Blog

  • Choosing Restoration ERP and Sales Software in 2026

    Choosing Restoration ERP and Sales Software in 2026

    The restoration software landscape in 2026 has consolidated into four recognizable categories. The wrong choice will cost a restoration operator three to five years of integration debt. The right one will quietly compound margin and visibility for the same period.

    This is a buyer’s framework, not a vendor ranking. Vendor names move quickly in this market through acquisition and rebranding. The categories below are stable, and the selection criteria are durable.

    The Four Categories of Restoration Software in 2026

    When operators talk about “restoration ERP” or “restoration sales software,” they are usually referring to one of four distinct categories that solve different problems:

    • End-to-end restoration ERPs — single platforms covering CRM, job management, scheduling, estimating, photo documentation, accounting integration, and reporting. The dominant choice for shops above roughly $5M revenue that want one system of record.
    • Sales-focused CRMs — platforms purpose-built for the commercial cultivation cycle, account mapping, and sales-pipeline management. Often paired with a separate job-management tool.
    • Job-management platforms — systems focused on the production side: dispatch, technician documentation, customer signatures, estimating, photo capture. The dominant choice for shops where production discipline drives the business.
    • Best-of-breed point tools — moisture mapping, photo documentation, equipment tracking, communication, scheduling — each from a separate vendor, integrated through APIs or middleware.

    The first selection question is which category fits the shop, not which vendor. Most software regret in the restoration industry comes from buying a vendor in the wrong category for the operating model.

    How to Choose the Right Category

    The right category is a function of revenue scale, operating model, and growth direction. A working framework:

    • Under $2M revenue, residential-led: a job-management platform plus a basic CRM is usually sufficient. Full ERP is overhead the shop cannot absorb.
    • $2M to $5M revenue, mixed residential and commercial: a job-management platform with a strong sales module, or an ERP with a clear sales workflow. The decision tilts on commercial growth ambition.
    • Above $5M revenue, multi-location or commercial-led: end-to-end ERP becomes the practical choice. The cost of stitching point tools together exceeds the cost of the ERP.
    • Heavy commercial sales motion: a dedicated sales CRM is often added regardless of the production platform, because commercial cultivation requires functionality production-led platforms do not prioritize.

    The Six Selection Criteria That Actually Matter

    Vendor demos make every platform look comparable. The differentiators show up in production. The six criteria that separate platforms operators stay on from platforms operators leave within 24 months:

    1. Documentation discipline. Does the platform enforce the documentation standard your insurance work requires, or does it allow technicians to skip critical fields? The IICRC S500 2026 documentation expectations make this non-negotiable.
    2. Estimating integration. Does the platform connect to the estimating tool your shop uses (Xactimate, Symbility, or alternatives) without a manual re-key? A re-key step is where margin leaks.
    3. Accounting integration. Does the platform write clean records into QuickBooks, Sage, or NetSuite? Without this, your controller is rebuilding the books every month.
    4. Mobile reliability. Does the technician-facing app work on a job site with intermittent connectivity? Field-side reliability is the most common reason adoption stalls.
    5. Sales pipeline depth. If you have a commercial sales motion, does the platform support named accounts, multi-contact account mapping, and stage-based cultivation? Most production-led platforms do not.
    6. Reporting and forecasting. Can ownership see revenue forecast, gross margin by job type, and sales pipeline in one view, or are these stitched together in spreadsheets?

    The Hidden Cost: Implementation

    The license fee is rarely the largest cost of restoration software. Implementation, data migration, and the productivity dip during the cutover typically run 1.5x to 3x the first-year subscription cost. Operators who underestimate this number end up on the platform without ever fully implementing it, which produces the worst possible outcome — paying for software no one trusts.

    The mitigations are well known: dedicate an internal champion who owns the rollout, plan for a 90-day cutover with parallel operation, and stage the implementation by department rather than going live everywhere at once.

    The AI Question

    Every restoration software vendor in 2026 is shipping AI features — automated photo tagging, voice-to-documentation, sketch generation from job photos, and project estimation assistance. The honest assessment is that the AI features that hold up in production are the ones that automate documentation entry, not the ones that promise to “do estimating for you.” Operators evaluating platforms in 2026 should weight the AI features by their effect on technician documentation discipline, not by demo polish.

    Switching Costs Are Real

    The cost of switching restoration platforms after 18 months on one is high — historical job data, customer records, and team training all get disrupted. This argues for thorough selection, not for paralysis. Most operators who report regretting their software choice cite either rushing the decision or buying for a future state of the business that never arrived. A platform that fits the next 18 months and is extensible into the next 36 is a better choice than the perfect platform for a future that may not happen.

    Frequently Asked Questions

    What is the difference between a restoration ERP and a job-management platform?

    An ERP covers the full operating system of the business — CRM, sales, job management, accounting integration, reporting — in one platform. A job-management platform focuses on the production side — dispatch, technician documentation, estimating, photo capture — and typically pairs with a separate CRM and accounting system.

    When should a restoration company invest in a dedicated sales CRM?

    When the commercial sales motion requires named-account cultivation, multi-contact account mapping, and stage-based pipeline management at a depth that production-led platforms do not support. Shops with serious commercial growth ambition typically run a dedicated sales CRM regardless of their production platform.

    How much should I budget for restoration software in 2026?

    License fees vary widely, but a working budget for a mid-sized restoration operation is 1% to 3% of revenue for software, with implementation and training adding 1.5x to 3x the first-year subscription cost in year one. The total software stack typically replaces a measurable amount of administrative labor, so the net cost is usually lower than the gross spend.

    Should I integrate AI tools into my restoration software stack?

