A Scenario A
ComparedQuoted rent—
Area—
CAPEX—
Landlord incentives—
Calculate the total cost of your office over the selected period — not just the rent. The TCO calculator includes service charges, utilities, indexation, CAPEX, landlord incentives, and entry and exit costs. It compares two scenarios and shows the total lease cost, monthly cost, cost per 1 m² and per FTE, and the point at which one option becomes more cost-effective.
Rent is only one of the cost items that determine the financial attractiveness of an office. The actual cost of a scenario also includes service charges, utilities, CAPEX, relocation, lease overlap, exit costs and the landlord contribution. Ecoffices TCO Engine maps these cash flows over time, normalises two scenarios to the same analysis horizon and shows their financial consequences. This makes it possible to compare not only which office has a lower rent, but which scenario has a lower total lease cost in present-value terms.
The examples below were calculated using the current TCO Engine logic. Each row represents one complete lease scenario. In the module, the user compares two such scenarios — A and B — and the engine analyses their cash flows, identifies the lower present-value cost, shows when a lasting cost advantage appears and indicates the items responsible for the difference.
| Scenario | Decision | Area | FTE | Rent | Service charge | CAPEX | Landlord contribution | Rent-free | Relocation | Lease overlap | Exit cost | Net entry cost | Nominal TCO | NPV | Average / month | Cost / m² / month | Cost / FTE / month | First year | Peak month | Rent-free benefit | Risks to confirm | Conclusion |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| S1245 m² office | Stay and refresh | 245 m² | 22 | 74 PLN/m² | 28 PLN/m² | 0.18m PLN | 0 PLN | 0 months | 0.02m PLN | 0 PLN | 0 PLN | 0.20m PLN | 1.81m PLN | 1.53m PLN | 30,209 PLN | 123 PLN | 1,373 PLN | 0.50m PLN | 0.20m PLN | 0 PLN | flexibility of the current lease | The lowest total cost, but staying is financially rational only if the current space still meets the organisation's needs. |
| S2530 m² office | Modernisation of the current office | 530 m² | 48 | 82 PLN/m² | 30 PLN/m² | 0.85m PLN | 0.15m PLN | 1 month | 0.06m PLN | 0 PLN | 0 PLN | 0.76m PLN | 4.55m PLN | 3.87m PLN | 75,777 PLN | 143 PLN | 1,579 PLN | 1.43m PLN | 0.76m PLN | 0.04m PLN | works in an occupied office and technical conditions | Modernisation can reduce the cost of changing location, but requires verification of construction phasing and the ability to maintain business operations. |
| S31,000 m² office | Business relocation | 1,000 m² | 92 | 94 PLN/m² | 32 PLN/m² | 3.05m PLN | 1.05m PLN | 5 months | 0.26m PLN | 0.42m PLN | 0.32m PLN | 2.68m PLN | 10.66m PLN | 9.13m PLN | 177,645 PLN | 178 PLN | 1,931 PLN | 3.72m PLN | 2.68m PLN | 0.47m PLN | handover standard, timing and building capacity | The landlord contribution and rent-free months help, but they do not eliminate CAPEX, lease overlap and the cost of exiting the previous office. |
| S41,350 m² office | Relocation with lower rent | 1,350 m² | 115 | 82 PLN/m² | 36 PLN/m² | 4.10m PLN | 0.85m PLN | 4 months | 0.35m PLN | 0.65m PLN | 0.46m PLN | 4.25m PLN | 14.55m PLN | 12.59m PLN | 242,492 PLN | 180 PLN | 2,109 PLN | 5.72m PLN | 4.25m PLN | 0.44m PLN | larger area and unconfirmed handover standard | A lower rent does not automatically compensate for a larger area, a weaker landlord contribution and a high entry cost. |
| S51,600 m² office | Representative headquarters | 1,600 m² | 145 | 116 PLN/m² | 39 PLN/m² | 7.20m PLN | 2.15m PLN | 6 months | 0.48m PLN | 0.82m PLN | 0.62m PLN | 6.35m PLN | 21.86m PLN | 18.85m PLN | 364,257 PLN | 228 PLN | 2,512 PLN | 8.21m PLN | 6.35m PLN | 1.11m PLN | technical scope, availability and lease flexibility | The scenario may have strategic justification, but requires conscious acceptance of the high entry cost and first-year cash requirement. |
