The best solar proposal software in Philippines is the one that prints a savings number the customer’s own Meralco bill can confirm. That sounds obvious until you look at what most tools do here. They credit every exported kilowatt-hour at the retail tariff, which under Republic Act 9513 is simply wrong, and the resulting payback figure is optimistic by a wide margin. Philippine grid tariffs are high enough that an honest model still closes the deal, so there is no reason to inflate it. This ranking scores ten platforms on the regulatory content a Philippine proposal has to carry, prices each in pesos, and names where each one fails. SurgePV takes the top slot at roughly PHP 75,000 (US$1,299) per user per year on the 5-User Team plan.
Direct answer. The best solar proposal software in the Philippines for 2026 is SurgePV, at about PHP 75,000 per user per year on the 5-User Team plan. It models the RA 9513 export split correctly, valuing self-consumed energy at the retail tariff and exported energy at the distribution utility’s generation charge, handles the 100 kW net metering cap, shows 12 percent VAT on the quote, and ships the single line diagram and bill of quantities with the branded proposal.
This is the sales-side companion to our best solar design software in Philippines ranking. That page is about what your engineer needs. This one is about what your closer needs, which is a different tool test and often a different licence.
The RA 9513 Export Split Is the Number One Proposal Error
Every other feature comparison on this page is secondary to this section. If your proposal tool values exported energy wrongly, nothing else it does matters.
Republic Act 9513, the Renewable Energy Act of 2008, and the Energy Regulatory Commission rules implementing it, give qualified end-users net metering up to 100 kW of installed capacity. The energy accounting is asymmetric, and that asymmetry is what imported templates miss.
Self-consumed energy offsets the entire retail tariff. That means generation charge, transmission charge, system loss charge, distribution charge, supply and metering charges, universal charges and the VAT layered on top. In Meralco territory that stack commonly lands above PHP 12 per kWh for residential and in the PHP 9 to PHP 11 range for many commercial classes.
Exported energy is credited at the distribution utility’s blended generation charge alone. None of the wires charges, none of the universal charges. Depending on the month, that credit is often in the PHP 5 to PHP 7 per kWh region, roughly half of what the same kilowatt-hour is worth if the customer consumes it on site.
The commercial consequence is that Philippine solar sizing is a self-consumption exercise, not an offset-the-annual-bill exercise. A proposal tool that lets you input a single blended rate and multiply it by annual production will produce a number your customer’s finance manager can disprove in one afternoon with twelve bills.
📘 Regulation note
Per the Energy Regulatory Commission and the Department of Energy, net metering under RA 9513 covers installed capacity up to 100 kW, and exported energy is credited at the distribution utility's generation charge rather than the full retail rate. Above 100 kW the project sits outside net metering and is normally structured for self-consumption with export limiting.
Bring one of your own sites to a free SurgePV demo. We will build the 3D roof from a satellite address, run the 8,760-hour shading simulation, and hand you the SLD, BOQ and branded proposal on the call.
Book a free SurgePV demo → Compare pricingWhy the 100 kW Cap Needs Two Proposal Templates
A Philippine sales team needs two proposal structures, and most software gives you one.
Below the cap. The story is straightforward. Net metering applies, surplus earns a credit, and the customer sees a bill that shrinks. Your proposal shows monthly bill before, monthly bill after, credit balance behaviour across wet and dry seasons, and payback. Approval runs through the distribution utility’s net metering application.
At or above the cap. Net metering is off the table. The system is designed to serve on-site load with export limiting at the inverter or a dedicated controller, and the financial case rests entirely on avoided consumption. Now the proposal has to carry an hourly load profile against an hourly generation profile, because any generation above load at any given hour is simply curtailed and worth nothing. A tool that models annual energy instead of hourly coincidence will overstate a 300 kW warehouse array by a large margin.
That second case is where most Philippine commercial and industrial money sits, and it is where the weakest proposal tools quietly fail. Ask any vendor to model a 250 kW system on a factory that runs a single day shift, then check whether the tool curtails the weekend generation. Many do not.
Want a second opinion before you send the quote? Send us the last twelve months of bills and the operating hours, and our engineers will sanity-check the self-consumption fraction. Talk to our team or run a first pass with our solar calculator.
