.95% (21.6 min / month) |
Support response — P1 Acknowledgement time, included tier | 15 minutes (Business Support, included) | 1 hour (Standard, included) | 4 hours (Basic, included); 15 min requires paid upgrade |
Security certifications Coverage in scope of the proposal | SOC 2 Type II, ISO 27001, ISO 27017, HIPAA, PCI DSS, FedRAMP High | SOC 2 Type II, ISO 27001, ISO 27018, HIPAA, PCI DSS, FedRAMP High | SOC 2 Type II, ISO 27001, ISO 27017, HIPAA, PCI DSS |
Data residency (EU) Customer-controlled regions + commitments | Frankfurt, Ireland, Paris, Stockholm; no in-writing commitment on metadata residency | 9 EU regions; explicit no-cross-border processing commitment (DPA §4.1) | Frankfurt, Belgium, London, Finland, Madrid; metadata may transit US |
Contract term & renewal Initial term, renewal mechanics, notice window | 36 months, auto-renews 36 months unless 90-day notice (§11.2) | 36 months, explicit opt-in renewal | 36 months, explicit opt-in renewal |
Liability cap Maximum aggregate liability + breach carve-outs | 12 months of paid fees, with carve-out for breach of confidentiality + IP indemnity | 12 months of paid fees, with carve-out for breach of confidentiality | 12 months of paid fees, no carve-out (§9.3) — below industry norm |
Egress pricing (over 100 TB/mo) Per GB, after included allowance | $0.090 / GB | $0.087 / GB | $0.080 / GB |
Stakeholder summary
For the procurement and finance lens: GCP is the strongest financial proposal, with $320K / year cost savings versus AWS and the best egress pricing for the projected volume. For the CTO / engineering lens: AWS is the safest technical bet — best SLA, broadest ecosystem and the most mature managed services. For the CISO lens: Azure offers the cleanest contractual data-residency commitment, which materially de-risks the EU compliance posture.
Talking points for negotiation
We can use GCP's $1.10M proposal as leverage in AWS / Azure renegotiation — both have a clear path to closing the cost gap without changing tier.
The 36-month auto-renewal in AWS §11.2 needs a contract amendment before signing. Counter: 90-day window → 180-day window, or convert to opt-in.
GCP's missing data-breach carve-out is a non-starter for finance / legal — push for parity with AWS / Azure §9.3 language.
The egress pricing delta ($0.01 / GB across providers) is worth ~$240K / year at 2 PB / mo. Material enough to weight 5 % of the scorecard.
Recommendation
Recommendation: enter parallel negotiation tracks with AWS (primary preference) and GCP (cost leverage). Defer Azure to a secondary track unless EU compliance posture is the dominant decision factor. Pre-negotiation must-fixes: AWS auto-renewal window (§11.2), GCP liability carve-out (§9.3). Re-score after the next round of pricing iterations; current scorecard implies AWS at the recommended provider given a 5–8 % price concession from list.
Run this on your real vendor PDFs
Upload 2–3 proposals or contracts and POCsheet generates a report like this in under 60 seconds. 2 free comparisons per month.