SolarSoftwares
Find Software →

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

Comparison

Energy Toolbase (ETB Developer) vs Xendee

21 differences · 11 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
XendeeXendee Corporation
Entry price
USD 440
Charged
Per seat
Free tier or trial
Paid trial
Named integrations
1
Verified data points
20

The differences that matter most

  • Pricing model hardware-inclusive per-seat
  • Free tier Not offered paid-trial
  • Entry price 299 USD per user/month billed annually 440 USD per user/month billed annually

All 21 differences ↓

Energy Toolbase (ETB Developer) or Xendee?

They differ most on pricing model. Energy Toolbase (ETB Developer) publishes USD 299; Xendee publishes USD 440. They use different pricing models, so those figures do not compare directly.

We do not name a winner. Below are 21 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 Xendee is priced per-seat. 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

Xendee

USD 440

440 USD per user/month billed annually

Per seat

1 seat included

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

Where they differ

21 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 Xendee
Capability Energy Toolbase (ETB Developer) Xendee
Solar design & simulation
Dispatch / self-consumption strategy Advanced Verified — Could not read
Single-line diagram — Could not read Advanced Verified
Sub-hourly / 8760 output — Could not read Yes Verified
Proposals & sales
Branded / customisable templates — Could not read — Verified
E-signature Yes Vendor claim — Verified
Financing option presentation Advanced Verified — Could not read
Incentive and rebate calculation Advanced Verified — Could not read
Savings / bill-offset calculation Advanced Verified — Could not read
Monitoring & operations
Portfolio / fleet view — Could not read Advanced Verified
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
Integrations & extensibility
Named, documented integrations 4 Verified 1 Verified
Platform prerequisite — Could not read Genability/Arcadia access (Enterprise API tier) Verified
Pricing & commercial terms
Pricing model hardware-inclusive Verified per-seat Verified
Free tier Not offered Verified paid-trial Verified
Entry price 299 USD per user/month billed annually Verified 440 USD per user/month billed annually Verified
Project / design cap 10 Verified — Could not read
Market fit & availability
Residential Yes Verified No Verified
Target buyer developer; engineering-firm Verified engineering-firm; 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
  • AI agent / copilot
  • Seat cap
  • Currency
  • Price published
  • Geographic availability
  • Product status
  • C&I
  • Interconnection application
  • Delivery model
  • Web application
  • Proposal document generation

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 Xendee if…

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

For developers, EPCs, consultants and OEMs doing techno-economic microgrid and EV-charging work who need multi-node modelling, power-flow and one-line output, and a path from business development through to operations in one algorithm. Not for someone who wants one licence that does everything — PROPOSE and DESIGN are separate products at separate per-user prices, and custom tariffs, white labelling and DISCOVER API access are all priced on top.

Full Xendee profile

Related comparisons

Frequently asked

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

They differ most on pricing model. In total we recorded 21 verified differences and 11 points where they are the same.

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

Energy Toolbase (ETB Developer) is priced hardware-inclusive and Xendee is priced per-seat. 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 Xendee 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