The 5-Point Philippine Proposal Test
This is the framework our design desk uses to shortlist a proposal tool for Philippine work. Each platform scores 1 to 5 on five axes, for 25 total. We will not put anything below 17 in front of a paying commercial client.
- Export-credit fidelity. Does the tool separate self-consumed and exported energy and value them differently, or does it apply one blended rate?
- Cap awareness. Does it handle the 100 kW boundary, export limiting and hourly curtailment, or does it only know annual totals?
- Utility fidelity. Does it carry Meralco, Visayan Electric, Davao Light and electric cooperative tariff structures, including the separate charge lines a Philippine bill itemises?
- Commercial correctness. Peso pricing, 12 percent VAT shown on the quote, a payment schedule a bank accepts, and depreciation treatment for corporate buyers.
- Close mechanics. E-signature, proposal analytics, financing options and a handoff into whatever tracks the deal after signature.
Applying it: SurgePV 22, OpenSolar 17, Arka360 16, Aurora Solar 16, Pylon 15, Solargraf 14, SolarPlus 14, Enact Systems 13, QuickEstimate 13, Sunbase 12. Aurora and Pylon each gain a point on axis 4 against an older version of this page, because Aurora’s entry plan is cheaper than we previously stated and Pylon bills per project rather than per seat.
Read those scores carefully. No platform reaches 25, and the losses cluster on axes 1 and 3. The Philippine market is small enough that no global vendor has built a Meralco-native tariff engine, so some tariff configuration work remains yours whichever tool you buy.
Top 10 Solar Proposal Software in Philippines Compared
Pricing is 2026, annualised, converted at approximately PHP 58 per US dollar. Vendors quoting in dollars move with the exchange rate, so treat peso figures as indicative rather than contractual.
| # | Platform | Indicative PHP price | Key capability | Best for |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | SurgePV | PHP 75,000 (US$1,299) per user per year, 5-User Team | Design, hourly simulation, SLD, BOQ and proposal in one licence | EPCs quoting residential and C&I in one workflow |
| 2 | OpenSolar | Core platform free; API Access and Connectors chargeable from 16 Apr 2026, rates not published | Free proposal and design core, strong APAC presence | Solo installers and new entrants in Cebu or Davao |
| 3 | Aurora Solar | US$135/user/mo Basic and US$220 Premium billed annually, so US$1,620 to US$2,640/yr (~PHP 94,000 to PHP 153,000) | Deepest residential sales design workflow | Foreign-owned shops with an existing Aurora process |
| 4 | Arka360 | India list price only: INR 70,000 to INR 1,00,000/yr plus 18% GST (~PHP 48,000 to PHP 68,000) | Asia-built design plus proposal at a lower seat price | Small residential teams watching the peso |
| 5 | Solargraf | Priced by plan, not by seat: US$2,799/yr Starter (2 users, 240 projects) to US$12,999 Enterprise (~PHP 162,000 to PHP 754,000) | Fast proposal with e-signature, Enphase-linked | Teams standardised on Enphase microinverters |
| 6 | Pylon | Per project: US$4.00 Standard, US$10.00 Pro, no monthly minimum (~PHP 232 to PHP 580 a project) | Interactive web proposals with finance modules | Sellers whose differentiator is proposal presentation |
| 7 | SolarPlus | US$135 to US$450/mo by tier on annual pre-pay, so US$1,620 to US$5,400/yr (~PHP 94,000 to PHP 313,000) | Sales and design with tropical presets | APAC teams wanting Southern Hemisphere support hours |
| 8 | Enact Systems | US$279/mo for 2 users on annual, so US$3,348/yr for the pair (~PHP 194,000, about PHP 97,000 a seat) | Proposal plus post-sale lifecycle tracking | Teams wanting one record from quote to commissioning |
| 9 | QuickEstimate | ~PHP 25,000 (US$435) per user per year | Quotation, lead capture, chat-based follow-up | Installers losing deals to slow follow-up, not weak quotes |
| 10 | Sunbase | From US$59/user/mo (~PHP 41,000/yr); higher tiers not published | CRM plus field sales with proposal attached | Door-to-door and channel-partner sales models |
Three structural notes. First, the spread is enormous, from a free core platform up past PHP 300,000 a seat, and the top of that range buys US residential polish rather than Philippine regulatory content. Second, two entries undercut us outright and it would be dishonest to bury that: OpenSolar’s core platform is free, and Pylon’s per-project billing means a Philippine installer issuing five proposals a month spends roughly PHP 14,000 to PHP 35,000 a year against PHP 75,000 for one SurgePV seat. Third, positions 9 and 10 are sales tools with a quote attached, not design tools, so they belong in a stack rather than on their own.
