Compare Competing Property Offers
Design a seller's comparison workspace that puts price, contingencies, financing, timing, and uncertainty on equal footing.
The brief
Understand the problem
Background
The highest headline price is not always the strongest property offer. Sellers and agents need to compare financing, deposits, inspections, closing dates, and expiration windows without flattening them into a misleading score.
User context
Marisol is selling her home and has three offers. One is highest but depends on another sale, one is cash with a quick deadline, and one matches her preferred move-out date with an inspection condition.
Product problem
A seller needs a consistent comparison and a record of advice while retaining responsibility for a high-stakes decision that depends on personal priorities and local rules.
Objective
Create offer normalization, side-by-side review, scenario comparison, and decision confirmation for one property listing.
What to design
Define the experience
Required experience
- Review normalized terms while retaining each original offer document
- Compare financial, timing, and contingency differences
- Test a small number of seller-priority scenarios
- Record a selection, counteroffer, or hold decision with acknowledged deadlines
Screens and states
- Offer overview
- Term comparison
- Scenario review
- Decision confirmation
Core user flow
Follow the critical path
- 01
Marisol opens three verified offers and sees two terms that still need agent review
- 02
She compares net proceeds, financing evidence, contingencies, and closing dates
- 03
She gives move-out flexibility more importance and reviews how that changes the comparison
- 04
Her agent adds local context without changing the source terms
- 05
Marisol chooses to counter one offer and confirms the expiring alternatives she may lose
Product rules
Requirements and constraints
Requirements
- Preserve original terms, attachments, sender, receipt time, and expiration
- Calculate estimated net proceeds with visible inputs and exclusions
- Separate verified facts, agent notes, seller preferences, and unresolved terms
- Avoid a single recommended winner or opaque quality score
- Require acknowledgement of deadlines and conflicts before sending a response
Constraints
- The interface cannot provide legal, tax, lending, or appraisal advice
- Offer terminology and permissible seller criteria vary by jurisdiction
- Protected personal characteristics must not be used in comparison
Reality check
States worth considering
Ready-to-use content
Mock data
Use this content to test hierarchy and realistic data states. You can expand it when the concept needs more depth.
Offer A
- $612,000 price
- 20% down
- Inspection contingency
- 45-day close
Offer B
- $598,000 price
- Cash
- No financing contingency
- 21-day close
Offer C
- $605,000 price
- 10% down
- Home-sale contingency
- 60-day close
Finish line
What to deliver
- Four responsive screens comparing three offers and confirming a counteroffer decision
Optional direction
Visual resources
Use these as a starting constraint if you want one. They are not part of the required solution.