Best Solar Design Software in the USA: Top 10 for 2026

If you are shortlisting the best solar design software in the USA for 2026, the design engine is rarely what decides the job. What decides it is whether the plan set clears the AHJ on first submission, whether the string sizing matches the NEC cycle that jurisdiction actually adopted, and whether the financial model reflects the state’s real export compensation rather than a retail-rate assumption from 2021. The US is the most mature solar software market on earth and Aurora Solar has owned the depth crown for a decade. The platform that wins our 2026 bench test is SurgePV, a cloud-native all-in-one suite at $1,299 per user per year on the 5-User Team plan, which is roughly half the five-seat cost of an Aurora Premium deployment at $220 per user per month billed annually. Below are all ten platforms US installers actually shortlist, with honest limitations on each including ours.

Direct answer. The best solar design software in the USA for 2026 is SurgePV, at $1,299 per user per year on the 5-User Team plan ($6,495 for five seats). It ships an NEC 2017, 2020 and 2023 code library with AHJ variation tracking, permit-ready plan set output, federal ITC and bonus credit modelling with MACRS, state net metering libraries including California NEM 3.0, SREC markets, 8,760-hour module-level shading, AI 3D roof from satellite, and white-label proposals on every plan.

This guide is written for US installers, EPC firms, engineering consultancies and in-house residential and C&I design teams shipping five or more projects a month. We rank ten platforms on four criteria: US regulatory depth, engineering rigour lenders and tax-equity investors accept, full workflow coverage from address to signed proposal, and total cost of ownership for a five-person team. Where a competitor genuinely beats SurgePV we say so, and SurgePV’s own weak spots are named in section one rather than buried at the bottom.

What Makes US Solar Design Different

Four things, and each one is where a cheap tool quietly costs you money.

The code cycle is local, not national. NEC 2023 is the current edition, and as of 2026 the large majority of states have adopted it or are mid-adoption, but a meaningful minority still enforce 2020 or 2017. NEC 690 governs PV system design including rapid shutdown under 690.12, NEC 705 governs interconnection including the 120 percent busbar rule, and NEC 706 governs energy storage. A tool that ships one national code assumption will produce a compliant drawing in Sacramento and a rejected one in a county that has not adopted 2023 yet. The NFPA publishes the code and NREL tracks state adoption.

The AHJ plan set is the real deliverable. Roughly 20,000 authorities having jurisdiction set their own submission requirements in the US. Some accept SolarAPP+ automated permitting, most do not, and the required package typically includes a site plan, roof plan, electrical single-line, placard and labelling schedule, structural attachment detail and equipment cut sheets. Design software that produces a pretty 3D render and no permit-ready plan set has solved the easy half of the problem. Our engineering group covers the submission mechanics in their AHJ permit submission guide.

ITC modelling is now a stack, not a rate. The Inflation Reduction Act set the base credit at 30 percent and layered bonus adders on top: energy community siting, domestic content, and low-income community allocation for smaller commercial projects. Commercial systems also pair the credit with MACRS depreciation, with a basis reduction of half the credit. A financial model that applies a flat 30 percent and stops is understating the return on projects that qualify for adders and overstating it on ones that do not. The Department of Energy maintains the current guidance.

Net metering ended in the largest state. California’s NEM 3.0 net billing tariff compensates exports at the avoided cost of generation, which is a fraction of retail and time-variable. That changed the design, not only the finance: self-consumption and battery attachment now drive the economics, so a Californian proposal without storage modelling is usually the wrong system. Other states diverge sharply. Texas has no statewide mandate and compensation depends on the retail provider, Florida still runs retail-rate net metering, and Hawaii runs a customer self-supply framework. The SEIA policy tracker is the reference.

State Rules: Why One Financial Model Does Not Travel

The same 8 kW rooftop is a different financial product in San Diego, Newark and Tampa. This is the most common reason a US proposal is wrong.

Two consequences follow. First, storage is a design decision driven by tariff, not a sales upsell: in California and Hawaii a solar-only proposal is often engineering malpractice, while in Florida it is usually correct. Second, certificate markets in New Jersey, Massachusetts and Maryland can be 20 to 30 percent of customer return, so a tool without an SREC or certificate library systematically underprices those jobs and loses them to a competitor whose model includes the revenue.

Get your sizing sanity-checked. For a fast independent second opinion on system size and payback before you build the design, run the numbers through our free solar calculator or talk to our engineering team.

