Best Solar Contractor Software (2026)

Pros

• +LIDAR-backed aerial design with shading analysis that is accurate enough to survive a customer challenge — the irradiance modeling is genuinely best-in-class
• +Panel layout tool auto-checks setbacks, fire codes, and obstructions so your design does not get kicked back by the AHJ on permit review
• +Production estimation (kWh/year) is tied to real local irradiance data and matches post-install performance within a few percent — critical for honest sales
• +Proposal generator presents cash, loan, lease, and PPA side by side with monthly payment scenarios — the customer sees their real options at the kitchen table
• +Utility rate database is deep and auto-calculates 25-year savings against the customer’s actual current bill, not a generic regional average

Cons

• −Expensive — the full Aurora AX tier with Sales Mode runs $400+/mo per user once you layer in add-ons, and pricing is opaque until you book a demo
• −Design-heavy workflow assumes you have someone on the team who enjoys CAD-style work — steep learning curve for door-to-door sales reps
• −Install-side features (scheduling, project management, material tracking) are weak — you still need a separate tool for the actual build
• −Commission and pipeline tracking are basic — door-knocker-heavy orgs usually bolt on Enerflo or a separate CRM
• −Overkill for the 20-job-a-year installer — the price only makes sense if solar sales is your whole business

Pros

• +Actually free — no paywalled tiers, no trial expiration, no feature gating for shading, layout, or proposals (revenue comes from partner hardware and financing)
• +3D design with shading analysis is legitimately competitive with paid tools for standard residential roofs — sloped, simple, no weird dormers
• +Built-in financing marketplace connects proposals to Sungage, GoodLeap, Dividend, and Mosaic loan products directly
• +Proposal output looks professional enough that customers do not ask “did you build this in PowerPoint” — clean production estimates and 25-year savings math
• +Zero barrier to entry — a new 1-person installer can be designing systems and generating real proposals the same afternoon they sign up

Cons

• −Shade analysis on complex roofs (heavy tree cover, cut-up hip roofs, multi-plane layouts) is weaker than Aurora’s LIDAR-backed modeling
• −Utility rate database is shallower than Aurora — some obscure munis and coop utilities are missing or out of date
• −Support is community-driven and email-based — no dedicated rep, no SLA, response times can stretch into days during busy season
• −No install-side project management — this is strictly a sales and design tool, not a CRM or operations platform
• −Because it is free, product direction is driven by hardware/financing partners, not paying customers — you get what you get

Pros

• +End-to-end pipeline from door-knock to PTO — lead capture, design handoff, contract, credit app, site survey, permit, install, inspection, and monitoring in one system
• +Deep integrations with Aurora, OpenSolar, and Solo — you keep your preferred design tool and Enerflo owns the workflow around it
• +Commission and rep hierarchy tracking is purpose-built for door-to-door solar sales orgs with overrides, setter splits, and multi-tier management
• +Credit application flow connects directly to GoodLeap, Sungage, Sunlight, and Mosaic — no bouncing between tabs when a customer says yes
• +Permit and interconnection paperwork tracking with AHJ-specific templates saves days of admin work per project

Cons

• −Expensive once you add seats for setters, closers, ops, install, and finance — a 20-person org easily passes $5K/mo
• −Not a design tool — you still pay for Aurora, OpenSolar, or Solo on top of Enerflo
• −Configuration is heavy — expect a 4-8 week implementation with a dedicated admin before it actually runs smoothly
• −Small 2-person installer teams will drown in the feature set — this is built for 10+ person sales orgs
• −Mobile experience for install crews is not the strength — plan on a separate field app for install day

Pros

• +Proposal turnaround is fast — experienced reps can build and present a system in under 15 minutes at the kitchen table
• +Cleaner customer-facing proposal experience than Aurora — the output reads as a sales pitch, not an engineering report
• +Financing integrations cover the major loan products (GoodLeap, Sungage, Dividend) with monthly payment scenarios built into the proposal
• +Pricing is more transparent and affordable than Aurora at the per-seat level — real option for mid-size dealer teams
• +Good utility rate coverage for major US markets with 25-year savings math built into the customer view

Cons

• −Design accuracy on complex roofs is a step below Aurora — it is fine for standard pitched residential, weaker on commercial or cut-up roofs
• −Shading analysis is decent but not LIDAR-grade — if you design in heavy-canopy markets you may see proposal-vs-actual production gaps
• −Smaller installed base and ecosystem than Aurora — fewer YouTube tutorials, fewer hiring candidates who already know it
• −Integrations with install-side tools are thinner than Enerflo’s — still mostly a sales and proposal platform
• −Support and roadmap velocity lag behind Aurora — feature gaps take longer to close

Pros

• +Best-in-class economic modeling for commercial solar, storage, and solar-plus-storage — NPV, IRR, payback, bill savings, and demand-charge reduction all in one place
• +Handles complex commercial utility rate structures including time-of-use, demand charges, ratchets, and tariff riders that trip up residential tools
• +Storage dispatch modeling for ITC + SGIP + standalone storage deals is deeper than anything else on this list — critical for C&I proposals
• +ITC, MACRS depreciation, state incentives, and SREC revenue flow into the pro forma automatically — your CFO customer sees a credible model, not a marketing sheet
• +PPA and lease waterfall modeling built in — if you sell third-party-owned systems, this is where you build the deal

Cons

• −Not a design tool — no panel layout or shading analysis, so you still need Aurora or OpenSolar for the system design itself
• −Residential sales reps will find it dense and slow — it is built for analysts and project developers, not door-to-door closers
• −Learning curve is steep — plan on 2-4 weeks of ramp-up before a new user is building solid pro formas
• −Pricing is custom and scales with user count and modules — commercial-focused orgs can easily hit $10K+/year
• −Residential-only installers will never use 80% of the feature set — this is overkill for a sub-$2M residential shop

Pros

• +Price is approachable — at $25-99/user/month it fits a 6-person installer without taking a bite out of the margin on every job
• +Install-side project management is solid — site survey, permit status, material delivery, install day, inspection, and PTO all trackable in one board
• +Mobile app is actually usable for install crews in the field — photos, signatures, punch lists, and time tracking work offline
• +Integrates with Beacon, ABC Supply, and major distributors for material ordering — same workflow your crews already know from roofing
• +Customer communication hub (texts, emails, photos) keeps the homeowner in the loop through the 8-12 week install-to-PTO cycle without sales calling them daily

Cons

• −Not a solar design tool — no shading analysis, no panel layout, no production modeling (you still need Aurora, OpenSolar, or Solo for the proposal)
• −No built-in utility rate database or financing proposals — the sales side of a solar deal does not live here
• −Reporting on solar-specific KPIs (kW sold, $/watt, PTO time) requires custom fields and some spreadsheet work
• −Crew commission tracking for sales reps and setters is not purpose-built for solar orgs with setter/closer splits
• −No native interconnection paperwork tracking — AHJ and utility submissions are managed as generic tasks, not a structured workflow