1. SurgePV
What it does best. SurgePV is the only platform here where the same licence produces the engineering and the customer-facing document. A designer starts from a satellite address, the AI builds the 3D roof, an 8,760-hour simulation produces the hourly generation profile, and the financial engine runs that profile against the client’s hourly load. Self-consumed kilowatt-hours are valued at the full retail tariff and exported kilowatt-hours at the generation charge, so the payback figure on the proposal is the one the customer’s bills will actually show. Above 100 kW the export-limiting case is a design option, and the curtailed hours are visible rather than hidden inside an annual total. The proposal ships white-labelled with the single line diagram and bill of quantities attached.
Pricing. About PHP 75,000 (US$1,299) per user per year on the 5-User Team plan, roughly PHP 377,000 for five seats. Individual seats run about PHP 110,000 (US$1,899). Free trial, no credit card.
Who it suits. Philippine EPCs and installers issuing fifteen or more proposals a month, teams selling commercial and industrial rooftops where the self-consumption fraction decides the deal, and anyone currently paying for a design licence plus a separate proposal licence.
Honest limitations. Four worth stating plainly. It is not a CRM, so lead chasing needs a second product, and in a market where most residential deals are won on follow-up speed that gap is real. There is no native Meralco tariff pack, so the charge lines are configured once by your team rather than shipped ready. Brand recognition in the Philippines is low because the product launched in 2025, which adds a conversation when a bank or a Japanese or Korean parent company reviews the numbers. And there is no built-in local financing integration, so a proposal offering a BPI or Security Bank facility carries those terms as manual inputs rather than a live quote.
Book a SurgePV demo with one of your own sites and a real twelve-month bill history so you can test the export-credit handling against something you can verify.
2. OpenSolar
What it does best. The core design and proposal engine is free, and OpenSolar has genuine traction across Australia and Southeast Asia, which means the templates and workflows are not purely US-shaped. For a two-person installer in Cebu doing three residential jobs a month, the economics are hard to argue with.
Pricing. The core platform is free, for any number of users, which makes it the cheapest option on this page and cheaper than ours. OpenSolar has said that API Access, charged per project on creation, and Connectors, charged as a flat monthly fee, become chargeable from 16 April 2026, but it has not published those rates and they are geography-specific, so no Philippine add-on figure can honestly be quoted yet.
Who it suits. Solo installers, new market entrants, and anyone testing whether solar sales is a viable line of business before committing to a licence.
Honest limitations. No RA 9513 export-credit logic, so the tariff modelling is yours to build and maintain. No Philippine utility library. Commercial work above the net metering cap is poorly served because the hourly curtailment case is not modelled. Our OpenSolar alternative comparison covers where the free tier stops being free in practice.
3. Aurora Solar
What it does best. The most polished residential sales experience in the list. Roof detection is strong, the sales mode is designed for a rep sitting at a kitchen table, and the proposal output persuades homeowners. Foreign-owned installers already running Aurora elsewhere keep their process intact.
Pricing. Aurora publishes US dollar prices: Basic US$135 per user per month billed annually and Premium US$220, or US$159 and US$259 billed monthly. That is US$1,620 to US$2,640 a year, roughly PHP 94,000 to PHP 153,000 a seat at PHP 58 to the dollar, so five Basic seats cost US$8,100 and five Premium US$13,200. Plan sets are a separately priced service rather than a plan inclusion, and LIDAR modelling, bankable shade reports and battery modelling sit on Premium. Worth saying plainly: Aurora Basic at US$1,620 a year undercuts a SurgePV Individual seat at US$1,899.
Who it suits. Larger residential-led operations with US or Australian parentage and stable designer headcount.