The 4-Point USA Bench Test

This is the framework we use internally before deploying any design platform on our own solar EPC work. Each tool scores 1 to 10 on four axes, out of 40. We do not deploy anything below 32.

1. US regulatory depth. NEC 2017, 2020 and 2023 libraries with per-jurisdiction adoption tracking, permit-ready plan set output, UL 1741 SA and SB certification flags on the component database, utility interconnection application support, ITC and bonus credit modelling, state net metering and certificate libraries.
2. Engineering rigour. 8,760-hour module-level simulation, P50, P75 and P90 outputs lenders and tax-equity investors accept, soiling, snow, albedo, temperature coefficient and degradation modelling.
3. Workflow coverage. Address to NEC-labelled single-line diagram to plan set to bill of quantities to branded proposal in one licence, with DXF or DWG export for the structural engineer of record.
4. Total cost of ownership. Seat licence plus add-ons plus onboarding time, per finished project, across a five-person team.

Scores across the ten platforms: SurgePV 36, Aurora 34, HelioScope 30, OpenSolar 29, Solargraf 28, Pylon 25, PVsyst 30, Scanifly 22, PVcase 24, RatedPower 22. The scoring is ours and it is opinionated. We cut SurgePV’s cost score from 10 to 9 after re-verifying competitor pricing in August 2026: Aurora Basic at $1,620 a year undercuts SurgePV Individual at $1,899, OpenSolar’s core platform is free, PVsyst is CHF 700 per user per year, and Pylon bills per project rather than per seat. Scanifly, PVcase and RatedPower lose points on cost transparency because none of them publishes a price. Aurora scores within three points of the winner, and if your team has eighteen months of Aurora muscle memory and a lender stack built around Aurora exports, that gap does not justify a migration on its own.

Top 10 Solar Design Software in the USA Compared

Pricing below is 2026, annualised, from published rate cards and reseller quotes.

The honest read: positions 1 through 5 are genuine full-workflow contenders. Positions 6 through 10 are specialists that do one job better than any generalist can. Enact deserves a mention outside the ten as a finance-flow layer for residential sales teams, but its shading depth is too thin to rank it above the tools above.

1. SurgePV

What it does best. SurgePV runs the full motion in one licence: satellite address to AI-generated 3D roof with LIDAR-grade accuracy, 8,760-hour module-level shading, string sizing, NEC-labelled single-line diagram, permit plan set, bill of quantities, financial model and white-label proposal. For the US specifically, the code library carries NEC 2017, 2020 and 2023 with jurisdiction-level adoption tracking rather than a single national assumption, so a design in a county still on 2020 gets 2020 rapid-shutdown labelling. The financial module handles the base 30 percent ITC, the energy community and domestic content adders, and MACRS with the correct basis reduction on commercial deals. The state net metering library applies NEM 3.0 avoided-cost export pricing in California rather than retail-rate math. Clara AI takes plain-English instructions such as “design a 12 kW residential rooftop with NEC 2023 rapid shutdown and NEM 3.0 with a 13 kWh battery”.

Pricing. $1,299 per user per year on the 5-User Team plan, so $6,495 for five seats. Individual seats are $1,899 per year. Enterprise is quoted. Free trial with no credit card.

Who it suits. US installers and EPCs doing five or more designs a month, teams operating across multiple states and AHJs, and shops currently paying more than $150 per seat per month for design plus a second licence for proposals.

Honest limitations. Five real ones, and price is one of them. SurgePV is not the cheapest tool in this guide: OpenSolar’s core platform is free, PVsyst is CHF 700 per user per year, Pylon bills $4.00 to $10.00 per project with no monthly minimum, and Aurora Basic at $135 per user per month billed annually works out to $1,620 a year, less than SurgePV Individual at $1,899. SurgePV wins on cost per finished project for a full-workflow team, not on licence price. Beyond cost, brand recognition is the biggest: SurgePV launched in 2025, and if a tax-equity investor or a lender asks whose software produced the yield report, the answer prompts a follow-up question that “PVsyst” or “Aurora” does not. AHJ coverage is deep on the code side but SurgePV does not maintain a per-jurisdiction submission-requirement database as granular as a dedicated permitting service, so unusual counties still need a manual check. It does not provide PE stamping or structural certification, so the DXF export still goes to an engineer of record for the wet-stamped package. And it does not do drone capture, so a complex or unsafe roof still needs an upstream survey step.