    The AI features that hold up in production in 2026 are the ones that automate documentation entry — photo tagging, voice-to-documentation, sketch generation. AI features that promise to replace estimating or scoping judgment are not yet reliable enough to depend on. Evaluate AI by its effect on technician discipline, not demo polish.

    How long does a restoration software implementation take?

    A realistic implementation runs 90 days for a mid-sized restoration operation, with parallel operation against the legacy system for the first 30 to 60 days. Compressing the timeline below 60 days typically produces an incomplete implementation that erodes platform trust within the first year.

    For more on the technology layer of running a restoration business, see Restoration Tech Playbooks.


  • Worker Smoke Test 2

    Worker Smoke Test 2

    Second attempt

  • Xactimate X1 Platform Guide for Restoration Operators

    Xactimate X1 Platform Guide for Restoration Operators

    Xactimate X1 is Verisk’s unified estimating platform for property claims work. It runs across desktop, online, and mobile with cloud-synced data, which means a field tech can start a sketch on a tablet at a loss site and a project manager can finish the estimate on a desktop in the office without re-keying anything. For restoration operators, that field-to-office continuity is the single biggest workflow advantage X1 brings to the business.

    This guide assumes you already understand how Xactimate fits into a restoration company’s pricing workflow. If not, start with our restoration pricing and estimating master guide for the full context.

    What Makes X1 Different

    X1 is the modern Xactimate experience Verisk has been moving the platform toward over the last several years. The defining capabilities are cross-device sync (desktop, online, mobile share the same estimate state), Sketch AR for mobile measurement, customizable rules that enforce estimating practices in real time, and the Line Item Advisor that suggests appropriate codes from the roughly 17,000-item Xactimate library.

    The practical impact is that X1 reduces the amount of post-claim review time required to catch missed line items, mismatched scopes, and inconsistent estimating practices across a team. For multi-rep restoration companies, this is where the platform pays for itself.

    The Field-to-Office Workflow

    The intended X1 workflow for a restoration job looks like this: field tech arrives on site, opens the mobile app, runs a Sketch AR measurement of the affected rooms, captures damage photos tied to specific rooms, adds preliminary line items, and syncs to the cloud before leaving the site. Back at the office, the estimator opens the same estimate on desktop, adds the rest of the scope (equipment, labor, content manipulation), runs the rules check, and prepares the estimate for submission.

    Companies that adopt this workflow consistently report 30 to 50 percent reductions in time from loss to estimate submission, which directly improves cash flow and TPA scoring.

    Customizable Rules: The Quiet Margin Lever

    X1’s customizable rules feature is one of the most under-used capabilities on the platform. Rules let you encode your estimating practices (always include this line item with that one, always default to this dehumidifier class on Cat 2 jobs, always flag estimates above a certain dollar amount for senior review) directly into the platform.

    The rules then enforce themselves in real time as the estimator builds the estimate. This is the difference between a company whose estimates are inconsistent across reps and a company whose estimates look like they all came from the same hand. For TPA programs and audit defensibility, that consistency is worth real money.

    Line Item Advisor and the 17,000-Item Library

    Xactimate’s line item library has roughly 17,000 items, which is more than any human estimator can hold in memory. The Line Item Advisor in X1 suggests appropriate codes based on the context of the estimate, which speeds up estimate construction and reduces the chance of using the wrong code for a specific scope item.

    For new estimators, this feature shortens the learning curve significantly. For experienced estimators, it surfaces line items they might otherwise default away from out of habit.

    X1 vs Legacy Xactimate

    If your team is still working primarily on the legacy Xactimate experience, the migration to X1 is worth planning intentionally. The cloud-sync model, the mobile capabilities, and the rules system all require a workflow shift, not just a software update. Plan two to three months of dual-running before retiring legacy workflows entirely.

    Getting Your Team on X1

    Verisk offers an X1 training course covering the full platform, including importing and creating estimates, claim information setup, interior and roof Sketch diagrams, line item entry with localized pricing, and reporting. Third-party providers also offer X1-specific training. Whichever path you choose, formal training shortens onboarding time substantially compared to self-teaching.

    Frequently Asked Questions

    What is the difference between Xactimate X1 and the legacy Xactimate experience?

    X1 is the unified, cloud-synced version of Xactimate that runs identically across desktop, online, and mobile. The legacy experience was device-specific with manual sync. X1 also adds Sketch AR for mobile measurement, customizable rules, and the Line Item Advisor. Functionality is broadly similar, but the workflow and collaboration model are substantially different.

    Do I need separate Xactimate licenses for desktop, mobile, and online?

    No. An X1 license covers desktop, online, and mobile use under the same account. A user can move between devices on the same estimate without re-licensing. License pricing depends on the seat type and contract; verify current pricing directly with Verisk.

    How accurate is Xactimate Sketch AR for restoration measurement?

    Sketch AR is accurate enough for most residential interior measurements when the device camera and lighting allow for clean tracking. For jobs requiring high-precision measurement (insurance disputes, large commercial losses), traditional measurement methods are still recommended as a verification step.

    Can I use Xactimate X1 offline?

    Yes, the mobile app supports offline work for sketching and basic line item entry. Estimates sync to the cloud when connectivity returns. For full pricing data and the complete line item library, an internet connection is required.

    Should restoration owners learn X1 themselves or hire an Xactimate professional?

    Both. Owners benefit from understanding the platform well enough to review estimates intelligently and spot scope gaps. For high-volume estimate production, hiring or contracting a dedicated Xactimate professional almost always pays for itself in faster estimate turnaround and fewer scope misses.