Honest limitations. The Philippine regulatory layer is absent. No RA 9513 split, no Meralco charge structure, no peso-native pricing, and dollar billing that hurts when the peso moves. Premium is among the more expensive cloud seats here, though SolarPlus Complete costs more, and the Premium price is difficult to justify against Philippine deal sizes. See our Aurora Solar alternative breakdown.
4. Arka360
What it does best. Built in Asia for Asian rooftops, which shows in how it handles small irregular roof planes and cluttered urban sites. Seat pricing sits below the US platforms, and the design-to-proposal path is short.
Pricing. Arka360 publishes no Philippine price list. Its only published rates are for India: Lite INR 46,000 a year, Basic INR 70,000 and Premium INR 1,00,000, all plus 18 percent GST, with a one-time INR 10,000 onboarding fee. That is roughly PHP 31,000 to PHP 68,000 a year at current rates, and a Philippine buyer should expect a quote rather than a published price.
Who it suits. Small Philippine residential and light commercial teams for whom seat cost is a live constraint.
Honest limitations. Its regulatory content is tuned to India, not the Philippines, so the subsidy and utility logic you inherit is the wrong country’s. Simulation depth falls short of what a Philippine bank wants for a financed commercial rooftop. The equipment database is smaller than the US platforms carry.
5. Solargraf
What it does best. Speed. A rep can produce a clean residential proposal with e-signature quickly, and if your standard inverter is Enphase the component workflow is tight because Enphase owns the product.
Pricing. Solargraf does not sell seats. It prices by plan in US dollars: Starter US$2,799 a year covering 240 projects and 2 users, up to Enterprise US$12,999 for 1,500 projects, with API access a further US$4,000 a year on every plan except Enterprise. At PHP 58 to the dollar that is roughly PHP 162,000 to PHP 754,000 a year, which is a good deal more than the per-seat figure this page previously carried.
Who it suits. Residential-only sellers standardised on Enphase microinverters, a stack that appears in higher-end Metro Manila and Tagaytay homes.
Honest limitations. Shading analysis is light, commercial capability is thin, and there is no Philippine tariff or net metering content at all. The Enphase bias also matters commercially, since microinverter pricing limits reach in a cost-sensitive residential segment where Deye, Growatt and Solis hybrids dominate.
6. Pylon
What it does best. Presentation. Pylon produces interactive web proposals that a customer explores rather than reads, with financing scenarios embedded. In a market where the payback story is genuinely strong, letting the customer move the sliders themselves is persuasive.
Pricing. Pylon is not a seat licence. It bills per project: US$4.00 on Standard and US$10.00 on Pro, with no monthly minimum, which is about PHP 232 and PHP 580 a project. eSignature costs US$0.80 a project, payments 2.50 percent a transaction, and the separate Solar CRM add-on starts at US$49 per user per month. For a Philippine installer at any realistic volume this is dramatically cheaper than every per-seat product here, ours included.
Who it suits. Sales-led teams whose differentiator is the quality of the customer experience rather than engineering depth.
Honest limitations. The financing integrations are built for markets Pylon serves directly, and Philippine lenders are not among them, so the finance section becomes manual entry. Design and simulation depth sit below the top four here, and there is no RA 9513 logic.
7. SolarPlus
What it does best. An Australian-built platform covering design, proposal and some project management, with presets that suit tropical and subtropical conditions better than a Northern Hemisphere tool. Support runs on an Australian timezone, which overlaps Philippine working hours almost exactly.
Pricing. SolarPlus bills in US dollars despite its Australian origin: Starter US$135 a month, Pro US$260 and Complete US$450 on annual pre-pay, or US$150, US$300 and US$520 billed monthly, with Enterprise quote-only. That is US$1,620 to US$5,400 a year, roughly PHP 94,000 to PHP 313,000 a seat. Commercial capacity is capped at 900 kW, 2 MW and 3.9 MW by tier.
Who it suits. APAC-focused teams who value timezone-aligned support and want design and proposal from one vendor without paying US pricing.
Honest limitations. Its regulatory depth is Australian, built around STCs, feed-in tariffs and AS/NZS standards, none of which apply here. The interface is dated relative to Aurora or SurgePV, and Philippine utility structures need manual configuration.
