Answer: The best solar quote software fits your project type, market and sales process. Compare SurgePV, Aurora Solar, OpenSolar, Solargraf, HelioScope, Enact and PV*SOL using the same design, price and contract inputs. Verify the purchased edition, regional availability, proposal revision control, integration costs and export before choosing. No universal speed or close-rate improvement is established here.
A solar quote must explain what the customer will receive, what it costs and which assumptions support the expected production and savings. A polished document cannot compensate for an outdated tariff, an omitted installation item or a design that changed after approval.
This guide compares seven routes to that output. The useful distinction is between a design-to-proposal platform, a sales-oriented quoting workflow and an engineering tool whose report feeds a separate commercial quote. Choose the route that fits the people doing the work.
Publisher, Method and Evidence
SurgePV publishes this guide and sells one of the products included. Its inclusion is a disclosure of that commercial interest, not an independent recommendation. The order below follows workflow categories rather than a scored ranking.
Vendor product pages, help documentation and pricing pages were checked on 30 September 2026. They establish public claims and displayed plan conditions, not measured accuracy or customer results. We did not run matched production accounts, interview a representative customer sample or obtain independent security audits for this comparison.
The decision framework below is editorial interpretation. A feature that remains unverified is a question for the vendor, not proof of absence. Availability, editions, regions and contracts can change; save dated evidence for the actual purchase.
Compare the Quoting Workflow First
| Workflow | Output to request | Failure to catch before purchase |
|---|---|---|
| Design to proposal | Customer output tied to a reviewed system and production scenario | Design changes leave an old price or yield in the quote |
| Sales quoting and acceptance | Branded options, clear commercial terms and an accepted revision | Presentation, signature and deposit refer to different versions |
| Engineering report plus quotation | Simulation and equipment exports with an identified commercial template | Manual transfer loses units, assumptions or revision identity |
For every route, check five stages: site inputs, equipment and layout, production assumptions, installed price and financial assumptions, then customer delivery and approval. Software may assist each stage, but it does not replace site verification or engineering responsibility.
A controlled spreadsheet can remain part of this process. Its suitability depends on permissions, validation, version control and workload. The comparison should measure handoffs and rework rather than assume that every spreadsheet fails or that every integrated platform is accurate.
Seven Solar Quote Software Routes
SurgePV: Reviewed Design to Branded Proposal
SurgePV’s proposal workflow describes customer output prepared from project design, equipment and financial assumptions. Evaluate it when the design and sales team need an identifiable handoff between the system being reviewed and the proposal being issued.
Bring a representative layout, equipment schedule and existing quote template to the demonstration. Check output formatting, figures, revision behavior and the treatment of financing assumptions. A displayed payment scenario is not a lender approval.
The company CRM overview explicitly states that SurgePV does not ship its own CRM. QuickEstimate is a separate partner product without automatic data sync. Confirm the customer-record handoff, signature workflow and any requested connector rather than treating those as included native functions.
Aurora Solar: Sales and Design Editions
Aurora’s pricing page positions Basic around sales and design essentials, including tablet-friendly proposals. Premium lists additional modeling tools. It is a candidate when those documented workflows match the team’s projects and market.
Check the exact edition, imagery coverage, production model inputs, proposal customization and contracted finance connections. This review does not establish that its lender network is the largest or that it produces more accurate quotes than the other candidates. Ask for the finance and signature steps to be demonstrated using your account configuration.
OpenSolar: Free Core With Regional Proposal Availability
OpenSolar’s proposal documentation describes several presentation and quote paths. Its Swipe setup guide requires a residential project, valid design and no more than six selected systems; access also depends on the organization. Do not infer commercial Swipe support from broader commercial design support.
The core app remains free, while external API access and supported connectors incur charges from 16 April 2026. Check the region, requested presentation path, customization and external connections before calling a complete workflow free. The evidence does not support the original claim that free access necessarily means weaker simulation.
Solargraf: Design, Proposal and Project-Volume Plans
Solargraf’s product page presents design, proposals, permitting and management in one platform. Its current marketing includes residential and commercial work. It is a candidate for a team wanting those stages evaluated together.