  • Xactimate Common Mistakes: The Line Items Restoration Estimators Forget Most

    Xactimate Common Mistakes: The Line Items Restoration Estimators Forget Most

    Xactimate is precise enough that small estimating mistakes show up clearly when the invoice closes out. The platform has roughly 17,000 line items, and the difference between the operators who consistently get paid in full and the operators who absorb chronic reductions is usually a small number of repeating mistakes. This article catalogs the mistakes that show up most often in restoration estimate audits and how to fix each one.

    This article assumes you are familiar with the broader Xactimate workflow. For that context, see our restoration pricing and estimating master guide.

    Mistake 1: Picking the Wrong Code from a Similar-Looking Group

    Xactimate often has multiple line items that look similar but apply to different scopes. Drywall repair, drywall replacement, and drywall hang/finish are three different items with three different prices. The Line Item Advisor in X1 helps surface the right code, but estimators who default to the first match they see consistently choose codes that under-bill the actual work.

    The fix is discipline: read the line item description before adding it, and use the Advisor’s suggestions when working on unfamiliar scope.

    Mistake 2: Under-Counting Equipment Days

    Equipment days are the most common source of audit reductions on water damage jobs. The pattern: the estimator counts contract days from project start to project close, but the audit counts only the days the equipment was physically on site per the daily monitoring log. Missing log entries mean missing days.

    The fix is operational: daily monitoring logs must be completed daily, with equipment counts and moisture readings, and equipment placement and removal must be photographed for documentation.

    Mistake 3: Missing Antimicrobial on Cat 1 Losses

    Antimicrobial application on Cat 1 water losses is sometimes treated as optional, but the IICRC S500 standard supports its use in many Cat 1 scenarios — especially when there is any risk of category escalation, when affected materials cannot be fully dried, or when the response time means microbial growth is a real risk.

    Skipping antimicrobial on Cat 1 losses out of a vague sense that “it might get cut” leaves real billable scope off the estimate. The fix is to document the reasoning for the antimicrobial line in the estimate notes.

    Mistake 4: Single Air Scrubber for Multi-Room Jobs

    The pricing matrix supports multiple air scrubbers when the affected area justifies them. Single-scrubber estimates on multi-room losses are routine, and they routinely under-bill the equipment scope. The fix is to scrubber-count by room and document placement on the equipment log.

    Mistake 5: Skipping Containment on Fire Cleanup

    Containment line items are routinely skipped on fire cleanup estimates because the estimator focuses on visible cleaning work. But proper fire cleanup requires HEPA negative air containment to prevent soot redistribution into adjacent unaffected areas. Skipping containment in the estimate produces work that either gets done un-billed or causes secondary contamination claims.

    Mistake 6: Missing the Second Floor When Water Migrated

    Water rarely stays on one floor. Estimates that scope only the floor where water originated routinely miss legitimate scope on the floor below (where ceiling damage is common) or above (where water can wick up baseboards). The fix is a complete walkthrough of the entire structure on intake, not just the affected room.

    Mistake 7: Outdated Local Price List

    Xactimate pricing updates monthly. Estimating templates that have not been refreshed against the current price list are systematically under-billing on items where prices have moved. The fix is a monthly refresh ritual: when the new price list drops, refresh the templates.

    Mistake 8: Generic Notes That Cannot Defend the Scope

    Estimate notes that say “per IICRC standards” without referencing the specific standard, scope item, or category provide no defense in audit. Notes that say “Cat 2 water loss per S500, antimicrobial applied per protocol due to documented contamination evidence (photos attached)” defend almost any scope item.

    Mistake 9: Wrong Labor Efficiency Model

    Now that Xactimate has three labor efficiency models as of February 2026, choosing the wrong one mis-prices the labor by 10 to 25 percent. The new Large Restoration/Remodel tier should be used for mid-sized multi-trade work that previously got force-fit into one of the two prior models.

    Mistake 10: Lump-Sum Estimates for Cash Jobs

    Lump-sum cash estimates feel simple but consistently under-price the work because the estimator forgets line items that would have been included in an itemized scope. The fix is to always build cash estimates itemized in Xactimate, then optionally summarize for the customer if a lump-sum presentation is preferred.

    Frequently Asked Questions

    What is the most common Xactimate mistake on water damage jobs?

    Under-counting equipment days. The pattern is estimating contract days while the audit counts only documented on-site days from the daily monitoring log. The fix is rigorous daily logging with equipment counts and moisture readings, plus photo documentation of placement and removal.

    How many line items does Xactimate have?

    Approximately 17,000 line items in the standard library. The Line Item Advisor in X1 surfaces appropriate codes based on context, which reduces the cognitive load of finding the right code without defaulting to the first plausible match.

    How often should I update my Xactimate estimating templates?

    Monthly, in line with the Verisk price list update cycle. Templates frozen at older pricing produce estimates that get reduced on submission because they do not reflect the current published research.

    What kind of estimate notes hold up to TPA audit?

    Notes that reference specific standards (IICRC S500, S520, S700), specific category and class documentation, specific scope decisions and the evidence supporting them, and photo references where applicable. Generic “per industry standard” notes provide no defense.

    Does the new 2026 labor efficiency model affect my older estimates?

    No. The Large Restoration/Remodel option applies to estimates built going forward. Estimates already submitted under the prior two-model architecture are not retroactively affected. New estimates should evaluate which of the three models best fits each job.


  • Xactimate Sketch AR and the Mobile-First Restoration Workflow

    Xactimate Sketch AR and the Mobile-First Restoration Workflow

    Field measurement has historically been the slowest step in restoration estimating. A tech walks the loss with a tape measure or laser, jots down dimensions, returns to the office, and re-keys everything into Xactimate before the estimate can begin. Xactimate Sketch AR collapses that workflow by moving the measurement and initial sketch into the field, on a mobile device, with cloud sync to the office.

    For broader context on how Xactimate fits restoration operations, see our restoration pricing and estimating master guide.

