← All comparisons

Why Branch — not Helioscope, Solesca, or PVCase?

Or some combination of them? It's the honest question every commercial solar engineer asks before they buy another tool. This page answers it directly — with real pricing pulled from each vendor's own terms of service, sourced user quotes, and no marketing softening.

The honest answer

You probably want Branch and one of them — not instead of.

Solar engineers ask this question expecting a winner-takes-all answer. There isn't one, and anyone selling you a single tool that “does it all” is lying to you. A commercial project touches four distinct jobs, and the tools on the market are each built for one or two of them — never all four.

Helioscope is a yield simulator. Keep it if you're pricing PPAs. It will not finish your drawing.

Aurora Solar is a residential proposal tool that meters you per design. Wrong category for commercial engineering.

Solesca is a pre-CAD feasibility tool priced at $300 per deliverable, non-refundable. Useful for a small developer; punishing for a production engineering firm.

PVCase is a utility-scale engineering platform that lives in AutoCAD. At $15K+/seat, it's overbuilt for commercial rooftop and still produces no automated SLD, wire sizing, or tag generation.

Branch is the AutoCAD-native drafting automation step — the part that turns an engineered design into a stamped CD set. Three minutes, $299/mo per daily active user, unlimited projects, no credits.

The realistic stack for a commercial engineering firm is Helioscope (or PVsyst) for yield + Branch for drafting. That combination costs under $5,000/year per engineer and covers every phase from PPA-grade energy modeling through a stamped construction document set. Every other combination either overpays, under-delivers, or both.

Below: the side-by-side, the per-project math, and the detail on each tool — with sources. If you prefer to skip the writeup and just install Branch on a current project, start the free trial — no credit card, 14 days.

At a Glance

Eight axes that matter when an engineering firm evaluates solar design software. Green = yes, red = no, amber = partial or qualified.

CapabilityHelioscopeAuroraSolescaPVCaseBranch
Published pricing
$159–$259/mo
Credit-metered
Not disclosed
Contact sales
$299/mo per DAU
No per-project fee
Subscription
$15–$200/design
$300–$750/project
Enterprise seat
Unlimited
Unlimited projects
10/mo cap (120/yr)
Credits expire 12 mo
Credits per run
Per-seat
No cap
Trial without sales call
14-day trial
Demo gated
Contact required
Sales call required
14 days, no CC
AutoCAD-native output
DXF needs AUDIT
Proposal PDFs
Pre-CAD by design
Plugin in AutoCAD
Plugin in AutoCAD
Automated homerun routing
Not produced
Not produced
Not produced
Trench routing issues
K-means optimized
Automated circuit lengths
Not produced
Not produced
Not produced
Not produced
From drawn geometry
Fits stamped-CD workflow
Redraw required
Redraw required
Redraw required
No SLD/schedules
Drafting output ready

What One Engineer Pays for 50 Projects a Year

A middle-of-the-road commercial engineer at a firm like CMTA might touch fifty projects in a year across BD, preliminary design, and production. Here is what each tool charges to move those projects through its workflow.

Aurora Solar

~$10,000 in credits

50 × $200 per commercial design, plus seat subscription

No — redraw in AutoCAD

Helioscope

$1,908–$3,108

Subscription; hard-capped at 120 projects/year on annual plan

No — redraw in AutoCAD

Solesca

$13,500+ in credits

50 × $270 at volume-bundle rate, non-refundable, plus seat

No — explicitly pre-CAD

PVCase

$13,000–$17,000

Seat license plus required AutoCAD or Civil 3D

Partial — no automated SLD or schedules

Branch

$3,588 flat

Per daily active user, unlimited projects, no add-on CAD license

Yes — AutoCAD-native CD drafting output

Recovered labor is on top of the license delta. A firm saving three hours of drafting per project on fifty projects at a loaded rate of $120/hr recovers roughly $18,000 per engineer per year.

The Workflow These Tools Pretend Not to Know About

At an engineering firm, a commercial solar project does not end when the panel layout is finished. That is where the real work starts.

Most design and proposal tools optimize for the 30% design milestone — a feasibility sketch, a yield number, a single-line cartoon, a PDF to send the client. What happens next is invisible to them. An engineer opens AutoCAD, imports a DXF or a PDF, and rebuilds the drawing against the firm's CAD standard, the AHJ's plan-check preferences, the utility's interconnection submittal package, and the PE's red-line habits.

Strings get re-laid on proper layers. Homeruns get routed to actual combiner and inverter positions. Circuit lengths get measured off drawn geometry, not estimated. Tags get generated per the firm's symbol library. The SLD, panel schedules, conduit schedules, placards, fire setbacks, disconnect locations, equipment pads, and grounding details all get drawn by hand.