Book a SurgePV demo and bring a real project from a jurisdiction that has given you trouble, rather than a showcase file, so you can judge the code library on a case that matters.

2. Aurora Solar

What it does best. Aurora has the deepest US residential design and sales workflow in the market, the most mature template library, the largest installed base and the strongest lender and financier familiarity. Its automated design tooling handles roof plane detection on US suburban housing stock better than anything else on this list, and the sales presentation layer is genuinely polished. On US regulatory depth and engineering rigour Aurora scores full marks alongside SurgePV. It loses on five-seat cost, not capability, and on a single seat it actually wins.

Pricing. Basic is $135 per user per month billed annually ($159 monthly) and Premium is $220 billed annually ($259 monthly), with Enterprise quoted. Five Premium seats are $13,200 a year and five Basic seats are $8,100. Both plans cover 1 user and 50 projects a month. LIDAR modelling, bankable shade reports and battery modelling are Premium only. Plan sets are a separately priced service rather than a plan inclusion, and site models start at $9.99. The old Grow, Scale and Run tier names no longer exist.

Who it suits. Established residential installers with more than ten designers, existing Aurora process debt, and financing partners who expect Aurora export formats.

Honest limitations. Per-seat monthly pricing scales linearly with headcount, which is painful in a growth year, though a solo designer on Basic at $1,620 a year pays less than a SurgePV Individual seat. LIDAR modelling, bankable shade reports and battery modelling are gated to Premium, and plan sets are billed as a separate service on top of any plan. Onboarding a new designer typically takes two to three weeks against roughly a day on SurgePV. And Aurora is thin outside North America if your team ever takes international work. See our Aurora Solar alternative comparison.

3. HelioScope

What it does best. HelioScope produces commercial and industrial yield simulation that US lenders and independent engineers accept without argument. Module-level 8,760-hour modelling, a readable loss tree, sensible wiring and clean export. For a 900 kW warehouse roof in Ohio it is a defensible choice and the report will not be challenged.

Pricing. Basic is $159 per month ($1,620 a year) and Pro is $259 per month ($2,640 a year), each covering 1 user and 10 projects a month, with DC design ceilings of 1.25 MW and 5 MW. Five Pro seats are $13,200 a year. Enterprise is quoted.

Who it suits. Engineering consultancies and C&I-only teams whose deliverable is a yield report rather than a homeowner proposal.

Honest limitations. No AI 3D roof capture, weak proposal tooling that forces a second licence, no permit plan set output, and no residential sales layer at all. It solves one axis of the bench test very well and largely ignores the other three. Read our HelioScope alternative guide before committing five seats.

4. Solargraf

What it does best. Solargraf, owned by Enphase, turns an address into a polished residential proposal fast. Enphase microinverter design is native rather than bolted on, permit-package generation is available as a service, and the template output closes homeowners without a designer touching it. For a high-volume residential shop the throughput is real.

Pricing. Solargraf sells by project volume rather than by seat: Starter is $2,799 a year for 240 projects and 2 users, rising to Enterprise at $12,999 a year for 1,500 projects. API access is $4,000 a year on every plan except Enterprise.

Who it suits. Enphase-heavy residential volume sellers who want speed from lead to signed contract.

Honest limitations. Shading analysis is weaker than HelioScope or SurgePV, there is no bankable 8,760-hour output for commercial finance, and commercial and ground-mount work falls outside its scope. Enphase ownership also biases the component workflow toward Enphase hardware, which is a constraint if you buy on price.

5. OpenSolar

What it does best. The core platform is free, which is hard to argue with for a solo installer doing two or three residential jobs a month, and harder still to argue with at five seats. Short learning curve, large community, and enough proposal polish to close a homeowner without a licence commitment.

Pricing. The core platform is free, proposals included. From 16 April 2026 OpenSolar began charging for API Access (per project, charged on creation) and for Connectors (a flat monthly fee). Those rates are geo-specific and OpenSolar does not publish them, so we will not put a number on them. An earlier version of this page quoted $80 to $150 per user per month in add-ons: that figure had no primary source and has been removed.

Who it suits. Solo US installers and new entrants who need working output at zero fixed cost.