| S62,260 m² office | Optimised relocation | 2,260 m² | 210 | 98 PLN/m² | 34 PLN/m² | 8.05m PLN | 3.60m PLN | 8 months | 0.62m PLN | 0.75m PLN | 0.70m PLN | 5.82m PLN | 23.99m PLN | 20.41m PLN | 399,910 PLN | 177 PLN | 1,904 PLN | 7.63m PLN | 5.82m PLN | 1.77m PLN | availability date and reinstatement conditions | The highest nominal cost does not automatically mean the weakest efficiency. A large landlord contribution and controlled cost per FTE improve the economics of the scenario. |
A larger area, a weaker landlord package and higher CAPEX can quickly eliminate the benefit of a lower base rent.
Two scenarios with similar NPV can require completely different levels of cash at office entry and launch.
A common period, discount rate and FTE count make it possible to compare the actual economics rather than incomparable offers.
In the Ecoffices model, TCO is the sum of base rent, service charges, utilities, other operating costs, CAPEX, relocation, lease overlap and exit costs, less the landlord contribution. Every expense is assigned to a specific month, so the engine takes into account not only the amount of the cost but also when it occurs.
This structure makes it possible to compare different decisions: staying in the current office, modernising the occupied space, relocating to an existing fitted office or delivering a new fit-out. The name of the scenario does not affect the result — the entered cash flows do.
Nominal TCO shows the sum of all cash flows without discounting. It is used to calculate the average monthly cost, cost per m² and cost per FTE. NPV, or the present value of costs, accounts for timing. In this approach, a cost incurred today has more weight than the same amount paid several years later.
Scenario comparison is based on the lower NPV. The engine also shows the nominal difference, the point at which the advantage becomes permanent and the cost categories that most strengthen or weaken the lower-cost scenario.
Entry cost includes CAPEX, relocation and lease overlap, less the landlord contribution. TCO Engine separately shows the first-year cost and the highest cash outflow occurring in any single month. This distinction matters: the first metric describes the total burden at the beginning of the project, while the second identifies the moment of highest cash requirement.
The user can specify the month in which CAPEX, the landlord contribution, relocation, lease overlap and exit costs occur. Two scenarios with similar total expenditure can therefore have different NPV and completely different liquidity profiles.
Rent-free months reduce only the base rent during the first months of the analysis. Service charges, utilities and other costs may still apply. The landlord contribution is a separate cash flow reducing TCO in the month specified by the user. It does not reduce the technical cost of preparing the office — it only changes how that cost is financed.
TCO Engine does not recalculate fit-out cost or carbon footprint. It can use the CAPEX result stored in an Ecoffices scenario and the monetary CO₂ equivalent from Carbon Engine. CAPEX becomes part of financial TCO, while the CO₂ value is presented as a separate perspective and does not change the base financial result.
TCO Engine does not convert risks into an arbitrary score from 0 to 100. The user identifies specific issues that need confirmation: handover standard, reinstatement obligations, available electrical capacity, ventilation or cooling, lease flexibility and availability date. They are displayed next to the financial result because they may affect scenario feasibility even though they are not automatically assigned a monetary value.
TCO Engine is designed to compare scenarios at the decision stage. It is not a lease offer, property valuation, legal opinion or accounting forecast. The quality of the result depends on the quality of the input data, so before signing a lease the user should confirm rates, indexation rules, incentives, programme, handover standard, exit costs and technical feasibility.
