Best Solar Proposal Software in Saudi Arabia: Top 10

The best solar proposal software in Saudi Arabia is judged on a harder test than in most markets, because the document that wins work here is usually a procurement submission rather than a sales pitch. Three things break imported proposal tools inside the Kingdom. The Saudi Electricity Regulatory Authority caps small-scale solar PV at 2 MW and ties permitted capacity to the consumer’s sanctioned load, so a system sized to fill a roof gets rejected regardless of how good the savings chart looks. Residential electricity is heavily subsidised, which makes an honest villa payback long and turns the financial section into an exercise in telling the truth persuasively. And a large share of the real revenue sits in C&I self-consumption and government-linked tenders, where the buyer wants equipment schedules, compliance evidence, local content data and frequently an Arabic version, not a lifestyle graphic. The platform that carries the most of that inside one licence is SurgePV at roughly SAR 4,870 (US$1,299) per user per year on the 5-User Team plan. Ten platforms are ranked below in riyals, with concrete limitations on each, ours included.

Direct answer. The best solar proposal software in Saudi Arabia for 2026 is SurgePV, at about SAR 4,870 per user per year on the 5-User Team plan (roughly SAR 24,350 for five seats). It sizes against sanctioned load under SERA’s 2 MW small-scale ceiling, treats the regulated export rate as an editable per-project field rather than a country preset, models subsidised tariff slabs honestly, exports Arabic and English documents, and backs every yield number with an 8,760-hour simulation. No tool on this list fully solves the tender-document problem.

This ranking is written for Saudi EPC business development teams, C&I sales staff selling self-consumption into industrial cities, contractors bidding government and semi-government work, and consultancies preparing bid packs in Riyadh, Jeddah, Dammam and the Eastern Province. The engineering companion is our best solar design software in Saudi Arabia ranking, which covers 45 Celsius derating, cleaning-interval soiling and terrain-aware ground-mount. This page is about the document that gets evaluated.

SERA’s 2 MW Cap and Load-Linked Sizing

The single fastest way to lose a Saudi deal on paper is to propose a system the regulation does not permit.

The Saudi Electricity Regulatory Authority regulates the small-scale solar PV programme for distributed generation. Two constraints matter to a proposal writer. The programme is capped at 2 MW per facility, which sets the ceiling. More importantly, permitted capacity is set in relation to the consumer’s sanctioned load and consumption rather than to available roof or land area. A warehouse with 40,000 square metres of roof and a modest sanctioned load does not get a roof-filling array approved just because the roof is empty. Settlement is not a retail-rate swap either: exported energy is credited at a regulated rate set by the authority, so a self-consumed kilowatt hour and an exported one carry different value in the cash flow.

That reorders the entire proposal. The sizing rationale becomes a section rather than an assumption, and it has to show the sanctioned load, the consumption profile, the resulting permitted capacity and the self-consumption split at that capacity. Most global proposal tools size from available area and a target offset percentage, which produces a number that reads well and cannot be built. If your platform cannot take sanctioned load as a hard constraint, your engineer will be resizing after the client has already seen a price, which is the worst order to do it in.

The Subsidised Tariff Problem Nobody Wants to Write Down

Saudi Arabia has among the strongest solar resources measured anywhere and one of the least favourable retail tariffs for a solar payback. Both statements are true at once, and a proposal that acknowledges only the first one is not credible.

Residential electricity in the Kingdom is sold under a subsidised slab structure that keeps the effective cost per kilowatt hour far below what European, Australian or even Indian homeowners pay. Solar displaces that cheap unit. The arithmetic is unforgiving: high yield multiplied by a low displaced tariff still produces a modest annual saving against a capital cost set in a world market. Run the numbers honestly on a Riyadh villa and the payback is long, frequently well past the four to seven years that imported templates default to. Any proposal tool that quotes a five-year villa payback in Saudi Arabia is quoting a fiction, and the customer’s own bill disproves it within a quarter.

Three consequences for the document, and for the software that produces it.

First, the tool must be able to print a long payback without the document collapsing. A template whose entire visual logic is a savings chart crossing zero in year five looks broken when the crossing point is year twelve. The honest Saudi residential document leads on tariff exposure over a 25-year horizon, on the value of self-consumption during peak air-conditioning hours, and on the asset itself, rather than on a short payback that does not exist.