Honest limitations. Simulation depth falls short of HelioScope, PVsyst or SurgePV for bankable commercial work, NEC update cadence lags, there is no native AI design, and the unpublished API and Connector rates make an integrated stack hard to budget. On licence price, though, OpenSolar beats SurgePV outright and no amount of framing changes that. See our OpenSolar alternative analysis.

6. PVsyst

What it does best. PVsyst remains the reference simulation engine. When a US bank, insurer or independent engineer wants a second opinion on a 40 MW project, the PVsyst loss diagram is the document named in the term sheet. This is one axis where SurgePV does not win: for lender-specified bankability at utility scale, PVsyst is still the paper that gets accepted first, and pretending otherwise would be dishonest.

Pricing. CHF 700 per user per year for the Professional licence, sold as an annual subscription rather than a perpetual licence. Five seats are CHF 3,500, which is less than SurgePV’s $6,495. Education is CHF 420, Training and Research CHF 560, and PVsystCLI is CHF 3,000. Group discounts of 5 to 20 percent apply by quantity.

Who it suits. Independent engineers, technical due diligence teams and developers who need lender-grade reports rather than customer-facing proposals.

Honest limitations. Desktop-only, steep learning curve, no proposal generation, no CRM, no collaborative cloud workflow, no NEC output and no permit plan set. It is a physics tool, not a business tool. Our PVsyst alternative guide covers where the tradeoff sits.

7. Scanifly

What it does best. Drone photogrammetry that turns a flight into an accurate as-built 3D site model. On a steep, cut-up or unsafe roof, sending a drone instead of a person up a ladder is a measurable safety and accuracy gain, and the resulting model removes the change-order risk that comes from bad site data.

Pricing. Not publicly listed. Scanifly publishes no price or plan table, so budgeting it requires a quote. The per-project and per-seat figures circulating in software directories, including ones this page previously carried, are unverified.

Who it suits. Installers with complex roof stock and an existing Part 107 drone programme.

Honest limitations. It is a capture tool, not a design suite. You still need something downstream for simulation, NEC-compliant plan sets, ITC modelling and proposals. It sits upstream of SurgePV rather than competing with it.

8. Pylon

What it does best. Fast, polished in-home sales presentation. If your motion is a rep at a kitchen table closing on the first visit, Pylon’s speed and interface matter more than its engineering depth, and it does that job well.

Pricing. Pylon is not a seat licence. It bills per project: $4.00 for a Standard project and $10.00 for a Pro project, with no monthly minimum. The Solar CRM add-on starts at $49 per user per month, eSignature is $0.80 per project, and payments carry a 2.50 percent transaction fee. At low project volume this is by some distance the cheapest option in this guide.

Who it suits. Door-knock and appointment-set residential sales teams.

Honest limitations. Shallow engineering, limited hourly shading, no AI 3D roof from satellite, weak NEC library and no permit plan set. Anything beyond straightforward residential needs a second tool, and the per-project model only becomes expensive at high volume.

9. PVcase

What it does best. Terrain-aware ground-mount layout inside AutoCAD, which matters on sites where a 2 percent slope changes row pitch, pile schedules and earthwork volume. Strong civil integration and a genuine edge over every cloud tool on undulating terrain.

Pricing. Not publicly listed. PVcase sells by quote only and also requires an AutoCAD licence alongside it. Any per-seat figure circulating for PVcase is an unverified third-party estimate, not a vendor price.

Who it suits. Utility-scale developers and ground-mount EPCs.

Honest limitations. No residential capability, no proposal workflow, no ITC modelling for a homeowner, and it assumes an AutoCAD-competent operator. Overkill and a poor fit for rooftop work, which is most of the US market by project count.

10. RatedPower

What it does best. Automated utility-scale plant engineering, generating full layouts, electrical design and documentation for large ground-mount sites in hours rather than weeks. For a developer screening twenty candidate sites, that speed changes what is feasible to evaluate.

Pricing. Not publicly listed, enterprise quote only. RatedPower, now part of Enverus, publishes no price. Any figure above $15,000 a seat that you see quoted for it is an industry-observed estimate, not a vendor-confirmed number.

Who it suits. Developers working 10 MW and above.

Honest limitations. No rooftop or residential relevance, enterprise pricing and contract terms, and no AHJ or permit workflow. Most readers of this article are outside its target market.

Permitting and Interconnection Details Most Software Gets Wrong

Three specifics decide whether a US design survives contact with the inspector.