    What Sketch AR Does

    Sketch AR uses the camera and motion sensors on a tablet or phone to take measurements as the user walks through the loss site. The output is a 2D sketch with dimensions captured directly from the field, plus optional 3D cutaway views that help visualize the interior layout. The data syncs to the cloud and is available on the desktop estimate immediately.

    The headline benefit is time. Field measurement that previously took 30 to 60 minutes per loss can be completed in 10 to 20 minutes with Sketch AR, and the office no longer needs a separate sketching step before the line item work begins.

    The Mobile-First Restoration Workflow

    The mobile-first workflow Sketch AR enables looks like this on a typical water loss:

    • Arrival — tech opens the X1 mobile app and creates the estimate shell
    • Walkthrough — tech runs Sketch AR through each affected room, capturing dimensions and damage photos tied to specific rooms
    • Initial line items — tech adds preliminary line items for obvious scope (extraction, demo, equipment placement)
    • Sync — estimate uploads to the cloud before the tech leaves the site
    • Office completion — estimator opens the same estimate on desktop, refines line items, runs rules check, prepares for submission

    Companies that adopt this workflow consistently report 30 to 50 percent compression in time from loss to estimate submission. That speed flows directly into faster cash flow and improved TPA scoring.

    When Sketch AR Is the Right Tool

    Sketch AR is well-suited for typical residential interiors with reasonable lighting, distinguishable wall edges, and accessible spaces. It is the right default for most water loss, mold, and partial fire jobs in homes and small commercial spaces.

    It is less well-suited for: heavily damaged spaces where wall edges are obscured, dark or smoke-filled environments where the camera cannot track, very large open spaces with limited reference features, or any job requiring precision measurement for dispute defense (where traditional measurement should still be used as a verification step).

    Training and Adoption

    The technical learning curve on Sketch AR is short — most field techs are productive within a single training session. The harder change is workflow: moving the team from “measure on site, sketch at the office” to “sketch on site, refine at the office” requires deliberate process change.

    The most common adoption failure is leaving the workflow optional. Teams that allow some techs to sketch on site and others to defer to office sketching never realize the speed benefits. Standardizing on the mobile-first workflow as the company default is the difference between marginal improvement and dramatic cycle-time compression.

    Equipment and Device Considerations

    Sketch AR works best on modern tablets with strong motion sensors and good cameras. iPads with LiDAR sensors produce particularly clean tracking. Spec out devices for the field team based on actual job conditions — a $400 tablet that struggles in low light produces worse measurements than a $900 tablet that handles real conditions.

    Where Sketch AR Fits in the Larger X1 Workflow

    Sketch AR is one of several X1 capabilities that together produce the field-to-office continuity that defines the modern Xactimate workflow. It pairs naturally with cloud-synced estimates, the Line Item Advisor for quick line item suggestions, and customizable rules that catch missed scope items at the point of entry. None of these features stand alone — they reinforce each other.

    Frequently Asked Questions

    What is Xactimate Sketch AR?

    Sketch AR is the augmented-reality measurement and sketching feature in the Xactimate mobile app. It uses the device camera and motion sensors to capture room dimensions and produce a 2D sketch in the field, with optional 3D cutaway views. The output syncs to the cloud and is available on the desktop estimate immediately.

    How accurate is Sketch AR?

    Sketch AR is accurate enough for most residential interior measurements when conditions allow for clean camera tracking. For high-precision requirements (insurance disputes, large commercial losses), traditional measurement is still recommended as a verification step. Devices with LiDAR sensors typically produce cleaner results than camera-only devices.

    What kind of device do I need for Sketch AR?

    A modern tablet or phone with a good camera and motion sensors. iPads with LiDAR are particularly well-suited because the dedicated depth sensor improves tracking. Field teams should standardize on capable hardware rather than mixing devices that produce inconsistent results.

    Can Sketch AR replace traditional measurement entirely?

    For typical residential interior work in good conditions, Sketch AR can serve as the primary measurement method. For high-stakes jobs, large commercial spaces, dark or heavily damaged environments, or any situation that may end up in dispute, traditional measurement should still be used as either the primary method or a verification step.

    How long does it take to train field techs on Sketch AR?

    The technical training is short — most techs are productive within a single training session. The harder change is operational: standardizing the team on a mobile-first workflow rather than leaving it optional. Allow two to four weeks for the new workflow to become muscle memory across the team.


  • Xactimate Certification Levels: What Levels 1, 2, and 3 Cover and Which One Your Team Needs

    Xactimate Certification Levels: What Levels 1, 2, and 3 Cover and Which One Your Team Needs

    Xactimate offers three certification levels that progressively cover the platform’s depth. For restoration operators staffing an estimating function, knowing which level each role actually needs is the difference between an over-trained team that costs too much and an under-trained team that produces inconsistent estimates. This guide breaks down what each level covers, what it costs, and how to think about certification across roles.

    For broader context on how Xactimate fits into restoration operations, see our restoration pricing and estimating master guide.

    Level 1 — Fundamentals

    Level 1 covers the foundational use of Xactimate: navigation, project setup, creating estimates, adding line items, and basic sketching. It is designed for users who are new to the platform or want to solidify the fundamentals.

    For restoration teams, Level 1 is the right baseline for anyone who touches an estimate at any stage — field techs who capture initial sketches, project managers who review estimates, and ownership who needs to read estimates intelligently. The certification establishes a shared vocabulary across the team and prevents the most common usage mistakes.

    Level 2 — Proficiency / Power User

    Level 2 builds on Level 1 and goes deeper into the more advanced platform capabilities — complex sketching, custom price lists, advanced reporting, and platform-level configuration. It is the right target for the team members who actually build estimates daily.