Second, commercial and industrial tariffs behave differently from residential ones, and the gap between the two is the whole reason the market skews C&I. A factory or a logistics operator with a heavy daytime load and a higher effective rate produces a genuinely attractive self-consumption case, and it is the customer worth building your sales motion around.

Third, the regulated export rate is not the retail rate, so exported units are worth less than displaced ones. On a site with a weak evening load, that pushes the optimal design toward matching generation to the load curve rather than maximising capacity. A proposal that cannot show the self-consumed and exported split separately cannot make that argument.

Note what those figures say together. Yield is excellent, the licence cost is trivial against a single C&I deal, and the binding constraint on the sale is neither of those. It is the tariff, and the tariff is policy.

Why the Saudi Ranking Is Weighted Toward Tender Documents

In a rooftop-led market you rank proposal tools on how fast a salesperson closes a homeowner. Saudi Arabia does not work that way, and pretending otherwise produces a useless ranking.

The volume of serious work sits in C&I self-consumption for industrial and logistics customers, and in government and semi-government tenders where the buyer is a procurement committee. Both produce a document with a different job. A tender submission carries a technical compliance schedule mapped line by line against the requirements, an equipment list with conformity evidence, a bill of quantities a commercial evaluator can score, local content data, a defensible yield basis and, for government submittals, frequently an Arabic version. A savings bar chart contributes nothing to that.

Local content is a procurement input, not an engineering detail. Government-linked tenders carry local content requirements administered through the Local Content and Government Procurement Authority, pushing toward locally manufactured modules, mounting structures, cables and transformers where available. This constrains the bill of quantities before optimisation does. A proposal team that specifies on price and discovers the local content requirement at submission has to redo both the engineering and the pricing.

Arabic output is a genuine requirement, not a nicety. For government and many semi-government submittals an Arabic document is expected, and proper Arabic output is not a font swap. Tables, charts, page furniture, figure numbering and signature blocks all have to reflow right to left. Very few platforms in the global proposal market attempt this, and those that do usually ship a partial template set. The practical fallback across the Kingdom is a translated document rebuilt in a word processor, which is slow and drifts from the model that produced the numbers.

The honest finding on tenders. No platform on this list produces a complete Saudi tender pack. None generates a compliance matrix mapped to a specific requirement document, none scores local content, and none ships a Saudi Electricity Company application pack. The best any of them do is produce accurate components (yield basis, BOQ, drawings, financials, an Arabic export) that a proposal manager assembles. Any vendor telling you otherwise has not read a Saudi tender. Choose the tool that produces the most reusable, accurate components and budget the assembly time honestly.

The 5-Point Saudi Proposal Bench

This is the frame used to rank every platform below, and you can run it inside a free trial. Each axis scores 1 to 10, for a maximum of 50.

1. SERA compliance depth. Sanctioned load as a hard sizing constraint, the 2 MW ceiling, the regulated export rate as an editable field, and a clear self-consumed versus exported split in the output.
2. Tariff honesty. Subsidised residential slabs, separate C&I structures, the ability to present a long payback without the document falling apart, and a 25-year exposure view rather than only a break-even point.
3. Procurement grade. Compliance schedules, equipment lists with conformity fields, a BOQ a commercial evaluator can score, and output a technical committee can read without translation into a spreadsheet.
4. Language and document craft. Arabic and English export with real right-to-left reflow, white-label branding, e-signature, and a technical annex an engineer will actually read.
5. Cost per finished proposal in SAR. Annual licence plus every required add-on divided by realistic monthly volume.

Axis 3 is where this ranking diverges from every residential-led market in our series. A platform that is excellent at closing a homeowner in one sitting can score near zero here, because the buyer that matters never sits in that meeting.

Top 10 Solar Proposal Software Platforms in Saudi Arabia Compared

Pricing is 2026, annualised, converted at approximately SAR 3.75 per United States dollar. The riyal peg keeps that stable, which is a real budgeting advantage over most emerging solar markets.

Three readings before the detail. First, the residential-optimised tools rank lower here than they would anywhere else in this series, and that is a comment on the market rather than on their quality. Second, two entries are cheaper than we are, and it is worth saying so directly: OpenSolar’s core platform costs nothing, and Pylon bills per project rather than per seat, so a Saudi installer issuing ten proposals a month pays Pylon roughly SAR 1,800 to SAR 4,500 a year against SAR 4,870 for a single SurgePV seat. Third, none of the ten closes the tender gap, so the meaningful question is which one leaves you the least manual work on a bid, not which one has the prettiest template.

