Business Pricing

Unit price calculator

Price of A
Size of A
Grams, ml, sheets, any unit, as long as both match
Price of B
Size of B
Better value B
A: 3.00 ÷ 500 · B: 5.00 ÷ 1000
A per unit 0.006
B per unit 0.005
A per 100 units 0.6
Difference per unit 0.001
Cheaper by 16.67 %
Same unit on both sides · the percentage doubles as a waste allowance

Retailers rely on the assumption that it is. A larger pack costing more per unit has a name in the pricing literature, quantity surcharge, and it is common rather than exotic: Widrick’s survey of 37 grocery stores found 33.8% of brands priced that way, and in Kim’s peanut-butter scanner data quantity discounts led surcharges only 55 to 61 per cent of the time. Shelf-label unit pricing exists to expose it and is required across the EU, but the directive lets each country pick a customarily used unit, so a 500 g box priced per kilo beside a 6-pack priced per item is still work left to you.

Unit price is the pack price divided by the quantity it contains. On the figures above, a 3.00 pack of 500 g works out at 0.006 per gram against 0.005 for the 5.00 kilo, so the big pack wins by 16.67%. That percentage is measured against the dearer of the two, which turns out to be useful in a way the label never mentions.

How to compare unit prices

1 Enter the price and size of the first option.
2 Enter the second, in the same unit of measure. Grams against grams, sheets against sheets.
3 Read which is cheaper and by how much.
4 Read the "cheaper by" figure a second time as a waste allowance: waste that fraction of the big pack and you have given the saving back.

The arithmetic is one division, so everything interesting here is about what the division leaves out.

Start with the percentage. The panel says the better option is cheaper by 16.67%, and it gets that by dividing the difference by the higher of the two unit prices. Turn the question round and ask how much dearer the small pack is, and the same pair of numbers gives 20%, because the base has changed. Both statements are true. Quoting one at somebody who is thinking of the other is how price comparisons become arguments.

Dividing by the dearer price has a second use that makes the row more valuable than it looks. Ask what fraction of the cheaper pack you could throw away before the two options cost the same, and the answer is exactly the percentage on screen. A pack 16.67% cheaper per gram breaks even at 16.67% waste; a pack 30% cheaper survives losing 30% of it. Read the "cheaper by" figure as a spoilage budget and the bulk-buying decision stops being a matter of feel. Half a jar of something going hard at the back of a cupboard is not a small leak: on most supermarket pack ladders it wipes out the entire advantage of the larger size and then some.

The larger pack losing on unit price at all surprises people, and it should not. Pricing researchers call it a quantity surcharge and have been counting it since the 1970s. Widrick’s cross-sectional survey of ten categories across 37 grocery stores found 33.8% of brands surcharged at store level, with canned tuna reaching 84.4%. In more recent scanner data for peanut butter, Kim reports quantity discounts running only 55 to 61 per cent of the time, leaving the rest as surcharges. Two explanations compete in the literature and Kim sets them out side by side without picking between them. One holds that it is deliberate price discrimination against households that buy in quantity. The other holds that it is a side effect of temporary promotions: a price cut on the small pack alone flips the ladder for as long as the offer runs. Both are useful to a shopper, because they suggest the same move. If you find a surcharge, check whether the small size is on offer; if it is, the ordering will flip back when the promotion ends.

Unit mismatch is the failure that produces confident wrong answers, and it is partly written into the law. EU Directive 98/6/EC requires a unit price on almost everything and defines it as the final price including VAT per kilogramme, litre, metre, square metre or cubic metre, or per "a different single unit of quantity which is widely and customarily used in the Member State concerned". That last clause is what puts a per-kilo label next to a per-item label on the same shelf, entirely lawfully. The comparison you were about to make between them is not a comparison, and converting one side first is the only fix.

Two more places where the quantity on the pack is not the quantity you get. Tinned and jarred goods carry both a net weight and a drained weight, and the drained figure is the one you eat; two brands with identical net weights can differ by a fifth once the brine is gone. And any product measured in sheets, tablets, capsules or servings is measuring a unit the manufacturer defines, so kitchen roll priced per sheet, detergent priced per wash and supplements priced per capsule are all comparable only within a brand unless you check the sheet size, the dose and the strength.

What people use it for

  • Comparing supermarket pack sizes
  • Checking whether a bulk deal is real
  • Comparing subscription sizes
  • Working out cost per sheet, wash or serving
  • Turning the saving into a waste allowance before buying the big pack
  • Spotting a quantity surcharge caused by a promotion on the small size

Questions

Divide the pack price by the quantity it contains. Use the same unit on both sides or the comparison means nothing.

Kim, Quantity Surcharge and Consumer Heterogeneity (Ohio State University, 2016)Directive 98/6/EC on the indication of prices of products offered to consumers
Was this tool any good?
Internal signal only · I use it to find the tools worth rebuilding