8. Enact Systems
What it does best. One record from lead to commissioned asset. Enact covers proposal generation and then keeps tracking the project through installation and into performance, which suits teams tired of the handoff gap between sales and operations.
Pricing. US$279 a month for 2 users on an annual commitment, or US$299 billed monthly, so US$3,348 a year for the pair, about PHP 194,000 or roughly PHP 97,000 a seat. Commercial projects are capped at 10 a month, and Enact’s Asset Management and enterprise tiers are not publicly listed.
Who it suits. Mid-size installers who want lifecycle visibility more than design precision.
Honest limitations. The design engine is lighter than the top four. No Philippine regulatory layer. Its lifecycle tracking overlaps with monitoring platforms you may already run for free from the inverter vendor, which weakens the value case in a market where Huawei and Sungrow portals are already installed on most sites.
9. QuickEstimate
What it does best. Follow-up. It captures leads, builds a quotation quickly, and pushes chat-based follow-up, which addresses the failure mode that actually loses most Philippine residential deals. Sales teams here run on Messenger and Viber, and a tool that fits that behaviour beats one that assumes email.
Pricing. Around PHP 25,000 (US$435) per user per year, the cheapest paid entry on this list.
Who it suits. Installers whose designs are fine but whose pipeline leaks between the site visit and the signature. Pair it with a design engine rather than expecting one product to do both. See how to write a solar proposal that closes for the document structure it produces.
Honest limitations. It does not design. No roof modelling, no shading simulation, no single line diagram, no hourly generation profile. Its quotation is a commercial document, not an engineering one.
10. Sunbase
What it does best. Field sales management. Territory assignment, canvassing routes, appointment setting and a proposal attached to the CRM record. For channel-partner or door-to-door models, which several Philippine residential players run, that structure fits.
Pricing. Sunbase publishes an entry point of US$59 per user per month, about US$708 a year or PHP 41,000 a seat, and does not publish its higher tiers.
Who it suits. Sales organisations with a field team larger than their engineering team.
Honest limitations. The proposal engine is the weakest of the ten on engineering content, the design capability is minimal, and there is no Philippine tariff content. Treat it as a CRM with a quote feature rather than proposal software.
What a Philippine Solar Proposal Must Contain
⚠️ Watch out
A proposal quoting savings against a single blended peso-per-kWh rate is the fastest way to lose a commercial client at the finance review. Split the number into self-consumed and exported before you send it.
Work through this list before any quote leaves your office. Every item maps to a question a Philippine buyer or their bank will ask.
- The bill, itemised. Reproduce the customer’s current charge lines from a real bill, not an assumed rate. Philippine bills separate generation, transmission, system loss, distribution, supply, metering, universal charges, FIT-All and VAT, and each behaves differently under net metering.
- Self-consumption fraction. State the percentage of generation the site consumes directly, derived from an hourly load profile. This is the single most load-bearing assumption in the whole document.
- Export credit at the generation charge. Show it as a separate line at the correct rate, and state the assumption in words so it survives scrutiny.
- System size against the 100 kW cap. Say explicitly whether the design is inside net metering or outside it with export limiting, and what that means for the approval path.
- VAT at 12 percent and the payment schedule. Show VAT on the face of the quote. Commercial buyers also want the depreciation treatment and a milestone payment structure their bank can finance.
- The utility approval timeline. Name the distribution utility, describe the application, the distribution impact study where one is triggered, the inspection and the bidirectional meter swap, with realistic weeks against each.
- Degradation and O&M assumptions. A 25-year savings table with no degradation and no cleaning cost is a table nobody senior believes.
Our solar proposal software guide covers the document mechanics in general, and the solar BOQ software and solar SLD software pages cover the two attachments a Philippine commercial proposal should carry.
High Tariffs Change How You Frame the Proposal
Philippine electricity is among the most expensive in Southeast Asia, and that fact should restructure your document rather than just improve the numbers inside it.
In a low-tariff market the proposal has to argue that solar is worth doing. Here it does not. The argument is already won by the bill, so the proposal’s job shifts to removing risk: is the yield estimate credible, is the structure safe in a typhoon, will the utility approve it, and will the company still exist in year ten to honour the warranty.