    For most restoration companies, Level 2 should be the standard for senior estimators, project managers responsible for estimate sign-off, and anyone who configures price lists or custom rules for the company. The depth of Level 2 is what separates an estimator who builds defensible, complete estimates from one who produces work that triggers TPA reductions.

    Level 3 — Mastery

    Level 3 is reserved for the most complex scopes and is described as appropriate for veteran insurance adjusters with years of field experience handling the most complicated claims. The certification covers the full depth of the platform and the most nuanced estimating scenarios.

    For most restoration companies, Level 3 is overkill for the standard estimating workflow. The exception is companies that handle large-loss commercial work, work as TPA program subcontractors with audit responsibilities, or operate as third-party estimating services. For those use cases, Level 3 represents a meaningful credential.

    What the Exams Look Like

    Each certification level requires passing an exam administered by Verisk. The passing score is 70 percent. A current Xactimate license is required to take the exams. Once achieved, certification is valid for two years before renewal is required.

    The two-year renewal cycle matters for staffing planning — certifications are not lifetime credentials, and budgeting for re-certification every two years is part of running a properly trained estimating team.

    What Certification Costs

    Verisk offers training and exam options directly through its training platform. Third-party training providers also offer Xactimate Level 1 and Level 2 certification preparation, often bundled together. Pricing through major third-party providers tends to land around $650 for combined Level 1 and Level 2 training, with regional variation.

    For operators staffing multiple estimators, building a relationship with a single training provider and running team-wide certification cycles is often more cost-effective than ad hoc individual training. Some providers offer group rates and customized training for restoration-specific scopes.

    How to Think About Certification ROI

    The return on certification investment is not the credential itself — it is the reduction in estimating mistakes, audit reductions, and re-work that comes from a properly trained team. A single avoided $5,000 audit reduction pays for a team’s annual training budget several times over. Companies that under-invest in certification consistently leave more money on the table than they save in training cost.

    Recommended Certification Map for Restoration Teams

    A practical certification map for a restoration company:

    • Field techs and admin staff — Level 1 baseline, refreshed every two years
    • Senior estimators and project managers — Level 2 standard, refreshed every two years
    • Lead estimator / estimating manager — Level 2 minimum, Level 3 if handling large-loss commercial work
    • Owner / executive — Level 1 understanding to read and review estimates intelligently

    Frequently Asked Questions

    How many Xactimate certification levels are there?

    There are three certification levels: Level 1 (Fundamentals), Level 2 (Proficiency / Power User), and Level 3 (Mastery). Each level builds on the previous one, but you do not have to take them in sequence — a user can pursue Level 2 without holding Level 1.

    What score is required to pass an Xactimate certification exam?

    The passing score is 70 percent. A current Xactimate license is required to take the exam. Once passed, the certification is valid for two years before renewal is required.

    How much does Xactimate certification training cost?

    Pricing varies by provider. Third-party providers commonly offer combined Level 1 and Level 2 training in the $650 range, with regional and seasonal variation. Verisk also offers training and exam options directly through its platform. For up-to-date pricing, check the Verisk training site or your preferred third-party provider.

    Which Xactimate certification level do my estimators need?

    For most restoration companies, Level 1 is the right baseline for anyone who touches an estimate, and Level 2 is the standard for daily estimators and project managers. Level 3 is appropriate primarily for large-loss commercial estimators or third-party estimating professionals.

    How often do I need to renew Xactimate certification?

    Certifications are valid for two years. Renewal requires re-testing at the same level. Plan the recertification cycle into your annual training budget and stagger renewals across team members to avoid bunching the workload.


  • Xactimate 2026 Labor Efficiency Models: Why Verisk Added the Large Restoration/Remodel Tier

    Xactimate 2026 Labor Efficiency Models: Why Verisk Added the Large Restoration/Remodel Tier

    One of the most consequential Xactimate updates in recent years arrived in February 2026: Verisk expanded the labor efficiency architecture from two models to three. The new Large Restoration/Remodel option fills a long-acknowledged gap between service-level work and full rebuild scenarios. For restoration operators handling mid-sized losses, the change is meaningful — and using the wrong model is a fast way to mis-price the labor on a job.

    This article assumes you understand how Xactimate fits into the broader pricing workflow. For that context, start with our restoration pricing and estimating master guide.

    The Old Two-Model Architecture

    Before the February 2026 update, Xactimate offered two labor efficiency models: a service-level model for small-scope, single-trade work and a restoration/remodel model for larger rebuilds. The two-tier architecture worked well at the extremes but struggled in the middle.

    Mid-sized restoration jobs — partial kitchen rebuilds after water loss, multi-room fire cleanup, large mold remediation projects — did not align cleanly with either model. Estimators routinely made judgment calls or layered manual workarounds to bridge the gap. The result was inconsistent labor pricing across similar jobs, depending on which estimator built the estimate.

    What the New Three-Model Architecture Looks Like

    The 2026 update keeps the existing service-level and restoration/remodel models and adds a third tier — Large Restoration/Remodel — designed for mid-sized work that involves multiple trades, longer durations, and more complex coordination than a service-level job, but does not reach the scale of a full rebuild.

    The practical effect is that estimators now have a defensible, system-supported choice for the work that previously required manual workarounds. This produces more consistent labor pricing across a portfolio of jobs and reduces the audit exposure that comes from improvised efficiency selections.

    How to Choose Between the Three Models

    The right model selection depends on job characteristics. Verisk’s documentation provides detailed selection criteria, but the field-level shorthand most experienced estimators use looks like this:

    • Service-level — single-trade, short-duration, minimal coordination, typical small water mitigation or single-room work
    • Large Restoration/Remodel — multi-trade, multi-week duration, moderate coordination, mid-sized fire/water/mold or partial rebuild
    • Restoration/Remodel — full rebuild scope, long duration, full general contracting coordination, large losses

    The Large Restoration/Remodel tier is the one most likely to be under-used initially because it is new and unfamiliar. Operators should review recent estimates that fell awkwardly between the two prior models and identify which would now fit the new tier.

