SolarSoftwares
Find Software →

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

Comparison

Energy Toolbase (ETB Developer) vs HOMER Pro

26 differences · 4 identical

Energy Toolbase (ETB Developer)Energy Toolbase
Entry price
USD 299
Charged
Hardware inclusive
Free tier or trial
No free tier or trial
Named integrations
4
Verified data points
13
HOMER ProUL Solutions
Entry price
Not publicly disclosed
Charged
Modular licence
Free tier or trial
Free trial
Named integrations
1
Verified data points
15

The differences that matter most

  • Price published Partial Not published
  • Pricing model hardware-inclusive modular-licence
  • Free tier Not offered free-trial

All 26 differences ↓

Energy Toolbase (ETB Developer) or HOMER Pro?

They differ most on price published. Energy Toolbase (ETB Developer) publishes USD 299; HOMER Pro publishes Not publicly disclosed. They use different pricing models, so those figures do not compare directly.

We do not name a winner. Below are 26 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

Energy Toolbase (ETB Developer) is priced hardware-inclusive and HOMER Pro is priced modular-licence. These are different pricing models, so a single side-by-side figure would be misleading. Each is shown as its vendor states it.

Energy Toolbase (ETB Developer)

USD 299

299 USD per user/month billed annually

Hardware inclusive

1 seat included

10 projects

HOMER Pro

Not publicly disclosed

Modular licence

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

Where they differ

26 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 Energy Toolbase (ETB Developer) and HOMER Pro
Capability Energy Toolbase (ETB Developer) HOMER Pro
Solar design & simulation
Battery sizing and modelling — Could not read Advanced Verified
Sub-hourly / 8760 output — Could not read Yes Verified
Proposals & sales
Proposal document generation Advanced Verified — Not found
Savings / bill-offset calculation Advanced Verified — Not found
E-signature Yes Vendor claim Yes Verified
Financing option presentation Advanced Verified — Could not read
Incentive and rebate calculation Advanced Verified — Could not read
Permitting & engineering
Interconnection application Advanced Verified — Could not read
Monitoring & operations
Production monitoring Advanced Verified — Could not read
Thermal / aerial inspection analytics — Could not read Advanced Verified
Certificate, rebate & scheme administration
VPP / demand-response enrolment Yes Verified — Could not read
AI & automation
AI agent / copilot vendor-claimed Verified — Could not read
Integrations & extensibility
Named, documented integrations 4 Verified 1 Verified
Platform & deployment
Web application Yes Verified — Could not read
Pricing & commercial terms
Price published Partial Verified Not published Verified
Pricing model hardware-inclusive Verified modular-licence Verified
Free tier Not offered Verified free-trial Verified
Entry price 299 USD per user/month billed annually Verified — Could not read
Currency USD Verified — Could not read
Project / design cap 10 Verified — Could not read
Seat cap 1 Verified — Could not read
Self-serve signup — Could not read Yes Verified
Market fit & availability
Geographic availability US; global Verified global Verified
Residential Yes Verified No Verified
Target buyer developer; engineering-firm Verified engineering-firm 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 4 data points
  • Dispatch / self-consumption strategy
  • Product status
  • C&I
  • Delivery model

Which might suit you

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

Consider Energy Toolbase (ETB Developer) if…

  • AI-assisted workflows matter to you
  • your work is mostly residential

For C&I and community-scale solar-plus-storage developers and consultants who need a defensible bill-savings model against real tariffs and then a branded proposal out of the same tool. Not for off-grid or islanded microgrid engineering — ETB models the economics of grid-connected assets against a rate schedule, where HOMER Pro models the physics of a system that may have no grid at all.

Full Energy Toolbase (ETB Developer) profile

Consider HOMER Pro if…

  • you work at utility scale

For engineers sizing hybrid generation-plus-storage systems, especially off-grid, island, remote and campus microgrids where the physics and the fuel curve decide the answer. Not for a salesperson producing a client-facing proposal, and not for tariff-driven bill-savings work — HOMER names no utility rate database at all, which is exactly what Energy Toolbase sells.

Full HOMER Pro profile

Related comparisons

Frequently asked

What is the main difference between Energy Toolbase (ETB Developer) and HOMER Pro?

They differ most on price published. In total we recorded 26 verified differences and 4 points where they are the same.

Which costs more, Energy Toolbase (ETB Developer) or HOMER Pro?

Energy Toolbase (ETB Developer) is priced hardware-inclusive and HOMER Pro is priced modular-licence. These are different pricing models, so a single side-by-side figure would be misleading. Each is shown as its vendor states it.

Is Energy Toolbase (ETB Developer) or HOMER Pro 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