That means three framing changes most imported templates get wrong.
Lead with the bill, not the hardware. Page one should be the customer’s own twelve-month consumption and cost, then the same twelve months with solar. Panel brands belong later.
Show the downside case. A P90 yield scenario, a soiling-heavy year, and a payback under a conservative export assumption. In a market where the base case already looks good, showing the pessimistic case builds more credibility than another rendering does.
Answer the typhoon question before it is asked. Every Philippine commercial buyer thinks about it. State the National Structural Code wind zone, the basic wind speed used, and the attachment method. Our sister engineering team covers the calculation method in their civil and structural engineering service, and the underlying approach appears in their solar wind load guide.
Regional market context for the credibility section is available from the IEA Southeast Asia energy outlook and IRENA country profiles, both of which a corporate buyer will accept as neutral sources.
Should You Buy One Licence or Two?
Most Philippine teams past five people end up with two, because proposal software vendors build weak pipelines and CRM vendors build weak simulations.
- ✓ You issue under 15 proposals a month
- ✓ All work is residential under the 100 kW cap
- ✓ You sell in one distribution utility area
- ✓ The owner personally handles every follow-up
- ✗ You run three or more sales people
- ✗ You bid above the cap with export limiting
- ✗ Banks ask for a yield report on your deals
- ✗ Leads go cold between site visit and quote
The arithmetic for a small Philippine EPC: five SurgePV seats at roughly PHP 377,000 plus three CRM seats at roughly PHP 75,000 comes to about PHP 452,000 a year. Five Aurora Premium seats alone are US$13,200, roughly PHP 766,000, and leave the pipeline unmanaged. Five Aurora Basic seats are US$8,100, about PHP 470,000, which is still above the SurgePV stack but much closer than this page used to imply. The full stack question, including monitoring and field operations, is covered on our best solar software in Philippines overview.
Five Mistakes Philippine Sales Teams Make
-
1
Valuing exports at the retail rate. Under RA 9513 exports earn the generation charge only. The error inflates savings on every export-heavy design and it is discovered at the first quarterly bill review.
-
2
Quoting an annual offset for a daytime-only business. A factory on one shift consumes nothing at night. Model hourly coincidence or the proposal promises energy the client can never use.
-
3
Hiding the 12 percent VAT. Put it on the face of the quote. A commercial buyer who meets it first at invoicing reopens the whole negotiation.
-
4
Promising a utility timeline you do not control. Distribution impact studies, inspections and meter swaps take as long as they take. Give a range, name the steps, and stop guaranteeing a commissioning date.
-
5
Buying on demo polish. Ask each vendor to quote your hardest site with a real bill attached. A shaded Quezon City rooftop with a water tank tells you more than any feature list.
The wider set of delivery failures behind those sales failures is covered in our common mistakes EPC companies make in rooftop solar writeup.
How Heaven Green Energy and SurgePV Help Philippine Teams
Heaven Green Energy has delivered more than 10,000 solar installations, and our engineering group builds the software we use on our own jobs. SurgePV exists because our designers needed a proposal whose savings number matched the engineering behind it, which is the same problem Philippine teams describe. The useful entry points for a Philippine sales desk:
- Generation and financial modelling for the hourly self-consumption and export-credit split that decides a Philippine payback figure.
- Solar proposals for the white-label document with the drawing set attached.
- Hybrid battery sizing guidance when brownouts make a storage option part of the pitch.
- Rooftop detailed engineering when the client’s bank asks for a full drawing package rather than a proposal PDF.
For our own delivery approach on larger jobs, see the commercial solar and industrial solar pages. If you are choosing the best solar proposal software in Philippines for your own team, run three tools on the same real site with the same twelve months of bills, and reject any tool whose export credit you cannot see and edit.
Related Solar Proposal Software Guides
- Solar Proposal Software 2026: Tools Compared
- Best Solar Design Software in Philippines: Top 10
- Best Solar Proposal Software in India: Top 10 Ranked
- Best Solar Proposal Software USA
- Best Solar Proposal Software UK
- Solar Financial Modeling Software Compared
Compare Other Markets and Tool Categories
- Solar design software 2026: 7 tools compared and priced
- Best solar proposal software in Malaysia
- Best solar proposal software in Singapore
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the best solar proposal software in the Philippines in 2026?