1. SurgePV

What it does best. SurgePV treats the Saudi constraints as inputs rather than as a currency setting. Sanctioned load and consumption act as sizing constraints alongside available area, which is what the SERA small-scale programme actually requires and what most imported tools ignore completely. The export rate is an editable per-project field rather than a hard-coded country preset, which is correct given that the regulated rate is set by the authority and revised. The financial model handles subsidised slab structures, separates self-consumed units from exported ones, and produces a 25-year view rather than only a break-even marker, so a long villa payback can be stated plainly instead of hidden.

For the procurement side, the proposal builder produces white-label output with an equipment schedule and a technical annex generated from the same model as the yield figure, so the shading study, the single-line diagram and the savings table do not drift apart across revisions. Documents export in Arabic and English with right-to-left layout. Behind every generation number sits an 8,760-hour module-level simulation on Saudi hourly weather with cleaning-interval soiling and high-ambient derating, which matters because the yield basis is the part a technical evaluator attacks first.

Pricing. About SAR 4,870 (US$1,299) per user per year on the 5-User Team plan, so roughly SAR 24,350 for five seats. Individual seats run higher. Free trial, no credit card.

Who it suits. Saudi C&I contractors and EPCs sending five or more proposals a month, teams selling self-consumption into industrial customers, and firms that need one model to produce both an engineering pack and a client-facing document.

Honest weaknesses. Five, and several bite hard in this market. There is no tender compliance matrix, so mapping your submission line by line against a requirement document stays a manual job in a word processor. There is no local content calculator, so the BOQ cannot be scored against the procurement requirement inside the tool. There is no native Saudi Electricity Company application pack, so the connection submission is manual and any timeline you promise rests on your own scheduling. The Arabic template library is real but thinner than the English one, so a team submitting Arabic-first to government entities spends time building templates rather than selecting them. And brand recognition in the Kingdom is low because the product launched in 2025, which is friction when a lender’s technical advisor or a giga-project consultant reviews the yield report. We use SurgePV on our own solar EPC work, so weigh this ranking accordingly and run the bench yourself.

2. Aurora Solar

What it does best. Aurora produces the most polished customer-facing residential document available anywhere, refined against enormous US volume, with mature templates and strong storage narrative. Against a local contractor’s word-processed quote it wins on presentation outright.

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, about SAR 6,080 to SAR 9,900 at the pegged rate, 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. Aurora Basic at US$1,620 a year is cheaper than a SurgePV Individual seat at US$1,899.

Who it suits. International groups extending into the Kingdom with an Aurora standard, training and sales playbook already in place.

Honest limitations. The Saudi layer is absent end to end: no sanctioned-load sizing constraint, no SERA export logic, no SASO conformity fields, no Arabic output, no local content awareness. Its financial storytelling assumes a payback short enough to chart, which is exactly the assumption Saudi residential tariffs break. LIDAR coverage across the Kingdom is limited, so the headline roof capture often degrades to manual tracing. Our Aurora Solar alternative comparison covers the switch.

3. OpenSolar

What it does best. A genuinely free core design and proposal product funded by hardware referral margin, with usable templates, e-signature and a very low barrier for a new contractor. For a one-person villa business it removes the software line item entirely.

Pricing. The core platform is free, for any number of users, and nothing on this page is cheaper. 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 a Saudi team cannot yet be quoted an add-on figure at all.

Who it suits. Solo installers and new entrants doing occasional villa work.

Honest limitations. The economics steer you toward partner hardware, which is awkward where SASO conformity and local content decide what you can actually specify. No Saudi regulatory content, no Arabic output, no procurement-grade annex, and the commercial ceiling arrives quickly. Our OpenSolar alternative page covers the migration cost honestly.

Want the yield basis checked before a bid goes in? Send us the site details, the sanctioned load and the intended cleaning regime and our engineers will sanity-check the sizing and the generation assumption before you submit. Talk to our engineering team or run a first pass with our solar calculator.