    Why Labor Efficiency Matters for Margin

    Labor efficiency in Xactimate is not a discount or a multiplier — it is a coefficient that adjusts labor hours based on the type of work being performed. The same line item carries different labor hours under different efficiency models, because a service-level repair really does take less coordination overhead than a large rebuild.

    Selecting the wrong efficiency model on a job can shift the estimated labor by 10 to 25 percent, which is the difference between a profitable job and a job that loses money on labor underestimation.

    How TPAs Are Adopting the New Model

    TPA programs typically take a quarter or two to fully integrate new Xactimate methodology updates into their audit and review workflows. During the transition, expect inconsistency across reviewers — some will accept Large Restoration/Remodel selections without question, others will challenge them. Documenting the reasoning for the model selection in the estimate notes is the best defense.

    What to Update in Your Estimating Process

    Three things to update now that the three-model architecture is live: estimating templates should include the new Large Restoration/Remodel option as a standard selection for qualifying scopes, training materials should be refreshed to cover when to use each tier, and audit checklists should include a labor efficiency model review as a standard line item.

    Frequently Asked Questions

    What changed in Xactimate’s 2026 labor efficiency update?

    Verisk expanded the labor efficiency architecture from two models to three by adding the Large Restoration/Remodel option. The update was presented in February 2026 and is designed to bridge the gap between service-level work and full rebuild scenarios for mid-sized restoration jobs.

    When should I use the Large Restoration/Remodel labor efficiency model?

    Use it for mid-sized jobs that involve multiple trades, multi-week duration, and moderate coordination but do not reach the scale of a full rebuild. Common examples include partial kitchen rebuilds after water loss, multi-room fire cleanup, and large mold remediation projects.

    How much can the wrong labor efficiency model affect my estimate?

    Selecting the wrong efficiency model can shift the estimated labor on a job by roughly 10 to 25 percent depending on the scope. On a $30,000 estimate, that is $3,000 to $7,500 of labor either over- or under-stated. The model choice is a meaningful margin lever, not a minor technical detail.

    Do TPAs accept the new Large Restoration/Remodel model?

    Yes, but adoption is uneven during the early months after the release. Some reviewers accept the new tier without question, others challenge it. The best practice is to document the reasoning for the model selection in the estimate notes so the choice is defensible if questioned.

    Where can I learn more about the 2026 Xactimate labor efficiency update?

    Verisk has published webinar content covering the updated labor efficiencies architecture in detail. The on-demand webinar is the authoritative source for the methodology and selection criteria. Operator-level training providers have also begun including the new tier in their X1 curricula.


  • Xactimate Pricing Methodology: How Verisk Builds the Numbers Restoration Estimates Live On

    Xactimate Pricing Methodology: How Verisk Builds the Numbers Restoration Estimates Live On

    Xactimate is the most widely used estimating platform in property restoration, and the prices behind it are not invented in a back room. Verisk publishes a documented pricing research methodology that explains how every line item price is built, updated, and released. For restoration operators, understanding the methodology is the foundation of defending your estimates to TPAs, adjusters, and customers.

    If you have not read the broader pricing context first, start with our restoration pricing and estimating master guide.

    The Research Footprint

    Verisk’s pricing research covers 468 geographic regions across the United States and Canada. The data is gathered from a network of more than 50,000 providers of materials, equipment, and labor, generating over 345,000 survey points each year. That research footprint is what makes Xactimate pricing the reference standard for property claims work — no other estimating platform publishes data at that scope.

    The practical takeaway for restoration operators is that Xactimate is not “national” pricing dressed up as local — it is genuinely localized to your service area, which means defending your estimate to an out-of-area adjuster is a matter of pointing them to the documented research for your region.

    How Cluster Analysis Sets the Number

    For each line item in each region, Verisk performs cluster analysis on the submitted price points. The methodology identifies the largest cluster of prices and selects a point within the appropriate range. The published price reflects the most common recently submitted price for that item in that region.

    This matters because it explains a recurring estimator complaint: “the price feels low compared to what I would charge.” The Xactimate price is not the highest price or the lowest price — it is the most common price for the same scope of work in the same region. Operators charging meaningfully more than the published price are signaling either a different scope, higher-quality work, or a pricing strategy that needs to be defended on its own terms.

    The Update Cycle: What Updates When

    Verisk updates Xactimate price lists monthly. Within that monthly cycle, the work is layered:

    • Vendor-specific pricing updates nightly for items sourced from individual vendor catalogs
    • Hourly billable labor rates update monthly based on the most recent regional research
    • General quote prices update monthly with the new price list release
    • Material and equipment components update when market analysis indicates a change is warranted

    The “when warranted” language is important. Not every line item is freshly surveyed every month — that would not be feasible. Verisk’s methodology is closer to “update when the market moves” than “update on a fixed calendar.” This is why two adjacent monthly price lists can look almost identical for stable categories, then jump for categories where lumber, drywall, or other inputs have shifted.

    What This Means for Your Estimating Templates

    Restoration companies pulling from Xactimate should refresh their internal estimating templates monthly when the new price list drops. Templates frozen at older pricing produce estimates that get reduced on submission because they are out of step with the current published research.

    The same applies to cash work where Xactimate pricing is used as a baseline reference. Cash estimates built off stale price lists give away margin to inflation that the published prices have already absorbed.

