← The collection

Economic Order Quantity.

Balance annual ordering cost with the cost of holding a larger average inventory.

Interactive experimentintuitiveField note ·
INTERACTIVE EXPERIMENT / P57

Economic Order Quantity

Balance annual ordering cost with the cost of holding a larger average inventory.

TEST THE MECHANISM

Annual demand is 1,200 units, fixed cost per order 40 and holding cost 2 per unit-year. Inspect the tradeoff between ordering frequently and carrying larger average inventory.

10400
Annual relevant cost01025002055000400Order size →
Annual ordering + holding cost
Orders per year
12.00
Average inventory
50.00
Annual ordering cost
480.00
Annual holding cost
100.00
Total relevant cost
580.00

The classic EOQ model assumes steady known demand, instantaneous replenishment and no shortages or quantity discounts. Fractional annual order counts are long-run averages, not literal partial purchase orders.

Steady known demand, instantaneous replenishment, no shortages and no quantity discounts are assumed. Fractional annual order counts are long-run averages.

THE SHORT VERSION

Economic Order Quantity, explained.

Economic order quantity is an optimal replenishment size in a classic model balancing fixed ordering costs and inventory holding costs.

01 / THE MECHANISM

Why it happens

Annual demand 1,200, setup cost forty and holding cost two give relevant annual cost DS/Q+HQ/2 and optimum √(2DS/H), approximately 219.09 units.

Economic order quantity is an optimal replenishment size in a classic model balancing fixed ordering costs and inventory holding costs.

Read the result

Annual ordering and holding costs are computed from the same selected batch size. Purchase cost is omitted because its unit price is unchanged across choices.

02 / FOLLOW IT THROUGH

A worked example

Trade frequent orders for average inventory

  1. Select order quantity one hundred and inspect twelve annual orders with average inventory fifty.

  2. Increase batch size and observe ordering cost fall while holding cost rises.

  3. Reveal the optimum about 219.09 units and compare its relevant annual cost about 438.18 with nearby choices.

OPTIONAL DEEPER DETAILGo deeper: inside the model

Inside this model

Annual demand 1,200, setup cost forty and holding cost two give relevant annual cost DS/Q+HQ/2 and optimum √(2DS/H), approximately 219.09 units.

03 / BEYOND THE EXPERIMENT

Where this idea is useful

A practical use

Avoid minimising order count without considering the inventory held between orders.

CHECK YOUR INTUITION

A common misconception

THE TEMPTING CONCLUSION

“The fewest orders always give the cheapest inventory policy.”

THE MORE USEFUL DISTINCTION

Larger batches save setup costs but increase average holdings. The classic optimum balances both terms under its assumptions.

What this explanation leaves out

  • Steady known demand, instantaneous replenishment, no shortages and no quantity discounts are assumed. Fractional annual order counts are long-run averages.
ONE MORE QUESTION

Why can the annual order count be fractional?

It is a long-run average under steady demand, not an instruction to place a literal fraction of a purchase order.

TAKE THE IDEA WITH YOU

Which holding cost grows when you reduce ordering frequency?

Associated thinkers

Associations marked provisional are awaiting source review.

Further reading

Explore the original research or the teaching reference behind this experiment.