The 120 percent rule and busbar math. NEC 705.12 limits the combination of the main breaker and the PV backfeed breaker to 120 percent of the busbar rating on a standard load-side connection. A 200 amp panel with a 200 amp main takes a 40 amp backfeed and no more. Tools that do not check this produce designs that need a main breaker derate, a line-side tap or a panel upgrade discovered on installation day, and that discovery is a change order and an unhappy customer. Check the busbar rating and the main breaker on the customer’s panel photo before the design is priced, not after.

Rapid shutdown labelling changes with the adopted cycle. NEC 690.12 requirements and the associated placard wording differ between the 2017, 2020 and 2023 editions. Submitting a 2023-labelled plan set into a jurisdiction enforcing 2020 gets corrections, and the reverse gets a rejection. The tool has to key labelling to the jurisdiction, not to the current edition of the code.

Utility interconnection runs on its own clock. The AHJ permit and the utility interconnection application are separate processes with separate timelines, and on commercial systems the utility study can add months and trigger upgrade costs the customer never budgeted for. Fast-track eligibility thresholds vary by utility. Design software helps by producing the one-line and equipment documentation the application needs, but no tool removes the schedule risk, and a proposal that implies it does is setting up a difficult conversation.

Mistakes US Installers Make Choosing Design Software

1. 1
   Assuming one national NEC cycle. Adoption is jurisdiction by jurisdiction. A plan set labelled to the wrong edition comes back with corrections, and every correction cycle adds weeks to the install date.
2. 2
   Quoting California on retail-rate export. NEM 3.0 pays avoided cost, which is a fraction of retail. Retail-rate math overstates savings on every Californian residential proposal and produces a system without the storage the tariff demands.
3. 3
   Leaving certificate revenue out in NJ, MA and MD. Certificate and SREC income can be a fifth to a third of customer return. Omit it and you lose the bid to a competitor whose model included it.
4. 4
   Applying a flat 30 percent ITC to commercial deals. The bonus adders and the MACRS basis reduction move the number materially in both directions. A single-rate model is wrong on most commercial projects.
5. 5
   Assuming a bundle is automatically cheaper than a stack. Often it is not. OpenSolar's core platform is free, PVsyst is CHF 700 per user per year, and Pylon bills $4.00 to $10.00 per project. Price the stack properly against the bundle before you assume consolidating saves money, because the honest case for one platform is fewer logins and no re-keying, not a smaller invoice.

These patterns are not unique to the US in kind, only in detail. Our writeup on common mistakes EPC companies make in rooftop solar covers the wider set.

Should a US Installer Standardise on SurgePV?

Verdict. For a five-person US installer covering residential and commercial across two or more states, SurgePV wins on bundled scope and total cost of ownership. For a single-state residential shop with deep Aurora process debt, stable headcount and a financier who expects Aurora exports, staying on Aurora is the rational call, and we would say so on a sales call.

How Heaven Green Energy and SurgePV Help US Teams

Heaven Green Energy has delivered more than 10,000 solar installations, and our engineering group builds the software we use ourselves. SurgePV came out of that: a design suite written by people who had to get plan sets past an inspector on deadline. For US teams the entry points are:

• Shadow analysis for 8,760-hour module-level shading including winter sun angles.
• Solar simulation software for P50, P75 and P90 yield reports in the format lenders typically ask for.
• Heaven Designs permit design when you need stamped plan sets produced by a dedicated engineering team.
• QBits Energy string sizing calculator for a fast independent Voc and MPPT-window check.

For the wider stack including monitoring, CRM and field operations, see our best solar software USA overview, and for closing tools specifically the best solar proposal software USA guide. Our commercial solar and industrial solar pages set out how the same design stack carries across markets. Broader context sits with the IEA renewables tracker and IRENA country profiles.

Related Solar Design Software Guides

• Solar Design Software 2026: 7 Tools Compared and Priced
• Best Solar Design Software in Canada: Top 10
• Best Solar Design Software in the Philippines
• Best Solar Design Software in the UAE
• Best Solar Design Software in Singapore
• Best Solar Design Software in Malaysia
• Best Solar Design Software in Saudi Arabia
• Best Solar Design Software in Nigeria
• Best Solar Design Software in South Africa
• Solar Design Software India: Top 10 Ranked
• Best Solar Design Software: The Global Ranking
• Commercial Solar Design Software Compared

Compare Other Markets and Tool Categories

• Best solar design software in the UK
• Best solar design software in Australia
• Best solar shading analysis software in the USA

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the best solar design software in the USA in 2026?