    How to Read a Verisk Methodology Document

    The Verisk pricing research methodology is publicly documented and worth reading at least once for anyone building estimates daily. The document explains how labor rates are weighted, how material prices are sourced, how equipment rentals are priced, and how the cluster analysis selects the published number. Knowing this language gives you a defensible vocabulary when an adjuster questions a line item.

    When Xactimate Pricing Is Not the Right Reference

    Xactimate pricing is appropriate for the vast majority of standard restoration scope. It is not the right reference for: highly specialized work outside the line item library, custom installations with no comparable market data, art and high-value content cleaning, or unusual structural work where the cluster analysis has thin data. For those scopes, custom estimates or specialty contractor pricing is the correct approach.

    Frequently Asked Questions

    How often does Verisk update Xactimate pricing?

    Verisk publishes price list updates monthly. Within that cycle, vendor-specific pricing updates nightly, hourly labor rates update monthly, and general line item prices update when market analysis warrants. The monthly release is the cadence operators should plan their template refreshes around.

    How many regions does Xactimate pricing cover?

    Xactimate covers 468 geographic regions across the United States and Canada, with pricing researched independently for each region. This is the reason the same line item can have meaningfully different prices in different markets — the published number is built from local research.

    How does Verisk decide what price to publish for a line item?

    Verisk uses cluster analysis on submitted price points across more than 50,000 providers and over 345,000 annual survey points. The methodology identifies the largest cluster of prices for a line item in a region and selects a representative point within that range. The published price reflects the most common recently submitted price.

    Why does my Xactimate price feel lower than my actual cost on some items?

    If the published price is consistently below your cost, you are likely either operating in a higher-cost niche than the cluster average, using a higher-quality material than the published reference, or carrying overhead that the published labor rate does not absorb. Each of these is a legitimate basis for a custom price modifier or a documented variance — not a reason to ignore the published price.

    Can I challenge a Verisk price if I think it is wrong for my market?

    Yes. Verisk accepts pricing feedback from contractors and uses contractor submissions as part of its survey input. Submitting documented evidence of a price discrepancy can influence the next monthly research cycle. Individual estimates can also include documented variances when the published price does not reflect the actual cost of the specific work.


  • Restoration Sales CRM and Pipeline Operations

    Restoration Sales CRM and Pipeline Operations

    Sales operations is the difference between a restoration company that grows on individual heroics and one that grows on system. Without CRM discipline, defined pipeline stages, weekly reporting cadence, and clean handoffs between sales and production, even talented salespeople cannot scale the business. With those systems in place, average salespeople produce above-average results because the operating environment supports them.

    This article is part of our restoration sales playbook.

    CRM Selection

    The CRM landscape for restoration companies splits into general-purpose systems (HubSpot, Pipedrive, Salesforce) and restoration-specific platforms (DASH, Encircle, ServiceTitan, Restoration eAcademy CRM, others). Each has trade-offs.

    General-purpose CRMs offer flexibility and strong sales features but require customization for restoration workflows. Restoration-specific platforms offer pre-built workflows and integrations with Xactimate and accounting systems but often have weaker sales functionality.

    For most restoration companies under $5M, a well-configured general-purpose CRM (HubSpot or Pipedrive) paired with restoration-specific job management software produces better results than trying to make a single tool do both jobs.

    Pipeline Stage Definitions

    Clear pipeline stage definitions make sales reporting useful. A workable residential restoration pipeline structure: New Lead → Appointment Set → Estimate Completed → Authorization Pending → Authorization Signed → In Production → Closed-Won. Each stage needs an explicit definition (what makes a lead “Appointment Set” vs “New Lead”) and an explicit advancement criterion.

    For commercial restoration, pipeline stages need to be longer-cycle: Suspect → Prospect → Qualified Conversation → Capability Presented → Pilot Discussed → MSA Negotiation → MSA Signed → Account Active. The longer cycle requires more granular stages so management can see where deals are stuck.

    Sales Activity Tracking

    Activity tracking matters because revenue is a lagging indicator. Leading indicators that should be tracked daily or weekly: appointments set, appointments held, estimates delivered, follow-up calls and texts completed, and authorization signatures collected. Reps who are missing revenue targets are usually missing activity targets weeks earlier — fixing the activity issue is faster than waiting for revenue to recover.

    Lead Source Attribution

    Every lead in the CRM needs a clean source field — Google Ads, LSA, organic, referral (with sub-source), lead vendor (with vendor name), repeat customer, etc. Without clean attribution, marketing budget allocation is guessing. The most common CRM hygiene failure is sloppy lead source data, which makes ROI analysis impossible.

    Weekly Sales Reporting

    The weekly sales report that drives behavior includes: leads received and lead-to-appointment conversion, appointments held and appointment-to-estimate conversion, estimates delivered and estimate-to-close rate, average ticket size by rep and by lead source, and pipeline value by stage with weighted forecast. The report should be reviewed by the sales team together every week, not buried in an email.

    Sales-to-Production Handoff

    The handoff from sales to production is where many restoration companies leak quality. Clean handoff requires standardized scope documentation, customer expectations clearly captured (timeline, communication preferences, special concerns), insurance information complete, and a defined moment when ownership transfers from sales to production with explicit acknowledgement from both sides.

    Sloppy handoffs produce production surprises, customer complaints, and over-budget jobs. Sales should be partially accountable for production outcomes through compensation structure to align incentives.

    Frequently Asked Questions

    What CRM do most restoration companies use?

    The CRM mix in restoration is fragmented. Common choices include HubSpot, Pipedrive, ServiceTitan, DASH, Encircle, and various restoration-specific platforms. There is no dominant industry standard. The right choice depends on company size, technical sophistication, and existing tool stack.

    How often should sales pipeline be updated in the CRM?

