Why do solar installers need design and proposal software?
Selling solar is unusual. A homeowner cannot walk into a showroom and see the product. The entire sale hinges on a credible picture of a system that does not exist yet: how many panels fit on this specific roof, how much shade the chimney throws in December, how much the customer will actually save, and what the financed monthly payment looks like. Solar design and proposal software exists to produce that picture quickly, accurately, and in a form a customer can say yes to.
Trying to run a solar installation company without dedicated design software means manual roof measurements, guesswork on shading, spreadsheet savings estimates, and proposals that look like they were assembled in a word processor. That approach falls apart the moment you are competing against two or three other installers who can produce a polished, branded, financially modeled proposal the same day the homeowner inquired.
Modern platforms centralize the whole front half of the solar sale: satellite or LiDAR roof imagery, 3D system layout, hourly shade analysis, production estimates, utility-rate and savings modeling, financing options, and an interactive proposal the customer can open on a phone. The question is not whether you need one. It is which one fits how your team sells and what you can afford to spend.
Aurora Solar and OpenSolar are the two platforms that come up most often in that evaluation, and they could not be more different in how they make money. That single fact: paid subscription versus free-for-installers: drives most of the decision.
It is worth being clear about what these platforms are and are not. They are sales and design tools. They turn an address into a designed system and a designed system into a proposal a homeowner can say yes to. They are not field-service management systems, they are not accounting platforms, and with the partial exception of OpenSolar's newer CRM, they are not built to run the months-long installation project that follows a signed contract. Understanding that boundary matters, because a lot of installer frustration comes from expecting a design tool to also run operations it was never designed to handle. Both Aurora and OpenSolar are excellent at the job they were built for. The trouble starts in the gaps around that job, which is exactly where we will end up later in this comparison.
"Aurora and OpenSolar both take a homeowner from address to interactive proposal. The real question is whether you are paying for premium design accuracy and bankable reports, or running on a free platform funded by hardware and finance partners."
Quick comparison: Aurora Solar vs OpenSolar
| Feature | Aurora Solar | OpenSolar |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing model | Paid subscription and credits (no public list pricing) | Free for installers (partner-funded) |
| Design & modeling | Best-in-class 3D, LiDAR-assisted | Capable; strong for a free platform |
| Shade analysis | All 8,760 hrs/yr, NREL-validated | Built-in shading; less granular reporting |
| Bankable reports | Bankable shade reports (Premium tier) | Less emphasis on bankable output |
| Built-in CRM | Limited; designed to pair with a CRM | Yes: project-management CRM in OS 3.0 |
| AI features | Aurora AI: auto site modeling, plan sets | Ada: AI design assistant, voice-activated |
| Hardware ordering | Via integrations | Built-in catalogue, BOM, trade discounts |
| API & connectors | Available (enterprise-oriented) | API/connectors now charged (2026) |
| Best for | Teams needing premium accuracy & bankable proposals | Cost-sensitive teams wanting free end-to-end tools |
Features and pricing verified May 2026. Sources: Aurora Solar, OpenSolar
Comparing tools because something keeps slipping through the cracks? A free automation audit maps exactly where your workflow is leaking time and revenue, on top of whichever system you choose.
Get a free automation audit →Is Aurora Solar the right solar design software for your business?
Aurora Solar is the platform most often described as the industry standard for design accuracy. It is a paid product, and the pricing model has shifted over time toward a mix of per-user subscriptions and a credit-based pay-per-project option. The draw is precision: Aurora's 3D modeling, LiDAR-assisted design, and shade analysis are widely regarded as the most rigorous in the category, and its reports carry third-party validation that financiers and rebate authorities accept.
Aurora does not publish firm pricing publicly, and figures move as the model evolves. Reported numbers put basic residential design and proposal access in the rough range of $159 per user per month, with a Premium tier reported nearer $259 per user per month that adds LiDAR-assisted modeling, bankable shade reports, and battery modeling. There is also a credit-based option where individual projects and the Aurora AI add-on are billed per use. Treat these as directional and get a current quote.