That is the stamped construction document set — the product the firm is paid to deliver. Every tool on this page claims to do solar design. None of them finish the drawing. Two to eight hours per project, at $90–$180/hr loaded, absorbed into overhead forever. Branch is built for exactly that gap.

The Detail, Tool by Tool

Helioscope

A yield simulator with a drawing canvas attached

Helioscope's core value is the quality of its energy model — DC losses, 2.5D shading, inverter clipping, derates. Commercial developers trust a Helioscope yield number when they are pricing a PPA, and they should. The design surface exists to make the simulation tractable, not to produce construction documents.

  • No real SLD. The generated single-line is a cartoon. No wire gauges per NEC 690.8 or 690.9, no conductor schedules, no fault-current annotation, no equipment bill. A PE cannot stamp it.
  • DXF export is a tracing template. Modules come through as blocks on Helioscope-defined layers that do not match any firm's CAD standard. Copy-paste between DXF and DWG is documented-broken — Helioscope's own help center tells users to run the AUDIT command as a workaround. Imagery does not travel. Geolocation is stripped.
  • The 10-project-per-month ceiling is enforced. In October 2023 the soft limit became hard. For a firm that spins up preliminary studies for BD and throws half of them away when a prospect doesn't move forward, that cap is punitive. Single-user licensing means no shared pool across engineers.
  • 67% price increase after the Aurora acquisition. The base plan went from $95/mo to $159/mo in November 2022 with the vendor's explanation “we need to raise our prices.” Enterprise features got paywalled. The product's roadmap now serves Aurora's residential-sales ICP.

Right tool for yield numbers. Wrong tool for CD production.

Aurora Solar

Built for residential, priced like enterprise, metered like a taxi

Aurora leads the residential solar sales category. Sales Mode, financing integrations, the proposal builder, LIDAR imagery, and SmartRoof auto-tracing are all built to help a commission-based sales rep close a homeowner at the kitchen table. For commercial engineering firms, the friction is in the pricing mechanics.

  • SOL Credits charge per design. Residential designs consume 150–220 credits at $0.10 each, or $15–$22 per design. Commercial designs cost $200 per design (2,000 credits). The Aurora AI add-on is $9 per project.
  • Aggressive auto-top-up. When your balance hits zero, Aurora charges $3,000 for 30,000 credits automatically. Opting out means you stop being able to work.
  • Credits expire in 12 months. Non-refundable. Unused credits are gone.
“Aurora solar is simply an incredibly expensive ripoff. We paid R13 000 for just testing out the software in the first month.”
— Wouter Z., Capterra 1-star review, September 2024

Aurora will happily sell a commercial engineering firm a seat. It is not designed for that workflow. A $200 commercial design still produces nothing a PE can stamp — the drawing still gets rebuilt in AutoCAD.

Solesca

$300 per project deliverable, non-refundable, non-transferable, explicitly pre-CAD

Solesca is the newest of the four — founded 2022, CEC-approved July 2025, positioned as “pre-CAD” feasibility for C&I and community-scale projects. Its pricing model is disclosed only in its terms of service.

DeliverableCreditsSubscriberNon-subscriber
Site Plan + SLD for one project1.0$300$450
Solesca-staff-completed design (3 biz days)0.5$150$300
60 min engineering consultation1.0$300$450
Solesca-engineered full design (6 biz days)2.5$750$900

Volume bundles: 10 credits for $2,850, 50 credits for $13,500, 100 credits for $25,500.

  • Non-refundable, full stop. Per §3 of the terms: “All purchases of SOL Credits are final and non-refundable.”
  • Non-transferable across organizations, even within the same parent.
  • Promo codes and PPP discounts do not apply to credits. You pay rack rate.
  • Liability is capped at the credit value of the specific design giving rise to the claim.

For a firm running 50 commercial projects a year through Solesca: $13,500 in credits at volume-bundle rate, non-refundable, on top of the seat subscription, for output explicitly labeled “pre-CAD” that your drafter still rebuilds in AutoCAD before stamp. A project that goes through three rounds of value engineering pays three times.

PVCase

A utility-scale engineering platform being retrofitted for rooftop

PVCase is the closest of the four to a serious engineering tool. It lives inside AutoCAD or Civil 3D, generates terrain-adapted layouts with real pile and tracker mechanics, and produces geometry you can stamp. The problem isn't that PVCase is bad — it's that PVCase was built for utility-scale ground-mount developers and its pricing, UX, and complexity still serve that ICP.

