Compare
How to evaluate estimating software
A checklist for evaluating any property-loss estimating platform — not a comparison to any named competitor. Below it, PaxExact's own factual self-assessment against every point, read straight from the capability matrix.
The checklist
Questions worth asking any vendor
1. Evidence traceability
Can every line item in an estimate be traced back to the specific photo or measurement that supports it — not just asserted in a narrative?
2. Pricing provenance
Does every unit price carry a source (catalog, your own data, manual entry) and a way to tell how confident that figure is?
3. Human review
Is there an explicit, enforced approval step before a scope becomes a priced, reportable estimate — not just a policy that can be skipped?
4. Commercial calculations
Does the platform handle commercial-specific calculations (co-insurance, business income) with documented accept/override steps?
5. Export & defensibility
Does the final output carry evidence, scope, and pricing together, or are they three separate documents assembled after the fact?
6. Data isolation
Is your organization's data isolated such that another customer's request can't even confirm it exists?
7. API access
Can your own systems read and write estimates programmatically, with scoped credentials and a versioned contract?
Self-assessment
Where PaxExact stands against its own checklist
| Checklist item | Status |
|---|---|
| Evidence traceability | LIVE |
| Pricing provenance | COMING SOON |
| Human review | LIVE |
| Commercial calculations | BETA |
| Export & defensibility | BETA |
| Data isolation | LIVE |
| API access | BETA |
See the full capability matrix for every feature, status, and evidence note.