Direct answer (9 September 2026): A restoration profitability dashboard is useful when it shows job-level gross margin after labor, equipment, subs, and the Xactimate supplement cycle — not when it shows a pretty company-wide chart. Platform names and Xactimate / XactAnalysis pipes live on DASH vs Albi vs PSA vs Xcelerate and Xactimate integration.
This is the profitability intent page. It does not replace the four-way software comparison.
Fields that have to exist at job close
- Original estimate vs approved supplement, in Xactimate line items, not a single lump.
- Crew hours and equipment hours with fuel type — the same record the Restoration Carbon Protocol asks for.
- Sub and supplier cost posted before the invoice, not after QuickBooks closes the month.
- Days from first photo to carrier approval. That lag is cash, not a vanity KPI.
- Concurrent jobs per PM. Multi-location shops lose margin here, not in the estimating tool.
Where the platforms differ
DASH, Albiware, PSA, and Xcelerate all claim profitability views. The evaluation question is whether the number is built from the Xactimate / XactAnalysis export plus field hours, or from a manually typed job budget. If the dashboard cannot survive a concurrent water job and a rebuild on the same crew, it is a report, not an operating system.
Network reading
- Xactimate and scope development on Restoration Intel — how carriers price the estimate you are dashboarding.
- RCP spec on BC ESG — the carbon fields the same job record should emit.
- Shop kits — job tracker, claims command center, Xactimate scope drafter.
- Insurance language belongs on Risk Coverage Hub, not on this slug.
Leave a Reply