    Pipeline data should be updated daily by reps and reviewed weekly in management meetings. CRM data that is updated less than weekly produces unreliable forecasting and obscures emerging issues until they become critical.

    Should restoration sales reps own data entry or have admin support?

    Most restoration sales operations run more efficiently when reps own their own data entry, supported by mobile-friendly CRM tools that reduce friction. Outsourcing data entry to admin staff creates lag, errors, and accountability gaps. The exception: lead intake admins handling inbound calls and routing.

    What sales metrics matter most for restoration?

    The leading indicators that matter most are appointment-to-estimate conversion, estimate-to-close rate, average ticket, and lead source ROI. Lagging indicators like total revenue and gross profit by rep matter for compensation and forecasting but rarely surface fixable issues in time to course-correct.

    How do I get my sales team to actually use the CRM?

    CRM adoption is driven by three things: tools that are mobile-friendly and fast (no clunky desktop-only systems), management cadence that uses CRM data in every weekly meeting (so reps know it matters), and compensation tied to deals that exist in the CRM (no CRM record, no commission credit). Without all three, adoption stays low.


  • Closing Techniques for Restoration Sales: Emergency, Planned, and Commercial

    Closing Techniques for Restoration Sales: Emergency, Planned, and Commercial

    Closing in restoration sales is contextual. The technique that closes a 2am emergency water mitigation call at the kitchen table will not close a planned mold remediation project that involves comparison bids, and neither will close a commercial MSA negotiation. Effective restoration salespeople carry a small toolkit of closing techniques and the judgment to apply the right one to each situation.

    This article is part of our restoration sales playbook.

    The Assumptive Close (Emergency Mitigation)

    The assumptive close is the workhorse for emergency restoration sales. Rather than asking “Do you want to move forward?” — which invites delay — the rep transitions to logistics: “I’ll have the crew here in two hours with equipment. While we’re waiting, let me get this paperwork going so we can bill your insurance directly.” This works because in true emergencies the customer wants the problem solved, and the rep is simply removing friction.

    The assumptive close fails when the customer has not bought into the value yet — using it too early in the conversation triggers resistance.

    The Urgency Close (Time-Sensitive Damage)

    The urgency close uses the actual operational reality of restoration: secondary damage compounds rapidly. “If we wait another 24 hours, we’ll likely need to add demolition to the scope and the cost goes up significantly. Starting now keeps it contained at the current scope.” This works because it is true — restoration genuinely is time-sensitive — and reframes the decision as cost avoidance rather than spending.

    The Alternative Close (Commercial and Planned Work)

    The alternative close offers two acceptable paths rather than a yes/no decision: “Would you prefer we start Monday or next Wednesday?” or “Do you want us to handle the contents pack-out, or would you rather your team manage that piece?” This works because both options are progress; only refusal of the entire framing rejects the close.

    The Summary Close (Comparison Bid Situations)

    When the customer has explicitly mentioned getting other bids, the summary close walks back through everything that was just covered: “Let me make sure I have this right. You need [scope], you want it done by [date], you’re concerned about [issue], and you’re working with [insurance carrier]. Based on that, our scope at [price] covers everything we discussed and we can start [timeline]. Where does that leave us?” The summary creates a clear comparison framework against any competitor and surfaces remaining concerns directly.

    The Trial Close (Throughout the Conversation)

    Trial closes are temperature checks throughout the conversation rather than dedicated closing moves. Examples: “Does this scope match what you were thinking?” or “How does the timeline work for you?” These surface objections early when there is still room to handle them rather than letting concerns accumulate silently.

    The Pilot Close (Commercial New Logo)

    For commercial restoration sales, the pilot close shifts the decision from “do you want to give us all your work” to “would you give us one job to demonstrate our performance.” This dramatically reduces buyer risk and is often the only viable close for prospects without prior experience with the company. Successful pilots almost always lead to expanded relationships.

    When to Walk Away

    Sometimes the right close is no close. Walking away protects margin and reputation when: the customer demands pricing that puts the job below cost, the scope being requested is technically unsound (skipping critical drying or testing), the customer is signaling distrust that cannot be repaired, or the property condition is outside the company’s actual capability. Polite, confident exits (“I don’t think we’re the right fit for this project — best of luck”) preserve relationships for future opportunities.

    Frequently Asked Questions

    What is the most effective close in restoration sales?

    There is no single most effective close — different situations call for different approaches. The assumptive close dominates in emergency mitigation, the urgency close works for time-sensitive damage, the alternative close fits planned work, and the pilot close opens commercial accounts. The judgment to match technique to situation matters more than mastering any single close.

    How do I close without sounding pushy?

    Confidence comes from genuine belief that the recommendation is right for the customer. Salespeople who feel pushy usually do because they are not fully convinced of the value. Spending time deeply understanding the work and outcomes makes confident closing feel natural rather than aggressive.

    Should restoration salespeople create false urgency?

    No. Real urgency exists in most restoration scenarios — secondary damage, mold growth, structural compromise — and using it honestly is appropriate. Inventing urgency that does not exist erodes trust and damages the company’s reputation when the customer figures it out later.

    What do I do when the customer says “send me a quote and I’ll think about it”?

    Resist sending a quote and disappearing. Either close the conversation in person (“Let me walk you through it now while I’m here”), schedule a specific follow-up call within 24 hours, or politely surface the actual concern: “I’m happy to send something — what’s the main thing you’d want to think through?”

    How do I close commercial restoration deals when there is a buying committee?

    Identify the actual decision-maker and the influencers, present to all of them when possible, and propose a pilot engagement to demonstrate performance rather than pushing for an immediate MSA. Most commercial closes happen in stages over months — the goal of any single meeting is to advance to the next stage.