4. ARKA 360

What it does best. ARKA 360 moves from an address to a presentable 3D proposal quickly, at a price Gulf small and mid-size installers absorb comfortably. Tariff inputs are flexible, which beats a rigid preset built for another country.

Pricing. ARKA 360 publishes no Saudi 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 SAR 2,030 to SAR 4,400 at current rates, and a Gulf buyer should expect a quote rather than a published price.

Who it suits. Small and mid-size Saudi installers who want credible visual output without an Aurora seat.

Honest limitations. No SERA load constraint, no regulated export rate handling, no Arabic layout and no local content awareness. Commercial financial structures are thin, and the simulation depth behind the yield figure is lighter than the engineering-led platforms, which shows on an industrial roof cluttered with plant.

5. Enact

What it does best. Enact builds the conversation around lifetime savings and financing across a long horizon, which is unusually relevant here. Where the honest payback is twelve years, a tool designed to tell a 25-year story is closer to the right narrative shape than one built around a fast break-even.

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 SAR 12,550 or roughly SAR 6,280 a seat. Commercial projects are capped at 10 a month, and the Asset Management and enterprise tiers are not publicly listed.

Who it suits. Sellers leading with a long-horizon financial narrative on residential and small commercial deals.

Honest limitations. Saudi finance product coverage is thin against its US catalogue, the subsidised tariff structure is not modelled natively, there is no Arabic output and no SERA sizing logic. The design engine does not replace a proper shading study. See the Enact alternative comparison.

6. Solargraf

What it does best. Fast quoting with a clean customer-facing output and e-signature, built around getting from lead to signed document in one sitting. For a residential team that values speed it removes friction.

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. That is roughly SAR 10,500 to SAR 48,750, well above the per-seat figure this page previously carried.

Who it suits. Residential-led teams wanting speed and a tidy document rather than engineering or procurement depth.

Honest limitations. No Saudi regulatory or tariff content, no Arabic output, and thin commercial modelling. Its instincts come from North American residential sales, where the incentive logic and utility structure look nothing like SERA and the Saudi Electricity Company. On tender work it contributes very little.

7. QuickEstimate

What it does best. Built specifically for solar quoting and follow-up rather than adapted from a generic CRM, so the quote, the revision history, the follow-up sequence and the messaging nudge live in one place. For a team losing deals to silence rather than to price, that ordering is correct.

Pricing. Around SAR 1,500 per user per year.

Who it suits. Sales-led firms that already have a design tool and need quoting discipline plus follow-up.

Honest limitations. It is not an engineering platform. No shading simulation, no SERA sizing logic, no procurement annex, so it pairs with a design tool rather than replacing one. Its proposal generator is strong on speed and weak on technical depth.

8. Pylon

What it does best. Quoting joined to hardware procurement, so the bill of materials you quoted is the one you order at a price you have already seen. That is real weekly time recovered for installers who reconcile quotes against distributor stock by hand.

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, about SAR 15 and SAR 37.50 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. At Saudi proposal volumes that model is far cheaper than any per-seat product here, ours included.

Who it suits. Installers who want quoting and buying inside one system.

Honest limitations. Design depth is modest, the procurement advantage depends entirely on supplier coverage in the Kingdom, and the stock catalogue knows nothing about SASO conformity status or local content scoring. No Arabic output and no SERA logic. See our Pylon alternative page.

9. Sunbase

What it does best. Pipeline, lead routing, follow-up and reporting first, with proposal generation attached. If your bottleneck is sales process rather than document quality, that priority is defensible.

Pricing. Sunbase publishes an entry point of US$59 per user per month, about US$708 a year or SAR 2,655 a seat, and does not publish its higher tiers.

Who it suits. Firms with a design tool in place and no sales discipline.

Honest limitations. As a proposal engine it is the weakest here on engineering credibility, carries no Saudi compliance content and no Arabic output, and assumes the design is produced elsewhere. On a tender it contributes a contact record and nothing else.

10. Zoho CRM plus Zoho Sign

What it does best. It earns its place for two reasons. A meaningful share of Saudi solar SMEs genuinely run this way, on a CRM with a quote template, a PDF and an e-signature tool, at a price no solar vendor matches. And Zoho ships real Arabic interface support with regional presence, which for an Arabic-first back office is a practical advantage the solar-specific tools do not offer.

