Reading the Simulated Quote Result in EDGEBIC, Field by Field

After a quote simulation, EDGEBIC fills about a dozen fields: the simulated start and end dates, the work hours, the labor and material cost split, the effective cost, and the derived price, profit, and margin, each read against your real current capacity. EDGEBIC by User Solutions writes these fields once the finite capacity engine has scheduled a temporary copy of the quoted job and read off the result. Knowing what each field means, and which are measured versus derived, is what turns the quote grid into a reliable pricing dashboard.

The fields fall into three groups: the schedule fields (when), the hours and cost fields (how much work and what it costs), and the pricing fields (what you charge and what you keep). Read them in that order.

The schedule fields: when

These are the simulated production window, not routing arithmetic. If the dates look far out, the shop really is that full: the job is queuing behind committed work. Before assuming an error, check the work-center utilization view, or reach for a scenario. And read the lead time as calendar distance, which is why it can dwarf the work hours that sit inside it. For why the span and the hours diverge, see why quoted hours differ from the calendar span.

The hours and cost fields: how much work, at what price

Estimated total hours is the sum of the work hours the simulation allocated across every machine. This is real work content, not the calendar span. A product whose work lives mostly in sub-assemblies still prices correctly here, because the hours roll up recursively through child routings rather than reading as near zero.

Estimated labor cost is each work center's allocated hours multiplied by its rate, where a per-step labor rate on the routing wins over the work center's own rate when both are present. Estimated material cost comes from material-type routing steps, or falls back to the product's unit cost times quantity when the routing has no material step. On the documented Widget-A quote, the split was $7,930 labor and $1,300 material.

Estimated total cost is simply labor plus material. On Widget-A that is $9,230.

Effective total cost is the number the price is actually built on. It equals the manual cost override if you have set one, otherwise it equals the estimated total cost. The two match unless you have entered an override for something the simulation cannot see, like tooling wear or freight. Keeping both fields means you can shift the pricing basis with an override while the calculated labor and material split stays intact for quote-versus-actual variance later.

The pricing fields: what you charge, what you keep

Unit price is the customer-facing price per unit. If you left it at zero before simulating, the system derives it from effective cost and your markup once, and never overwrites a price you typed after that. On Widget-A the 25 percent default markup would propose $9,230 times 1.25 divided by 200, which is $57.69 per unit, unless you set your own price.

Total price is unit price times quantity.

Estimated profit is total price minus effective total cost.

Estimated margin is profit divided by total price, as a percentage. It is color-coded, and the colors are a discipline tool: green above 20 percent, amber above 10 percent, red when negative. At a quoted $85 per unit ($17,000 total), Widget-A returned $7,770 profit and 45.7 percent margin, painted green. Treat amber as "get approval" and red as "do not send," and the thresholds become a pricing policy everyone can read at a glance. For a deeper read, see reading the estimated margin and profit.

The measured versus derived distinction

Some of these fields are measured by the simulation and some are calculated from those measurements. It helps to know which is which:

• Measured by the simulation: start date, end date, total hours, labor cost, material cost.
• Calculated from those: lead time, total cost, effective cost, total price, profit, margin.

The practical consequence: if a derived field looks wrong, the fix is usually upstream. A red margin is not a margin problem; it is a cost or price problem. A too-good total cost is often a work center with a rate of zero, which silently prices its step at $0.00. Trace a surprising derived number back to the measured field that feeds it.

The status marker and the details window

Two more fields round out the picture. The quote is flagged as simulated once a run succeeds, which is your signal that the dates and costs are real output and not leftover placeholders. And the full simulated schedule is stored, so the row's details window can show exactly which work center received which hours on which days, alongside a summary of dates, lead time, cost, price, profit, and margin. That details view is where you go when a top-line number surprises you and you want to see the allocation behind it.

Costs are a snapshot

One reading rule sits over all of these fields: the numbers reflect the shop and the rates at the moment you simulated. If capacity or work-center rates change afterward, the quote view flags that the simulation is stale and should be refreshed before you send. A simulation older than its expiry is fiction, which is why the default 30-day expiry exists. Read the fields, but read the freshness first.

Every field here is output of the same finite capacity engine that plans your real production, which is what makes the promise a date you can keep. See the whole workflow in the EDGEBIC quoting guide, and explore EDGEBIC to read a live quote result against your own routings.