The credit model deserves a closer look because it changes how you budget. Rather than paying purely per seat, you buy credits and spend them as you design. A residential project consumes a chunk of credits, and turning on the Aurora AI add-on for automated site modeling costs additional credits on top. For a team with steady, predictable volume this can be efficient: you pay roughly in proportion to the work you do. For a team with lumpy volume, or one that designs many speculative proposals that never close, per-project costs can be harder to forecast and easier to overspend. The practical advice is to estimate your real monthly project count, including the proposals that do not convert, before assuming the credit model is cheaper than per-seat pricing.
Where Aurora Solar wins:
- Design and shade accuracy is the standout strength. Aurora models shading across all 8,760 hours of the year using NREL-validated calculations, with sub-module shading detail and standard P50 performance output. For financed and commercial deals where production estimates matter, this is hard to beat.
- Bankable shade reports. The reports Aurora produces are accepted by financiers and rebate authorities, which removes friction on deals that depend on third-party validation.
- LiDAR-assisted modeling on the Premium tier produces highly accurate roof geometry, reducing site-visit guesswork and rework.
- Aurora AI automates 3D site modeling and shading analysis and can help generate permit-ready plan sets directly from a sales design, compressing the design-to-permit timeline.
- Interactive, mobile-optimized, fully branded proposals that help reps sell with credibility in front of the customer.
- Consumption prediction added in the 2026 update estimates energy usage from utility data without requiring the customer's bills, speeding up early-stage design.
Where Aurora Solar has limitations:
- Cost. Aurora is a real line item, and for a small or early-stage installer the per-user or per-credit pricing can be hard to justify before volume is there.
- It is a design and proposal tool first. Aurora is not a full CRM, so most teams pair it with a separate pipeline system, which means another tool to connect and keep in sync.
- The credit-based pricing can make per-project costs harder to predict for teams with uneven volume, especially once the AI add-on is in regular use.
Pricing note: Aurora Solar does not publish firm pricing publicly, and the model now blends per-user subscriptions with credit-based pay-per-project access. Reported figures put basic residential access around $159/user/month and a Premium tier (LiDAR, bankable shade reports, battery modeling) around $259/user/month, with credits often cited near $0.10 each and residential projects in the low hundreds of credits. These numbers come from third-party reviews and reseller reports, not an official price list, and they move. Get a direct quote based on your seat count and project volume before budgeting.
Is OpenSolar the right solar design software for your business?
OpenSolar's entire pitch is in the name and the price: professional-grade solar software that is free for installers, forever. Instead of charging installers a subscription, OpenSolar earns revenue from hardware distributors and finance partners who pay for access to the installer network. The platform surfaces partner equipment and financing inside the design and proposal workflow, and that is how the lights stay on.
OS 3.0, the major release that rolled out into 2026, turned OpenSolar from a design tool into a more complete platform. It added a built-in project-management CRM with a Kanban view of all projects, customizable stages, and filters, plus an integrated hardware catalogue with an instantly calculated bill of materials and access to trade and bulk discounts. In January 2026 it introduced Ada, an AI assistant with voice-activated and automated design capabilities.
That CRM addition is significant for smaller installers, because it removes a line item many of them were paying for separately. Before OS 3.0, a typical OpenSolar shop designed in OpenSolar and tracked deals in a separate paid CRM. Now a lean team can run the visible part of the sales pipeline inside the same free platform where the designs and proposals live. For an installer counting dollars, consolidating design, pipeline visibility, hardware ordering, and proposals into one zero-cost system is a genuinely strong position. The caveat, which matters for the automation discussion later, is that a built-in pipeline view is not the same thing as a fully automated operations engine that talks to your phone system, your financing partners, and your permitting workflow.
Where OpenSolar wins:
- Free for installers. There is no per-seat or per-project software fee for the core application, which is genuinely unusual in this category and makes it the lowest entry cost of any major platform.
- End-to-end coverage. With OS 3.0, design, a project-management CRM, hardware ordering, and proposals live in one free system, so smaller teams can avoid stitching together several paid tools.
- Built-in hardware catalogue and bill of materials with trade and bulk discounts, ordered directly inside the design experience.