The official pricing search extract lists annual project-volume plans; the direct pricing fetch returned a forbidden response in this check. That is enough to flag the commercial model for confirmation, not to certify a checkout price. Verify the current allowance, definition of a project, user additions, overages, supported hardware and API cost. No mobile superiority or non-Enphase development restriction is established here.
HelioScope: Commercial Design With Pro Sales Outputs
HelioScope’s current plan page explicitly lists financial modeling and sales proposals in Pro. The previous blanket statement that it does not generate proposals is incorrect.
Check Pro’s output against the commercial buyer’s required price breakdown and assumptions. Basic and Pro list project allowances as well as user licences; unlimited design iterations do not mean unlimited projects. Obtain the required API and export scope for your edition. A vendor accuracy or bankability claim does not prove that a particular lender will accept your report.
Enact: Design, Pricing and Finance Analytics
Enact’s product announcement describes remote design and proposal generation with pricing, energy and finance analytics. The announcement is dated March 2024; it establishes a documented workflow, not a newly released 2026 capability.
Evaluate it against the exact tariffs, storage assumptions and proposal format required in your market. Do not assume a universal tariff-coverage advantage. Enact also publishes a separately priced design service; service delivery fees must not be presented as software subscription prices.
PV*SOL: Simulation and Customer Presentation
PV*SOL’s presentation documentation describes configurable customer presentations and PDF/DOCX export. Its financial analysis documentation explains cost and tariff inputs. The original claim that it offers no customer presentation was too broad.
Evaluate this route when detailed modeling and an exported report fit the process. Establish where the final installed price, contract terms, acceptance and CRM record are controlled. The presence of a customer presentation does not establish a complete signature or financing-application workflow, and this guide does not verify the previously claimed web beta.
Dated Pricing and Plan Boundaries
These are vendor observations on 30 September 2026, not binding offers. Compare currency, billing period, users, projects, tax, additions and implementation before comparing amounts.
| Product | Public observation | Buying boundary |
|---|---|---|
| SurgePV | $1,899 per user yearly individually; $1,499 per user for three users; $1,299 per user for five | Team totals are $4,497 and $6,495 yearly. Pricing displays 18% GST; confirm invoice and contract. Guided demo, not a promised self-service trial |
| Aurora Solar | Basic $159/user/month or $135/user/month billed annually; Premium $259 or $220 on those respective bases | Annual amounts are $1,620 and $2,640 per user. Confirm edition, additions and current order |
| OpenSolar | Core app free; external API access and supported connectors charge separately | Price the external workflow and regional feature availability |
| Solargraf | Official search extract lists Starter $2,799/year, 240 projects and two users | Direct pricing page could not be fetched; reconfirm price, project definition, users and overages before budgeting |
| HelioScope | Basic $159/licence/month or $1,620/year; Pro $259/month or $2,640/year | Listed allowances are ten projects monthly or 120 yearly; Pro lists sales proposals |
| Enact | No subscription amount established by the selected product evidence | Obtain an edition-specific quote; separate design-service fees |
| PV*SOL | No current licence amount established by the selected help documentation | Confirm product, licence, update rights and required commercial workflow |
SurgePV amounts come from its pricing page. Other amounts come from the vendor pages linked above, with the Solargraf search-extract limitation noted explicitly. No market-average fees, universal annual discounts or interview-derived benchmarks are asserted.
Build a full cost ledger: licences, project additions, imagery, finance or signature services, connectors, internal setup, training, administration, security review, support and exit. Mark unresolved items unknown rather than zero.
Run a Repeatable Quote Pilot
Keep the original guide’s useful recommendation: test the same projects in the shortlisted tools. Use a small sample that represents your actual work rather than only the easiest roof in a vendor demo.
- Freeze the inputs. Record address, survey confidence, module and inverter models, layout, losses, weather source and customer consumption. Keep identifiers and revisions.