Pricing. Zoho publishes its rates in US dollars. Zoho CRM Standard is US$14 per user per month billed annually and Zoho Sign Standard is US$10, so US$24 per user per month, US$288 a year, before local tax. That is roughly SAR 1,080 per user per year, approximate, at the pegged SAR 3.75 to the dollar. Higher tiers cost more: Zoho CRM runs to US$52 per user per month on Ultimate and Zoho Sign to US$16 on Professional.

Who it suits. SMEs with low volume, a strong administrator and design produced by an external consultant.

Honest limitations. Everything solar is manual: yield, derating, soiling, tariff slabs, SERA sizing, conformity evidence, the technical annex, all of it. The document is only as accurate as the last person who edited the template, and template drift across a sales team is how two customers receive different assumptions for the same roof.

Proposal Mistakes That Cost Saudi Teams Deals

1. 1
   Sizing to the roof instead of to the sanctioned load. SERA ties permitted capacity to the consumer's load and consumption under a 2 MW ceiling. An area-driven system gets rejected, and you re-quote at a different price after the client has seen the first one.
2. 2
   Quoting an imported retail tariff on a villa. Subsidised residential rates stretch payback well past the four to seven years global templates assume. A five-year payback on a Riyadh villa is a number the customer's own bill disproves.
3. 3
   Valuing exported units at the retail rate. Exports are credited at a regulated rate set by the authority. Treat self-consumed and exported energy as the same and the whole cash flow tilts optimistic on any site with a weak evening load.
4. 4
   Sending a residential savings chart into a tender. A procurement committee scores a compliance schedule, an equipment list with conformity evidence and a BOQ. A 25-year savings bar chart reads as consumer marketing in an evaluation room.
5. 5
   Discovering local content at submission. Requirements administered through the Local Content and Government Procurement Authority shape module, structure, cable and transformer choices. Optimise engineering first and you redo the engineering and the price together.
6. 6
   Treating Arabic as a translation task at the end. Right-to-left reflow of tables, charts, figure numbering and signature blocks is a document-engineering job. Left to the last day before submission, it is where errors enter the numbers.

The wider set of delivery traps sits in our common mistakes EPC companies make in rooftop solar writeup, and the performance ratio entry explains how the losses in your annex compound rather than add.

Should a Saudi Team Standardise on One Proposal Platform?

Verdict. SurgePV is the right default for a Saudi C&I contractor, because the load-linked sizing, the riyal financials and the Arabic export are bundled and the engineering under the document is real. OpenSolar is the right answer for a solo villa installer. Aurora is right only where a group standard forces it. For a pure tender business, the tool is a component factory and the bid pack is still assembled by a proposal manager, and any ranking claiming otherwise is selling something.

How Heaven Green Energy Helps

Heaven Green Energy has delivered more than 10,000 solar installations, and our engineering group builds the tools we use on our own jobs. We choose proposal software on what survives an evaluator’s questions rather than on the brochure. If you are weighing a Saudi proposal stack, these are the useful next reads.

• Best solar design software in Saudi Arabia for the engineering side of the same decision, including 45 Celsius derating and Eastern Province dust.
• Best solar proposal software in UAE for the closest sibling market, where DEWA approved-equipment filtering replaces the SERA load constraint.
• Solar proposal software for the global version of this ranking without the Saudi layer.
• Solar design software pillar guide for how the category is structured before you shortlist.
• Best solar proposal software in the USA for how the same tools rank under a subsidy-rich rulebook.
• Commercial solar and industrial solar for how we use these documents on live C&I work.
• Heaven Designs ground-mount design services when a bid needs terrain work an engineering team should own.
• QBits string sizing calculator for a fast sanity check before a technical annex is submitted.

Reference points worth bookmarking: SERA for small-scale programme terms, SASO for conformity status, and IRENA plus the IEA for capacity build context under Vision 2030. Choosing the best solar proposal software in Saudi Arabia comes down to how much accurate, reusable material a platform hands your proposal manager, because the last mile of a Saudi bid is still assembled by a person and will be for some time.

Related Solar Software Guides

• Best Solar Design Software in Saudi Arabia: Top 10
• Best Solar Proposal Software in UAE: Top 10 Ranked
• Solar Proposal Software Compared and Priced
• Best Solar Design Software in UAE: Top 10 Tools
• Utility-Scale Solar Design Software Compared
• Commercial Solar Design Software Compared

Compare Other Markets and Tool Categories

• Best solar the full software stack in Saudi Arabia
• Best solar proposal software in India
• Best solar proposal software in South Africa

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the best solar proposal software in Saudi Arabia in 2026?

