Heliosolve or RatedPower (pvDesign) to Design a Utility-Scale Plant in the Browser?
TL;DR (based on RatedPower’s public documentation as of 2026-09-14)
- RatedPower documents an integrated browser platform that goes from terrain to layout, energy, cabling, storage and financial KPIs, with 3D energy over topography and trees (3D Energy).
- Heliosolve follows a similar path and adds, in the same model, what RatedPower, according to its public documentation, does not describe or describes with a different method: correlated Monte Carlo P90, DSCR debt sizing, a joint inverter and battery search by NPV, and the provenance of every input.
- If you need 3D energy with tree shading, RatedPower documents it; if you need to close the debt case in the same model as the design, compare with Heliosolve.
What the published evidence says before either of us claims accuracy
Two measurements bound what any vendor here can honestly assert.
- On the simplest case there is, the whole field sits within a few points. A blind study covered seven commercial tools — 3E SynaptiQ, PlantPredict, PVsyst, RatedPower, SAM, SolarFarmer and Solargis Evaluate — on two fixed-tilt monofacial systems with the weather data supplied, reporting mean error in annual yield up to 2.5 % (15.4 kW) rising to 6.0 % (14.5 MW), attributed to “combined user decisions and inherent software behavior” (Deville et al., Solar Energy 304, 114207, 2026; abstract and publisher metadata). Heliosolve was not among the participants, the study does not rank the tools by name in any form we can quote, and it tested no bifacial modules, no trackers and no terrain — so for those configurations there is no published baseline for anyone.
- The assessor outweighs the engine. Given identical inputs for the same plant, five to seven professional assessors produced P50 values from 1,095 to 1,405 kWh/kWp, with the transposition step alone varying +18.8 % to +24.6 % while everyone claimed the same model (IEA-PVPS T13-18:2020).
So ask each vendor — us included — which dataset, period and conditions back their numbers, and treat any accuracy claim without them as marketing. Ours is stated in the limits section below.
Where is RatedPower strong?
- Integrated browser workflow, nothing to install, with its own layout editor (platform · editor).
- 3D Energy (October 2025): Radiance simulation over topography, including trees (3D Energy).
- Automatic roads in the layout editor (editor blog).
- Terrain and earthworks documented (pvDesign 3.0 · earthworks).
- Storage with editable IRENA-based cost templates (BESS).
- Published energy methodology, with models and references (methodology report, April 2024).
What does Heliosolve add?
Only what customers can use today in Heliosolve’s interface and that RatedPower’s public documentation does not describe or describes with a different method:
- P50/P90/P99 by Monte Carlo with correlated uncertainties; RatedPower offers P scenarios, but we could not read the method in its public documentation (the page requires JavaScript).
- DSCR debt sizing at P90, with DSRA, interest during construction, LLCR and PLCR (method).
- Market profile derived automatically from coordinates (costs, currency, tax and revenue).
- Provenance of every input on screen: typed, estimated or catalogue.
- Inverter and battery searched together by NPV, with rainflow and calendar degradation (method).
- Article-by-article NEC compliance report, with PASS / FAIL / ADVISORY / OPEN / N/A statuses, single-line diagram, conductors, protection and labels.
- Module temperature by energy balance with thermal inertia, thermal classes for floating PV, soiling from particulates and rain, and cell-level mismatch with bypass and MPPT.
Capability table
● documents it · ◐ partial or different method · ○ its documentation describes a different method or excludes it · – not publicly documented as of 2026-09-14 (does not mean it lacks it).
