If 2 applications are in competition and one offers PICs and the other doesn't, does it help to win the contention?

Short answer: No — offering PICs (Public Interest Commitments / now often called RVCs) does not by itself win a contention set.

How ICANN actually resolves contention

Under the Applicant Guidebook, competing applications for the same (or confusingly similar) string are resolved through specific mechanisms:

1. Community Priority Evaluation (CPE) (if applicable)A qualified community application that passes CPE gets priority over all standard applications.
2. Voluntary resolution (e.g., one withdraws, agreements, etc.)
3. Auction of last resort (if no other method resolves it)

There is no rule that compares applications based on “better commitments” in a generic contention set.

Where PICs / RVCs do matter

PICs (2012 round) / RVCs (next round):

• Are binding commitments about how the registry will operate (e.g., abuse mitigation, eligibility rules).
• Can:
• Help address objections (e.g., GAC, public interest, community concerns)
• Strengthen a community application’s case (since registration policies and safeguards are evaluated in CPE scoring)

But crucially: They are not a scoring system for head‑to‑head contention between standard applicants.

Practical implications in your scenario

If two standard (non-community) applicants compete:

• Applicant A offers strong PICs
• Applicant B offers none

➡️ They are still equal for contention purposes
➡️ Outcome = negotiation or auction

PICs alone won’t give Applicant A priority.

Exception (indirect effect)

PICs/RVCs can indirectly influence outcomes if they:

• Help an applicant avoid losing earlier (e.g., by overcoming objections or GAC concerns)
• Support a community application’s CPE score

But that’s not the same as “winning contention because of PICs.”

✅ Bottom line:

PICs/RVCs are important for acceptability and risk mitigation, but they are not a tie-breaker mechanism in ICANN contention sets.