Easy PV
Midsummer
Design & simulation · Web
Pricing GBP 0 Per seat Free tier, no time limit
Sept 2026
Comparison
Aurora Solar vs Solargis Evaluate
23 differences · 12 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
Solargis EvaluateSolargis
- Entry price
- EUR 12000
- Charged
- Per seat
- Free tier or trial
- No free tier or trial
- Named integrations
- 0
- Verified data points
- 7
The differences that matter most
- Price published Partial Published
- Entry price 159 USD per user/month 12000 EUR subscription
- Battery sizing and modelling Advanced Not found
Aurora Solar or Solargis Evaluate?
They differ most on price published. Aurora Solar publishes USD 159; Solargis Evaluate publishes EUR 12000.
We do not name a winner. Below are 23 differences drawn from the same sourced dataset that powers both product pages.
Verified against the vendor’s own pages.
Pricing
Both use the same pricing model, so the figures below are directly comparable.
Aurora Solar
USD 159
159 USD per user/month
Per seat
1 seat included
50 projects
Solargis Evaluate
EUR 12000
12000 EUR subscription
Per seat
60 projects
Prices are shown exactly as each vendor writes them and are never converted between currencies.
Where they differ
23 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
| Capability | Aurora Solar | Solargis Evaluate |
|---|---|---|
| Solar design & simulation | ||
| Battery sizing and modelling | Advanced Verified | — Not found |
| Loss and uncertainty modelling (P50/P90) | — Not found | Basic Verified |
| Named weather / irradiance data source | — Not found | advanced Verified |
| Ground-mount / tracker layout | — Not applicable | Advanced Verified |
| Inverter sizing | Advanced Verified | — Could not read |
| Proposals & sales | ||
| E-signature | — Could not read | — Not found |
| Proposal document generation | Advanced Verified | — Could not read |
| Estimation & financial modelling | ||
| ROI / payback calculation | Advanced Verified | — Not found |
| Reporting, data & BI | ||
| Report / deliverable export | — Could not read | Advanced Verified |
| AI & automation | ||
| AI design assistance | vendor-claimed Verified | — Could not read |
| Integrations & extensibility | ||
| Named, documented integrations | 7 Verified | 0 Verified |
| Public API | Advanced Verified | Basic Vendor claim |
| Pricing & commercial terms | ||
| Price published | Partial Verified | Published Verified |
| Entry price | 159 USD per user/month Verified | 12000 EUR subscription Verified |
| Currency | USD Verified | EUR Verified |
| Project / design cap | 50 Verified | 60 Verified |
| Seat cap | 1 Verified | — Could not read |
| Market fit & availability | ||
| C&I | No Verified | Yes Verified |
| 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 | 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 12 data points
- Pricing model
- Free tier
- Automatic module layout
- Single-line diagram
- CAD export (DXF/DWG)
- Shading analysis
- Remote site capture from imagery
- Annual energy yield simulation
- Bankable / IE-accepted simulation report
- Product status
- Delivery model
- Web application
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 profileConsider Solargis Evaluate if…
- you need a price you can plan against before talking to sales
- you work at utility scale
For utility-scale developers, engineers and IEs who are already buying Solargis data and want the design and simulation layer on top of it, with reports investors accept. Not for residential or rooftop sales work, not for anyone needing CAD/construction deliverables, and not for small teams — the published entry subscription is €12,000 and the project allowance is 60 "Early Stage" projects.
Full Solargis Evaluate profileRelated comparisons
Other options in design & simulation
SolarEdge Designer
SolarEdge Technologies
Design & simulation · Web
Pricing Free Free Free tier, no time limit
Sept 2026
SAM (System Advisor Model)
National Laboratory of the Rockies (NLR) — formerly the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL)
Design & simulation · Desktop
Pricing Free Free Free tier, no time limit
Sept 2026
Frequently asked
What is the main difference between Aurora Solar and Solargis Evaluate?
They differ most on price published. In total we recorded 23 verified differences and 12 points where they are the same.
Which costs more, Aurora Solar or Solargis Evaluate?
Both are priced per seat. Aurora Solar: USD 159. Solargis Evaluate: EUR 12000.
Is Aurora Solar or Solargis Evaluate 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