Skip to content

    Sherpa is now Navorda. Read the announcement

    Navorda
    Compare

    Navorda and the alternatives, compared honestly

    Navorda is not the right tool for every job. These pages set out, as fairly as we can, what the alternatives do well and where Navorda genuinely differs — so you can rule it in or out quickly.

    Last updated

    Why "permits and land" is a hard shopping list

    The market splits in two. Land systems — Quorum, Pandell, IFS (including iLandMan), PakEnergy — treat the agreement as the primary object: leases, options, easements, obligations and payments, tracked as a live ledger with alerts. Execution platforms — Sitetracker and its peers — treat the site as the primary object: a repeatable deployment workflow from assessment through construction. Both are mature. But a land system will not give you permit-milestone control against an approved baseline, and an execution platform generally treats land as a folder of documents rather than a live obligation ledger. Buyers who need permits and land together usually end up owning two systems and reconciling them by hand. Two more families sit beside them: origination and design tools — Glint Solar, LandGate — that find and shape a site before it is a project, and operations platforms — Power Factors — that take over once it produces.

    Land systems

    Quorum · Pandell · IFS / iLandMan · PakEnergy · Gridlync

    The agreement is the primary object. Leases, options and easements tracked as a live obligation ledger, with expiry logic, alerts and payment automation. Mature, deep, and mostly North American.

    The trade-off: Will not give you permit-milestone control against an approved baseline.

    Execution platforms

    Sitetracker · Matidor

    The site is the primary object. A repeatable deployment workflow from assessment through construction and into operations, applied at volume across many sites and industries.

    The trade-off: Generally treats land as a folder of documents, not a live obligation ledger.

    Development platforms

    Navorda

    The project is the primary object. Land, permits, baselines, risks, ownership and project finance in one governed model, so securing a plot and slipping a permit are visible in the same place.

    The trade-off: Smaller vendor, European focus, and not built for high-volume construction rollout.

    Head to head

    Each page sets out what the vendor does, in their own sourced words, then where Navorda differs — and when you should buy the other one.

    Also worth considering

    Vendors we have not written a full comparison for, but that belong on a serious shortlist.

    • Radian Digital

      Radian Generation's software platform — lighter-weight, aimed at early-stage development: permitting, land acquisition and interconnection milestones.

    • Matidor

      Map-based project management, well suited to geographically dispersed sites with significant field activity.

    A note on research: most "top 10 renewable energy software" articles are published by vendors in the category. That does not make them useless, but the rankings are marketing rather than analysis — including, in fairness, this page and our own entry in that genre, disclosure included. Weight independent reference customers and your own trial above any list.

    Frequently asked questions

    The closest alternatives fall into three groups. Land and obligation systems — Quorum On Demand Land, Pandell Land & GIS, IFS Land for Renewables and the newer Gridlync — treat the agreement as the primary object. Execution platforms — Sitetracker, Matidor and Radian Digital — treat the site and its deployment workflow as the primary object. And QBi Solutions, like Navorda a Spanish vendor, is a development-platform peer that spans the full asset lifecycle from business development and M&A through operation. A different animal entirely is LandGate — US parcel data and a land marketplace for siting rather than a workflow system. Navorda governs land, permitting, baselines, risk and ownership in one model, concentrated on the pre-construction lifecycle, with a European focus.

    Land management software is built around the agreement: leases, options and easements, with expiry dates, obligations and payments tracked as a ledger. Project development software is built around the project: whether it reaches ready-to-build on time, with permitting modelled per jurisdiction, schedule measured against an approved baseline, and risk quantified. Buyers who need both — which is most developers tracking permits and land together — often end up owning one of each and reconciling them by hand.

    Most of the established land systems state a US or North American focus: Quorum On Demand Land is described as serving U.S. solar, wind and storage; Pandell's base is Canadian and US oil, gas, pipelines, utilities and renewables. Sitetracker deploys globally with a strong North American installed base, IFS is a global vendor, and PakEnergy states its software is built, supported and hosted in the USA. Glint Solar (Oslo) and Navorda are the European vendors on these pages. Navorda is built for European multi-country portfolios, with permitting modelled per jurisdiction and Spanish Catastro GML parsed natively, and currently manages 300+ projects across 14+ European countries.

    No, and the individual comparison pages say so explicitly. If you are deploying high volumes of near-identical sites, Sitetracker is the better fit. If lease administration and royalty payments are the whole job in North America, Pandell or Quorum are deeper. If you already run IFS, its land module is lower friction. If your procurement requires ISO 27001 or SOC 2 attestation today, several of these vendors hold certifications that Navorda does not yet.

    No — it is written by CabSan Solutions, which builds Navorda, so it is an informed but interested source. What we can commit to is that every claim about another vendor is drawn from their own public material and linked, that each page states plainly when the alternative is the better choice, and that we correct errors when they are reported to info@cabsansolutions.com. Verify anything decision-critical with the vendor directly.

    Test it against your own portfolio

    Thirty minutes with your plots, your permit processes and your ownership structures will tell you more than any comparison table — including this one.

    Take the 5-minute assessment