  • Opaque enterprise pricing. No published number. Historical data points place it around €799/user/month billed annually — roughly $13,000/user/year — plus a required AutoCAD or Civil 3D license ($2,000–$4,000/user/year). True seat cost: $15,000–$17,000/year.
  • No self-serve trial. A sales call is mandatory to evaluate.
  • Still no automated electrical. PVCase produces great array geometry. It does not auto-generate SLDs, wire sizing, conduit fills, or panel schedules. The drafter still does that work.
  • Overkill for under ~1MW. Reviewers say so explicitly. Commercial rooftop is typically 50kW–2MW. PVCase's value concentrates above 5MW.
“PVcase is absolutely the worst user interface I have ever interacted with. Many settings are hard coded and not adaptable to our needs/wants.”
— PVCase Prospect G2 review
“String cable design is not accurate, and trenching layout is a pain. Software does not always follow user-defined trench routes precisely and sometimes routes cables through unintended paths.”
— PVCase Ground Mount G2 review

For an engineering firm doing commercial rooftop work, PVCase means paying for terrain adaptation, trackers, pile optimization, and Civil 3D integration that those rooftop projects will never use.

What a Commercial Engineering Firm Actually Needs

A complete software stack for commercial solar engineering is four things. Most firms already have the first three. The fourth is where Branch lives.

1. Yield model

Helioscope or PVsyst

Bankable energy production numbers for PPA pricing. Buy one. Keep it. Branch does not compete with this.

2. Feasibility layout

Helioscope, AutoCAD, or Google Earth

Preliminary BD sketches and client-facing proposals. Low stakes, low fidelity.

3. Engineering judgment

Your engineers

Inverter selection, string sizing, voltage-window compliance, wire sizing, NEC interpretation, AHJ-specific detailing. No software does this. Your PE does.

4. Drafting production

Branch

The step where every firm bleeds labor hours. Strings on proper layers, homeruns routed, circuit lengths measured from drawn geometry, tags per your symbol library. About three minutes per project. Inside AutoCAD, where your drafters already work.

Frequently Asked Questions

Does Branch replace Helioscope, Aurora, Solesca, or PVCase for an engineering firm?

No, and it is not trying to. Helioscope and PVsyst produce the yield models a PPA gets priced against. Aurora and Solesca live in the proposal and feasibility phase. PVCase generates utility-scale layouts. Branch is the fourth piece most engineering firms are missing — the AutoCAD-native drafting step that turns an engineered design into a stamped construction document set. Most firms keep one yield modeling tool and add Branch for CD production.

How is per-project cost actually different?

Aurora charges around $200 per commercial design in SOL Credits, with credits expiring 12 months after purchase and auto-top-up at $3,000 per 30,000 credits. Solesca charges $300 per project deliverable (1.0 SOL Credit) and $450 per deliverable for non-subscribers, all non-refundable. Helioscope caps Basic and Pro subscriptions at 10 projects per month. Branch is flat $299/mo per daily active user with unlimited projects — no credits, no per-design fees, no monthly caps, no seat limits.

Will Branch produce a stamped construction document set?

Branch produces the drafting objects — strings on proper layers, homerun paths, circuit lengths, tags — inside your AutoCAD drawing. The engineer still makes engineering decisions (wire sizing, voltage drop analysis, SLD content, AHJ-specific details) and a PE still stamps the set. What Branch eliminates is the hours of hand-drafting repetition between the engineered design and the final deliverable.

If we already pay for Helioscope or PVsyst, why would we add Branch?

Because none of those tools finish the drawing. A Helioscope DXF export is a tracing template with Helioscope-defined layers that gets rebuilt in AutoCAD against your firm's CAD standard. A PVCase layout has no automated SLD, wire sizing, or tag generation. In every case, a drafter spends two to eight hours per project rebuilding the drawing for permit. Branch collapses that step from hours into about three minutes and stays inside AutoCAD so drafters never leave the environment they already work in.

Is PVCase owned by Trimble? I've heard that somewhere.

As of April 2026, PVCase is independent. The company raised $100 million in July 2023 from Highland Europe, Energize, and Elephant, and reported roughly $53.8M in 2024 revenue. There is no public record of a Trimble acquisition. PVCase did acquire Anderson Optimization in June 2023, which may be the source of the confusion.

See Branch in Your AutoCAD

14-day free trial. No credit card. $299/mo per daily active user after the trial. 30-day money-back guarantee.

Run Branch on one of your current projects and compare the output to what you ship today.

Start free trial — 14 days free