SolarSoftwares
Find Software →

100 products researched 2,422 sourced facts Verified September 2026 Methodology

Comparison

Aurora Solar vs RatedPower (pvDesign)

25 differences · 11 identical

Aurora SolarAurora Solar Inc.
Entry price
USD 159
Charged
Per seat
Free tier or trial
No free tier or trial
Named integrations
7
Verified data points
9
RatedPower (pvDesign)RatedPower (part of Enverus)
Entry price
Not publicly disclosed
Charged
Quote only
Free tier or trial
Demo only, no trial
Named integrations
4
Verified data points
9

The differences that matter most

  • Price published Partial Not published
  • Pricing model per-seat quote-only
  • Free tier Not offered demo-only

All 25 differences ↓

Aurora Solar or RatedPower (pvDesign)?

They differ most on price published. Aurora Solar publishes USD 159; RatedPower (pvDesign) publishes Not publicly disclosed. They use different pricing models, so those figures do not compare directly.

We do not name a winner. Below are 25 differences drawn from the same sourced dataset that powers both product pages.

Verified against the vendor’s own pages.

Pricing

These cannot be compared on a single number

Aurora Solar is priced per-seat and RatedPower (pvDesign) is priced quote-only. These are different pricing models, so a single side-by-side figure would be misleading. Each is shown as its vendor states it.

Aurora Solar

USD 159

159 USD per user/month

Per seat

1 seat included

50 projects

RatedPower (pvDesign)

Not publicly disclosed

Quote only

Prices are shown exactly as each vendor writes them and are never converted between currencies.

Where they differ

25 differences, ordered by how much they are likely to matter — pricing transparency first, then capabilities the vendor explicitly confirms or denies.

Legend Verified Vendor claim Not offered Not found Could not read
Differences between Aurora Solar and RatedPower (pvDesign)
Capability Aurora Solar RatedPower (pvDesign)
Solar design & simulation
CAD export (DXF/DWG) — Not found Yes Verified
Ground-mount / tracker layout — Not applicable Advanced Verified
Inverter sizing Advanced Verified — Could not read
Loss and uncertainty modelling (P50/P90) — Not found Basic Vendor claim
Manual layout editing — Could not read — Verified
Shading analysis Advanced Verified Basic Vendor claim
Single-line diagram — Not found Basic Vendor claim
Proposals & sales
E-signature — Could not read Yes Verified
AI & automation
AI agent / copilot — Could not read vendor-claimed Verified
AI design assistance vendor-claimed Verified — Could not read
Integrations & extensibility
Named, documented integrations 7 Verified 4 Verified
Public API Advanced Verified Basic Vendor claim
Platform & deployment
Delivery model hybrid Verified software Verified
Pricing & commercial terms
Price published Partial Verified Not published Verified
Pricing model per-seat Verified quote-only Verified
Free tier Not offered Verified demo-only Verified
Entry price 159 USD per user/month Verified — Could not read
Currency USD Verified — Could not read
Project / design cap 50 Verified — Could not read
Seat cap 1 Verified — Could not read
Market fit & availability
Geographic availability US; CA; EU Verified global Verified
Jurisdictional compliance capability us-nec Verified — Could not read
Residential Yes Verified No Verified
Target buyer small-installer; sales-org Verified enterprise-epc; developer Verified
Utility-scale No Verified Yes Verified

Scroll the table sideways to see both products. The capability column stays in place.

Where they are the same 11 data points
  • Automatic module layout
  • Remote site capture from imagery
  • Battery sizing and modelling
  • Annual energy yield simulation
  • Bankable / IE-accepted simulation report
  • Named weather / irradiance data source
  • ROI / payback calculation
  • Product status
  • C&I
  • Web application
  • Proposal document generation

Which might suit you

Framed as requirements, not a verdict. Both descriptions come from the same data.

Consider Aurora Solar if…

  • you need it to connect to tools you already run (7 named)
  • AI-assisted workflows matter to you
  • your work is mostly residential

For residential installers and dealer/sales organisations who need design accuracy and a proposal in the same tool, on a per-seat subscription. Not for utility-scale or large C&I work — the vendor's own navigation routes "Commercial" to a different product (HelioScope), and the Aurora plan tables cap Basic/Premium at 1 user and 50 projects/month.

Full Aurora Solar profile

Consider RatedPower (pvDesign) if…

  • AI-assisted workflows matter to you
  • you work at utility scale

For developers, IPPs, EPCs and engineering firms who need to iterate hundreds of utility-scale layouts and carry them through to interconnection and off-taker-ready detailed engineering. Not for anyone who needs a published price (all three tiers are "Talk to sales"), not for rooftop or residential, and not for buyers who need site prospecting outside the specific geographies where Enverus PRISM International data is licensed.

Full RatedPower (pvDesign) profile

Related comparisons

Other options in design & simulation

Frequently asked

What is the main difference between Aurora Solar and RatedPower (pvDesign)?

They differ most on price published. In total we recorded 25 verified differences and 11 points where they are the same.

Which costs more, Aurora Solar or RatedPower (pvDesign)?

Aurora Solar is priced per-seat and RatedPower (pvDesign) is priced quote-only. These are different pricing models, so a single side-by-side figure would be misleading. Each is shown as its vendor states it.

Is Aurora Solar or RatedPower (pvDesign) better?

We do not name a winner. Both are described from the same verified data, and which suits you depends on your requirements — the differences above are the facts; the choice is yours.

Last verified

Vendors change pricing and features without notice. Check the vendor’s own page before deciding.

This comparison is generated from the feature database, not written by hand. A pair is only published when the data holds at least five stateable differences — which is why 281 candidate pairs were refused. How comparisons are built