Join our upcoming webinar "Can you rely on measured data?" on October 27, 2026 at 10:00 AM CET. Register here 

Comparison setup

We compared six tools using the same six test sites — chosen for climate diversity, from arid desert to humid tropics — and the same four PV system configurations at every site. Wherever possible, we also matched input data and model selections, so the comparison isolates differences in methodology rather than configuration.

PV simulatorType
Solargis EvaluateCommercial, cloud-based
Solargis ProspectCommercial, cloud-based
PVsystCommercial, desktop
System Advisor Model (SAM)Free, desktop (NREL)
pvlibOpen-source Python library
SolarFarmerCommercial, desktop and cloud (DNV)

Quantitative results cover pvlib, PVsyst, and SAM against Solargis Evaluate. Solargis Prospect and SolarFarmer appear only in the methodology-based comparisons.

The comparison covers the full simulation chain: solar and weather inputs plus scene setup, optical simulation (irradiance, shading, module losses), and electrical simulation (DC and AC conversion through to the grid connection).

Results summary#

At the grid connection point — the number that determines a project's reported yield — median bias against Solargis Evaluate stays within about 1% for all three simulators:

−0.93%

pvlib

−1.09%

PVsyst

−0.45%

SAM

Note: Solargis Evaluate is used as the reference point because the comparison needs one. This doesn't mean Evaluate is the more accurate simulator of the group — it means the study measures how the others diverge from it, not which one is closer to the truth.

That final agreement is closer than it looks. Each simulator gets there through two large deviations of opposite sign that mostly cancel out: an upward drift through the optical chain, reversed by a downward step at DC conversion. A tool that agrees with Solargis Evaluate to within 1% at the grid connection point can still differ by 2–3% earlier in the chain — and agreement also narrows sharply on projects with tracking, complex terrain, or difficult horizons.

Where simulators differ

Beyond the numbers, the tools differ structurally in what they model and how:

CapabilitySolargis EvaluatepvlibPVsystSAMSolarFarmer
Built-in solar and weather databaseYesNoNoNoNo
Native resolution15-min, 1-minHourly or sub-hourlyHourly or sub-hourlyHourly or sub-hourlyHourly or sub-hourly
Shading computation3D ray tracingView factorView factorView factorView factor
Built-in soiling modelYesYesNoNoNo
Built-in snow modelYesYesNoYesNo
Integrated reporting and analysisYesNoYesYesYes