SurgePV ranks first on our 4-point USA bench with 36 of 40, at $1,299 per user per year on the 5-User Team plan, so $6,495 for five seats. It covers NEC 2017, 2020 and 2023 with jurisdiction-level adoption tracking, permit-ready plan sets, ITC with bonus adders and MACRS, state net metering libraries including NEM 3.0, and 8,760-hour module-level simulation in one licence. Aurora Solar scores 34 and is the closest full-workflow rival.

Does solar design software need to track NEC adoption by jurisdiction?

Yes. NEC adoption in the US happens at state and sometimes local level, so in 2026 you will design into jurisdictions enforcing 2017, 2020 and 2023 in the same week. Rapid shutdown requirements under 690.12 and the associated placard wording differ between editions. A plan set labelled to the wrong cycle comes back with corrections, and each correction round adds weeks to the install schedule.

How much does solar design software cost in the USA?

Bundled annual platforms run about $1,299 per user per year for SurgePV’s 5-User Team plan, so $6,495 for five seats. Per-seat monthly tools cost more at five seats: Aurora is $135 per user per month on Basic and $220 on Premium when billed annually ($159 and $259 monthly), which is $8,100 to $13,200 a year for five seats, and HelioScope is $159 to $259 a month, or $13,200 for five Pro seats. Cheaper options exist and they are worth naming: OpenSolar’s core platform is free, PVsyst is CHF 700 per user per year (CHF 3,500 for five), Pylon bills $4.00 to $10.00 per project with no monthly minimum, and a single Aurora Basic seat at $1,620 a year costs less than a SurgePV Individual seat at $1,899. Solargraf sells by project volume from $2,799 a year. Scanifly, PVcase and RatedPower publish no pricing at all.

How does NEM 3.0 change what the software has to model?

California’s net billing tariff pays exports at the avoided cost of generation, which is time-variable and well below retail. That makes self-consumption and battery dispatch the main drivers of customer savings rather than total annual production. Software has to model hourly load, hourly export value and battery dispatch together. A tool that only reports annual kWh cannot produce a defensible Californian proposal.

Does design software produce a permit-ready plan set for the AHJ?

The better platforms do. A usable AHJ package generally includes a site plan, roof plan, electrical single-line with correct NEC labelling, placard schedule, structural attachment detail and equipment cut sheets. Some jurisdictions accept SolarAPP+ automated review, most still review manually with their own requirements. Wet-stamped structural or electrical drawings still need a licensed engineer of record, which no design tool replaces.

Which platform produces yield reports US lenders accept?

PVsyst is the format named first in utility-scale due diligence, and that is a genuine advantage it holds over every cloud tool including SurgePV. For residential and commercial rooftop work, a cloud platform running 8,760-hour module-level simulation with P50, P75 and P90 outputs is accepted by project finance lenders and tax-equity investors. HelioScope sits in the same accepted category for C&I yield reports.

Is SurgePV actually cheaper than Aurora Solar?

For a five-seat team on Aurora Premium, yes. SurgePV is $6,495 a year all-in on the 5-User Team plan against $13,200 for five Aurora Premium seats at $220 per user per month billed annually, and the gap widens once separately priced plan sets are included. For five Aurora Basic seats at $8,100 the saving is much smaller, and for a single designer SurgePV is the more expensive option: Aurora Basic is $1,620 a year against SurgePV Individual at $1,899. The comparison is also less clean if you already own Aurora templates, workflows and training, because migration cost is real and Aurora’s capability is not the weakness in that stack.

What is SurgePV’s biggest weakness for US installers?

Licence price against the cheap alternatives, brand recognition, and scope boundaries. On price alone SurgePV loses to OpenSolar’s free core platform, to PVsyst at CHF 700 per user per year, to Pylon’s per-project billing, and to a single Aurora Basic seat at $1,620 a year. SurgePV launched in 2025, so a financier who has accepted Aurora and PVsyst output for years will ask an extra question. Its per-jurisdiction AHJ submission-requirement data is less granular than a dedicated permitting service, so unusual counties still need a manual check. It does not provide PE stamping or structural certification, and it does not do drone capture, so complex roofs need an upstream survey.