SurgePV ranks first on our 5-point Philippine proposal test with 22 of 25, at about PHP 75,000 per user per year on the 5-User Team plan, roughly PHP 377,000 for five seats. It separates self-consumed and exported energy and values them at the retail tariff and the generation charge respectively, handles the 100 kW cap and export limiting, and ships the single line diagram and bill of quantities with the proposal. OpenSolar at 17 is the strongest free starting point.
How should a Philippine proposal value exported solar energy?
At the distribution utility’s blended generation charge, not the full retail tariff. Under RA 9513 and the Energy Regulatory Commission’s net metering rules, self-consumed energy offsets the entire retail bill including wires and universal charges, while exported energy earns the generation component only. In practice an exported kilowatt-hour is worth roughly half a self-consumed one, so any model applying a single blended rate to total production overstates savings.
What happens to the proposal above the 100 kW net metering cap?
The document changes structure. Net metering no longer applies, so the system is designed for self-consumption with export limiting at the inverter or a dedicated controller, and the savings come entirely from avoided consumption. The proposal then needs an hourly load profile set against an hourly generation profile, because generation above load in any hour is curtailed and earns nothing. Annual-total modelling will substantially overstate the return on a daytime-only industrial site.
Does a Philippine solar proposal need to show VAT?
Yes. Show the 12 percent value added tax on the face of the quote rather than adding it at invoicing. Commercial and industrial buyers will also want the depreciation treatment on the asset and a milestone payment schedule their bank can finance. Proposals that present a tax-exclusive headline figure routinely reopen at contract stage, and the renegotiation costs more goodwill than the transparency would have cost margin.
Which proposal software handles Meralco tariffs?
None of the ten ships a native Meralco tariff pack. The Philippine market is small enough that no global vendor has built one. The better tools, SurgePV included, let your team configure the individual charge lines once and reuse them, which is the practical answer. Tools that only accept a single blended peso-per-kWh input cannot reproduce a Philippine bill at all, and that limitation should remove them from your shortlist for commercial work.
How much does solar proposal software cost in the Philippines?
Seat prices run from about PHP 25,000 a year for a quotation and CRM tool up to roughly PHP 313,000 for SolarPlus Complete. SurgePV sits at about PHP 75,000 per user per year on the 5-User Team plan and bundles design, hourly simulation, drawings and proposals at that price. Aurora is US$1,620 to US$2,640 a year per seat, roughly PHP 94,000 to PHP 153,000. Sunbase starts near PHP 41,000. Three vendors do not price by seat at all: OpenSolar’s core platform is free with its 2026 API and Connector rates unpublished, Pylon charges US$4.00 or US$10.00 per project, and Solargraf charges per plan from US$2,799 a year for 2 users and 240 projects. A five-person Philippine team typically budgets PHP 375,000 to PHP 800,000 a year.
Do I need separate proposal and design software?
Not necessarily, but you probably need separate proposal and CRM software. SurgePV, Aurora, Arka360 and SolarPlus all cover design and proposal in one licence, which removes the most common source of mismatch between the engineering and the customer document. What none of them do well is pipeline management, so teams with three or more sales people usually add a CRM. The stack question across monitoring and operations is covered on our Philippines software overview page.
How do I test a proposal tool before buying it?
Give every vendor the same real site and the same twelve months of actual bills. Ask for a full proposal with the correct distribution utility named, the export credit shown as a separate line at the generation charge, VAT on the face of the quote, and the bill of quantities attached. Time how long it takes. Then have your most junior sales person repeat the job unassisted, because that throughput predicts your real cost per proposal far better than a scripted demo does.
Stop paying for four tools. Design it all in one.
SurgePV replaces Aurora + HelioScope + PVsyst + a separate proposal tool in a single license. AI 3D roof in under 60 seconds, bankable 8,760-hour simulation, auto-SLD, BOQ, DXF/DWG export and branded proposals.
Free trial, no credit card · $1,299 per user per year on the 5-User Team planDisclaimer: SurgePV is our own product. It is built by the Heaven Group, the same company as Heaven Green Energy, so treat this as a recommendation from its maker.