| Capability | Heliosolve | RatedPower | RatedPower source |
|---|---|---|---|
| Browser workflow from terrain to finance | ● | ● | Platform |
| Browser CAD | ● imports the site boundary as KML/KMZ | ● | Editor |
| Terrain: DEM, cut and fill, grading | ● | ◐ | pvDesign 3.0 · Earthworks |
| IEC 60287 / NEC cable sizing with short-circuit and protection | ● | ● | No public documentation of the method found as of 2026-09-17 |
| P50/P90/P99 by correlated Monte Carlo | ● | ◐ method not readable in its public documentation (JavaScript page) | Page requires JavaScript; method not readable as of 2026-09-17 |
| DSCR debt sizing at P90 | ● | ◐ financial KPIs, DSCR not mentioned | Financial KPIs |
| Market profile from coordinates | ● automatic derivation | ◐ editable IRENA templates | BESS |
| Provenance of every input | ● | – | — |
| Joint inverter and battery search by NPV | ● | – | — |
| Storage with rainflow and calendar degradation | ● rule-based dispatch | ◐ | BESS |
| Article-by-article NEC report with single-line diagram | ● | ◐ single-line diagram | Single-line diagram documented; no per-article NEC report found as of 2026-09-17 |
| Temperature by energy balance with thermal inertia | ● | ○ Faiman (§6.2, April 2024 methodology) | Methodology |
| Thermal classes for floating PV | ● | – | — |
| Soiling from particulates and rain | ● | ○ constant (§4.5, April 2024 methodology) | Methodology |
| Cell-level mismatch with bypass and MPPT | ● | ◐ per string (§7.2.2, April 2024 methodology) | Methodology |
| Layout optimisation by LCOE | ● | ◐ | No public documentation of an LCOE objective found as of 2026-09-17 |
| Bifacial rear side | Not available by ray tracing | ◐ Radiance (3D Energy, October 2025) | 3D Energy |
| Terrain-following rows with piles | Not available | ◐ | No public documentation of terrain-following rows with piles found as of 2026-09-17 |
The three rows marked “April 2024 methodology” come from that document; RatedPower released 3D Energy in October 2025 and we have not confirmed whether those methods still apply alongside it.
When should you choose RatedPower?
- You need 3D energy with Radiance over topography and tree shading.
- Your company already has workflows and templates in RatedPower and another team closes the financial case.
- Your procurement process prefers a quote-based contract.
- You want automatic roads and earthworks inside the same layout platform.
How do you use them together?
- Same site. With the site boundary in KML/KMZ, import it into Heliosolve and redo the layout there for detailed electrical design, storage and the P90 debt case.
- Energy cross-check. Compare annual and monthly production from both tools for the same plant, with the same weather file and equipment. If the trend matches, you have one more argument for the independent engineer; if not, Heliosolve’s loss tree shows which stage the difference is in.
What does each cost?
| Product | Tier | Seats | Billing | Public price | Trial |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RatedPower | — | — | — | On request (pricing) | Not found |
| Heliosolve | Starter | 1 | Monthly | $590/month · 25 MWp per plant | Not published |
| Heliosolve | Professional | 3 | Monthly or annual | $1,490/month or $14,900/year · 150 MWp per plant | Not published |
| Heliosolve | Enterprise | — | Monthly | from $2,500/month | Not published |
Without a public RatedPower price, figures cannot be compared. Ask both for a quote with the same scope.
What are Heliosolve’s limits?
- Validation against measurement at one plant: NIST Ground Array, −1.1% in annual energy against 371 MWh measured. RatedPower publishes a vendor validation document without sites or periods.
- Soiling: in desert climates with transported dust, Heliosolve’s result is indicative.
- No track record with banks and small team.
- Not offered today: bifacial rear-side ray tracing, terrain-following rows with piles, or tree shading like the one 3D Energy documents.
- Does not import layouts from other tools: it imports the site boundary as KML/KMZ.
Frequently asked questions
Does RatedPower calculate P90? It offers P50–P90 scenarios. As of 2026-09-14 we could not read its method in its public documentation (the page requires JavaScript).
Which one models shading better? It depends on the site. 3D Energy documents Radiance over topography with trees; Heliosolve resolves mismatch at cell level with bypass and MPPT. If there are trees near the plant, 3D Energy has a documented capability that Heliosolve does not offer today.
Can I size storage in both? Yes. In Heliosolve the inverter and battery are searched together by NPV, with rainflow and calendar degradation and augmentation.
Which one is cheaper? RatedPower does not publish prices, so we cannot compare.
Review and corrections
Last reviewed: 2026-09-14 (April 2024 energy methodology; October 2025 3D Energy). If anything is wrong, follow the corrections policy: first response within 48 hours on business days. History: changelog.
See also: how to choose solar farm design software · Heliosolve and PVsyst · Heliosolve and PVcase.
Want to see your project with its P90 and the debt it supports? Request a second opinion.
PVsyst, RatedPower, PVcase, SolarFarmer, Solargis, PlantPredict, HelioScope and SAM are trademarks of their respective owners. Heliosolve is not affiliated with, endorsed by or sponsored by any of them. Product names are used only to identify the products compared.