- The Ada AI assistant speeds up design with automated and voice-activated capabilities, and the Sales Machine proposal tool visualizes whole-home electrification like EVs and heat pumps.
- Massive scale and credibility. OpenSolar reports more than 28,000 solar professionals across 185 countries and has backing that includes a Google-led funding round, which signals staying power for a free product.
Where OpenSolar has limitations:
- Partner-funded model. You are working inside an ecosystem funded by hardware and finance partners, and equipment and financing options are surfaced accordingly. For many installers that is fine; for some it is a consideration.
- Design and bankable-report rigor. OpenSolar's design and shading tools are strong for a free platform, but installers chasing the highest production-estimate accuracy or third-party-validated bankable reports often still favor Aurora for financed and commercial work.
- API and connector costs. As of 2026, OpenSolar has announced charges for API access and certain third-party connectors. If your plan is to integrate OpenSolar with outside automation or CRM systems, that is no longer free, so confirm those costs.
"OpenSolar being free is not a gimmick: it is a deliberate model funded by hardware and finance partners. The trade-off is that you are designing inside that ecosystem, and the most demanding financed deals sometimes still pull teams back to a paid tool."
What about Solargraf? Aurora vs OpenSolar vs Solargraf
If you are shopping solar design and proposal software, Solargraf comes up in nearly every shortlist alongside Aurora and OpenSolar: and many teams actually run more than one of these together. Here is how the three-way comparison plays out.
Solargraf is a subscription-based design and proposal platform built for speed. It is owned within the Enphase ecosystem, and it shows: the platform claims proposal generation in as little as three minutes, includes deep Enphase integration with Enlighten monitoring data, and ships NEM 3.0 support with pre-built CPUC hourly rate tables. For high-volume residential teams, especially Enphase-heavy shops, that speed is the whole appeal.
Solargraf's published pricing sits between the other two: paid like Aurora, but generally more affordable at the entry level. Reported tiers run from a Starter plan around $2,799 per year (a small number of users and a capped project count) up through small-business and team tiers in the $4,799 to $6,399 per year range, with an Enterprise tier near $12,999 per year for unlimited users and higher project caps. Confirm current tiers and caps directly.
Where Solargraf wins:
- Speed. Proposal generation is among the fastest in the category, which suits teams running high lead volume where time per proposal directly limits how many homeowners a rep can work.
- Enphase integration. If you are an Enphase-centric shop, the tight integration with Enlighten and the Enphase ecosystem is a real workflow advantage.
- NEM 3.0 readiness. Pre-built CPUC hourly rate tables make it well suited to California's post-NEM-3.0 savings modeling.
- Predictable subscription pricing with clear tiers, which is easier to budget than Aurora's credit model for some teams.
Where Solargraf has limitations:
- Production-estimate variance. Installers report production estimates that can differ noticeably from Aurora or HelioScope, which is why some teams use Solargraf for fast proposals and a separate tool to verify production before signing.
- Project caps. Lower tiers cap the number of projects per year, so very high-volume teams need to size the plan carefully or move up tiers.
- Less of a free-end-to-end story than OpenSolar and less of a premium-accuracy story than Aurora: it lives in the middle.
| Factor | Aurora Solar | OpenSolar | Solargraf |
|---|---|---|---|
| Cost model | Paid: subscription + credits | Free for installers | Paid: annual subscription tiers |
| Design accuracy | Highest of the three | Strong for a free tool | Fast; some production variance reported |
| Built-in CRM | Limited | Yes (OS 3.0) | Partial / pipeline features |
| Proposal speed | Fast (faster with Aurora AI) | Fast | Fastest claimed (~3 min) |
| Standout fit | Bankable, financed, commercial | Lowest cost, end-to-end | Enphase shops, NEM 3.0, volume |
| Best for | Teams that need validated accuracy | Cost-sensitive and early-stage teams | High-volume residential, Enphase-heavy |
If software cost is the primary driver and you want one free system to cover design, pipeline, and proposals, OpenSolar is the clear starting point. If validated accuracy and bankable reports on financed or commercial work are non-negotiable, Aurora earns its subscription. If you live in high-volume residential and want maximum proposal speed (especially as an Enphase shop), Solargraf is worth a serious look. And plenty of teams simply run two of these together.