The total office lease cost is generated throughout the entire lease term. Ecoffices TCO Engine shows the nominal cost of each scenario, the present value of expenditure, when a permanent cost advantage appears and which items are responsible for the difference. This allows a decision about staying, modernising or relocating to be based on the complete cost picture rather than only the rent per square metre.
TCO Engine compares two independent scenarios, A and B, over a common horizon, using the same number of FTE and transparent financial assumptions.
The scenarios may represent staying in the current office, modernisation, relocation or two different lease offers. The scenario name does not affect the result — the entered costs and timing of cash flows do.
This is not a simple rent-per-square-metre calculator. It compares complete cost scenarios over time, including cash-flow timing, NPV and liquidity profile.
TCO includes all cash flows that the current engine can assign to a scenario.
Rent, service charges and utilities can increase over time using separate assumptions. Each one-off cost can be assigned to a selected month.
Nominal TCO is the sum of all cash flows without discounting. NPV shows their present value.
A cost incurred today has more weight in NPV than the same amount paid several years later. The engine takes into account the month in which the cash flow occurs and the annual discount rate entered by the user.
The financial comparison is based on the lower total present-value cost, or NPV.
After calculating both scenarios, the engine shows:
This conclusion concerns financial cost. Space suitability, lease terms and technical feasibility remain separate parts of the decision.
It is the first month from which the scenario that ultimately costs less remains less expensive until the end of the analysis period.
The engine compares cumulative present-value costs for both scenarios. If the lower-cost scenario is already ahead in month 0 and never loses that advantage later, the result can be described as “lower cost from the start”.
This point is particularly useful when one scenario requires a larger initial investment but has lower costs in subsequent months.
No. The benefit of a lower rent can be offset by other components of the scenario.
Lease offers should therefore be compared as complete cash flows, not only by their base rent.
Rent-free months remove the base rent during the first months of the scenario.
They do not automatically remove service charges, utilities or other operating costs. These items continue to be calculated according to the scenario inputs.
A longer rent-free period does not determine the result if the remaining costs of the offer are higher.
The landlord contribution is a negative cash flow that reduces the scenario TCO in the month selected by the user.
It does not reduce the technical cost of preparing the office. It changes the funding split between landlord and tenant and affects both NPV and the monthly cash-flow curve.
Net entry cost is the sum of CAPEX, relocation and lease overlap, less the landlord contribution.
Entry cost does not include the exit cost, which is recorded separately in the month selected for the end of the scenario. It is a summary metric; the actual cash profile also depends on the timing of individual cash flows.
These are two different liquidity indicators and should not be used interchangeably.
Two scenarios may have similar NPV while requiring completely different levels of cash at the beginning. In the modelled examples, entry costs are assigned to month 0, but users can schedule them according to the actual project programme.
Yes. The user can assign each main one-off cash flow to the appropriate month.
The timing affects the cost curve, NPV, first-year cost and the highest single-month cash requirement. It should reflect actual payment terms rather than only the planned lease commencement date.
Yes. A result stored in the Ecoffices scenario can be used as the CAPEX value for scenario A.
TCO Engine does not recalculate fit-out cost. It uses the net value passed from the CAPEX module or an amount entered manually.
No. The monetary CO₂ equivalent is presented as a separate perspective.
TCO Engine can use a value from Carbon Engine or a manually entered amount and show TCO including that equivalent. The base financial result still comes from the NPV of rent, operation, investment, transition and exit costs.
This means environmental impact complements the decision without being hidden inside the financial TCO calculation.
Risks are recorded as specific issues requiring confirmation rather than converted into an artificial 0–100 score.
The list does not automatically change NPV because the engine does not know the financial value of an unpriced risk. Its role is to identify items that should be verified before a decision is made.
No. TCO Engine structures the financial comparison of scenarios but does not replace specialist verification.
Before signing a lease, the result should be reviewed together with legal analysis, technical due diligence, test-fit and a confirmed CAPEX budget.