- Match the assumptions. Use the same tariff, export treatment, incentives, escalation, finance terms and assessment period. Label market rules with their jurisdiction and source date.
- Reconcile the outputs. Compare DC capacity, monthly production, installed scope, equipment quantities and quoted totals. Investigate differences before calling one tool more accurate.
- Change one item. Replace a module, adjust scope or correct a tariff. Check that affected figures update and that the old customer revision remains identifiable.
- Test commercial approval. Require the designated approver to review margin, exceptions, financing assumptions and validity. Preserve the accepted revision and its terms.
- Exercise delivery and handoff. Open the output on a customer device, check readability, then verify contact ownership, status updates and any failure queue in the CRM.
- Export and review. Retain customer output, inputs, equipment, notes and version information. Record missing fields, support work and measurable preparation time.
For a sales-stack assessment, use the solar sales software guide. For the customer document itself, use the proposal preparation hub. Neither a readable proposal nor a software-generated design is automatic permitting or lender acceptance.
Evaluate Value Without Invented Close Rates
Measure active preparation, approval delay, revisions and adoption in your own pilot. Do not attribute a change in wins entirely to quoting speed when lead quality, price, staffing or seasonality also changed.
Illustrative capacity calculation: suppose 40 quotes each month take 30 fewer active minutes, with sustained full adoption. That releases 20 hours monthly. At an assumed loaded rate of $30/hour, the capacity value is $600 monthly or $7,200 yearly.
If an illustrative $300 monthly subscription were the only cost, its yearly amount would be $3,600. The remaining $3,600 is a difference between capacity value and that licence cost, not a proven cash saving or software ROI. Add implementation and recurring costs, and identify how the released capacity will be used before claiming financial benefit.
This is a hypothetical buyer calculation, not a vendor price, customer result or promise. For incremental wins, use attributable contribution after relevant costs, not contract revenue; avoid counting the same capacity twice.
Make the Buying Decision
Select the smallest shortlist that meets the mandatory project and market requirements. Free and paid tools should face the same input checks, approval controls, output tests and export requirements.
Choose a paid plan only when its verified workflow and total cost justify it for the team. Choose a free-core route only after pricing external services and confirming the required controls. A feature label, numeric accuracy slogan or short demonstration is insufficient evidence for either decision.
To evaluate SurgePV’s part of the workflow, request a guided demonstration with your existing quote and a representative design. Agree which outputs, assumptions and handoffs will be checked before the meeting.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the best solar quote software in 2026?
There is no evidenced universal winner. Shortlist tools for your market and workflow, then compare the same project inputs, proposal outputs, purchased editions, integration costs and export. This is a vendor-documentation comparison, not a hands-on performance ranking.
How much does solar quote software cost?
Prices use different units, including user licences, project allowances and custom contracts. OpenSolar keeps its core app free but charges for external API access and supported connectors. Other dated examples appear in the comparison; verify taxes, add-ons, limits and renewal in a written quote.
What features should I look for in solar quote software?
Look for traceable design and production assumptions, equipment and installation scope, maintained price inputs, readable customer output and controlled revisions. Verify your required tariffs, financing, signatures, approvals, CRM handoff and exports in the edition and market you will use.
Can solar quote software integrate with my CRM?
It depends on the exact product, edition, connector and data scope. Test identifiers, field ownership, permissions, updates, failures and duplicate handling. SurgePV states that it does not ship its own CRM; its QuickEstimate partner product has no automatic data sync to SurgePV.
How long does it take to generate a solar quote with software?
No common completion time is established by this desk comparison. Measure active preparation and elapsed approval separately using representative projects. Include site verification, design changes, tariff checks, contract review and rework; producing a PDF is only one part of preparing a defensible quote.
Is free solar quote software good enough for professional use?
It can be if the available workflow meets the project and business requirements. Free core access does not establish regional availability, adequate controls or zero integration and implementation cost. Test the same acceptance cases for free and paid candidates instead of assuming either model has better accuracy.
Where this fits
This article is part of SurgePV's Solar Design hub, which works through the topic from first principles to the decisions a project team actually has to make.