Opening a new solar installation company? Which platform to choose
This is one of the most common questions from people launching an installer business, and the answer is more straightforward than the sales pitches make it sound.
For a brand-new installer watching cash flow, OpenSolar is the clearest starting point. Here is why: in the early months your volume is low and unpredictable, and a free platform that covers design, a project-management CRM, and proposals lets you sell professionally without a monthly software bill eating into thin early margins. You can validate your sales process before committing to a paid tool.
Aurora makes more sense the moment accuracy becomes a gating factor. If you are selling larger systems, doing commercial work, or relying on financing that demands bankable shade reports, Aurora's validated design output removes friction and protects you from production-estimate disputes. Many growing installers add Aurora for those specific deals rather than replacing OpenSolar entirely.
Solargraf is worth a look if you expect high residential volume early, particularly if you are building around Enphase hardware. The speed and NEM 3.0 readiness pay off when a rep is working through many proposals a week.
Starting lean, low and uncertain volume: OpenSolar. Free end-to-end design, CRM, and proposals while you find your footing.
Selling financed or commercial systems from day one: Aurora Solar. Bankable reports and validated accuracy where it matters most.
High residential volume, Enphase-centric: Solargraf. Fast proposals and NEM 3.0 rate tables built in.
Want the best of both: Run OpenSolar or Solargraf for everyday volume and Aurora for the deals that require validated, bankable output.
How do you choose between Aurora Solar and OpenSolar?
If keeping software cost near zero is the priority and you want one platform to handle design, pipeline, and proposals, OpenSolar is the default. If you compete on credibility and sell deals where production accuracy and bankable reports decide the close, Aurora is worth paying for. Most of the decision comes down to your deal mix and your budget, not a feature checklist: both cover the core design-to-proposal flow well.
When working with solar installation clients, we look at two things before weighing in on platform choice: the type and value of the deals the team sells, and where operational friction is actually occurring across the pipeline.
We lean toward Aurora when: The installer sells financed or commercial systems, depends on bankable shade reports, competes on design credibility in the home, or has the volume to justify the subscription. Accuracy-sensitive deals are where Aurora's validation pays for itself.
We lean toward OpenSolar when: The installer is early-stage or cost-sensitive, wants design plus a built-in CRM plus proposals in one free system, and does not yet have deal volume or financing requirements that demand premium bankable output. Free end-to-end is hard to argue against when margins are thin.
We flag the open question when: An installer is on OpenSolar today but starting to win larger or financed jobs. The real question becomes whether the free platform's design output is sufficient for those specific deals, or whether adding Aurora for them is worth it. Often the answer is to run both, not to switch.
How do you decide? Five questions to answer first
Answer these before you commit to either platform:
- What does your deal mix look like? Mostly straightforward residential cash or simple-loan deals, OpenSolar's free tools likely cover you. Heavy on financed or commercial systems that need bankable reports, Aurora's validated accuracy earns its cost.
- What is your software budget right now? If a monthly per-seat or per-credit bill is hard to justify at your current volume, OpenSolar removes that line item entirely. If you have the volume, Aurora's pricing is defensible.
- Do you already have a CRM, or do you need one built in? OpenSolar's OS 3.0 includes a project-management CRM, which is valuable if you do not already run one. If you have a dedicated pipeline system, Aurora pairs with it but expects you to bring your own.
- How much does production-estimate accuracy matter to your close and your liability? If financiers, rebate authorities, or skeptical commercial buyers are in the room, Aurora's NREL-validated, bankable output reduces risk. For simpler residential sales, a faster, free tool may be plenty.
- Do you plan to integrate your design tool with outside automation or systems? OpenSolar now charges for API access and certain connectors as of 2026, so factor that in if you intend to wire it into other software. Confirm connector costs on either platform before assuming integration is free.
AI features in Aurora and OpenSolar: what actually exists
Both platforms have leaned into AI, and the marketing can blur what is real. It is worth being direct about what each AI feature actually does, because in both cases it is focused on the design step, not the operations around it.