SurgePV ranks first for Saudi teams sending five or more proposals a month, at about SAR 4,870 per user per year on the 5-User Team plan, roughly SAR 24,350 for five seats. It applies sanctioned load as a sizing constraint under SERA’s 2 MW small-scale ceiling, treats the regulated export rate as an editable per-project field, separates self-consumed from exported units, exports Arabic and English documents, and backs every yield figure with an 8,760-hour simulation. For a solo villa installer, OpenSolar’s free core tier is the better value answer.

Why is the Saudi residential solar payback so long?

Because the displaced tariff is low. Saudi residential electricity is sold under a heavily subsidised slab structure, so each kilowatt hour that solar replaces is worth far less than in Europe, Australia or India, while the capital cost of the system is set in a world market. Excellent irradiance does not compensate for that, and an honest Riyadh villa payback commonly runs into double-digit years. The correct response is to sell 25-year tariff exposure, peak-hour self-consumption and the asset itself, rather than to inflate the break-even year.

What is the 2 MW cap on solar in Saudi Arabia?

The Saudi Electricity Regulatory Authority regulates the small-scale solar PV programme with a ceiling of 2 MW per facility, and permitted capacity is set in relation to the consumer’s sanctioned load and consumption rather than to available roof or land area. A proposal that sizes to fill a roof beyond that sanctioned load is rejected on review. Exported energy is credited at a regulated rate set by the authority rather than at the retail tariff, so self-consumed and exported units carry different value in the cash flow.

Is Arabic proposal output genuinely required in Saudi Arabia?

For government and many semi-government submittals, yes. English carries a large share of private-sector C&I work, but a public-sector submission is frequently expected in Arabic, and proper Arabic output means full right-to-left reflow of tables, charts, figure numbering and signature blocks rather than translated body text. Very few platforms attempt this and those that do usually ship a partial template set, which is why so many Saudi teams rebuild the Arabic version in a word processor and risk it drifting from the model that produced the numbers.

Can any proposal software produce a complete Saudi tender pack?

No, and any vendor claiming otherwise has not read a Saudi tender. No platform in this ranking generates a compliance matrix mapped against a specific requirement document, none scores a bill of quantities for local content, and none ships a Saudi Electricity Company application pack. What the better tools do is produce accurate reusable components: a defensible yield basis, an equipment schedule, drawings, a riyal cash flow and an Arabic export. A proposal manager still assembles the submission, so budget that time honestly.

How does local content affect a Saudi solar proposal?

Local content requirements in government-linked tenders, administered through the Local Content and Government Procurement Authority, push toward locally manufactured modules, mounting structures, cables and transformers where available. That constrains the bill of quantities before engineering optimisation does. Specify on lowest landed cost first and you may have to redo both the engineering and the pricing when the requirement is applied. Fix the eligible component set before the design is finalised, then optimise inside it.

What does a Saudi C&I proposal need that a residential one does not?

The sanctioned load and the resulting permitted capacity stated explicitly, a load curve showing the split between self-consumed and exported units, the regulated export rate named rather than assumed, a soiling assumption tied to a stated cleaning interval, an equipment schedule with conformity status, a bill of quantities an evaluator can score, and a multi-year cash flow a finance team can audit. For a tender it also needs a compliance schedule and, in many cases, an Arabic version of the whole document.

How much does solar proposal software cost in Saudi Arabia?

Per-seat products run roughly SAR 1,080 to SAR 9,900 a year. A Zoho stack is US$24 per user per month billed annually, US$288 a year, about SAR 1,080 at the pegged rate, QuickEstimate near SAR 1,500, Sunbase from SAR 2,655 with higher tiers unpublished, ARKA 360 on India-published rates equivalent to about SAR 2,030 to SAR 4,400, SurgePV at SAR 4,870 bundled, Enact at about SAR 6,280 a seat, and Aurora at SAR 6,080 on Basic to SAR 9,900 on Premium. Three vendors do not price by seat: 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. The riyal peg to the dollar removes the currency risk seen in most emerging markets.