Aurora has Aurora AI, which automates 3D site modeling and shading analysis with high reported accuracy and can help generate permit-ready plan sets directly from a sales design. On Aurora's credit-based model, the AI add-on is priced per project, so heavy use shows up on the bill. This is genuinely useful: it compresses the time from address to a designed system and can shorten the path to a permit set. What it does not do is respond to the lead, follow up on the proposal, or move the deal through your pipeline.
OpenSolar introduced Ada in January 2026, an AI assistant with voice-activated and automated design capabilities, layered on top of its free design tools. Like Aurora AI, Ada is about speeding up and simplifying the design itself. OpenSolar also added Sales Machine, a proposal tool that visualizes whole-home electrification such as EVs and heat pumps to help reps sell a bigger vision.
The honest takeaway: the AI in both products is design AI. It makes the act of producing an accurate model and a polished proposal faster. Neither platform's AI handles the operational chain around that proposal: instantly responding to a new lead, chasing a proposal that has gone quiet, texting back a missed call, syncing the deal into your install pipeline, or telling the customer their permit was just approved. That gap is the same on both, and it is where most installers actually lose deals.
The automation gap: what neither platform handles natively
Design accuracy and proposal polish win you the chance to close. They do not, on their own, close the deal or run the install. Whether you choose Aurora, OpenSolar, or Solargraf, there is a layer of operational work around the design tool that none of them automates end to end. This is where deals quietly leak out of the pipeline.
Lead-to-proposal speed. A homeowner fills out a form at 9pm. The installer who responds in five minutes is dramatically more likely to win that conversation than the one who calls back the next afternoon. None of these design platforms watches your lead sources and fires an instant, personalized response the moment a lead lands. That speed-to-lead reflex has to be built around the tool.
Proposal follow-up sequences. A solar proposal is a major financial decision, and homeowners rarely say yes on first read. They need nudges: a check-in at day three, a financing reminder at day ten, a final touch before the proposal expires. Aurora and OpenSolar will produce a beautiful proposal, but neither runs the multi-step follow-up sequence that turns a sent proposal into a signed contract. Without it, a large share of proposals simply expire in silence.
Missed-call text-back. Solar buyers call. When a call goes unanswered and nothing happens, that lead often calls the next company on their list. An automatic "Sorry we missed you, can we help?" text within seconds keeps the conversation alive. That is not a design-software feature on any of these platforms.
Install-pipeline and CRM sync. OpenSolar has a built-in CRM, and Aurora pairs with whatever you run, but a signed deal still has to flow cleanly from design into the install pipeline: site survey, engineering, permitting, scheduling, install, inspection, PTO. Keeping the design platform, the CRM, and the operations side in genuine two-way sync, so nothing is re-keyed and nothing falls through, is not something these tools do on their own.
Permit and financing status updates. The middle of a solar project is a long, opaque wait for the customer: permit submitted, permit approved, financing approved, install scheduled, PTO filed. Each milestone is a moment to reassure the customer and head off the anxious "what is happening with my project?" call. Neither Aurora nor OpenSolar automatically pushes those status updates to the homeowner as milestones change.
Review requests after install. Reviews drive the next batch of leads, and the best time to ask is right after a successful install when the customer is happiest. Sending that request at the right moment, to the right customer, every time, requires an automated trigger that none of these design platforms provides.
This is the layer Aplos AI builds for solar installation companies. We build custom automation on top of whichever design and proposal platform you run: Aurora, OpenSolar, Solargraf, or anything else: to handle instant lead response, proposal follow-up sequences, missed-call text-back, install-pipeline and CRM sync, permit and financing status notifications, and post-install review requests. The design tool stays exactly as it is. We connect the operational workflow around it so deals stop slipping through the gaps.
Still chasing cold leads, stalled proposals, and "where is my project?" calls by hand? We map your current workflow in a free audit and show you exactly which steps can be automated: on top of Aurora, OpenSolar, Solargraf, or whatever you are running today.
Get a Free Automation Audit →