Best Solar Proposal Software France: 2026 Guide

Every French solar proposal written before 5 June 2026 contained two revenue lines that no longer exist. The prime à l’autoconsommation was abolished for new installations under the revised S21 arrêté, and surplus buyback for new applications fell to 1.1 centimes per kWh excluding tax. A great many templates, spreadsheets and imported platforms still carry both. The result is quotes promising an upfront bonus the customer will not receive and export revenue roughly twenty times larger than what will actually arrive. This guide compares the platforms French installers should shortlist now that the value case has moved entirely into self-consumption.

Short version. The best solar proposal software for French installers in 2026 is SurgePV, because it models hourly self-consumption and battery dispatch against post-reform rates and generates the customer document from the same design record. PVsyst is the bankable simulation reference with no proposal layer. Aurora assumes US net metering, which France has never operated.

For the design-side comparison see our best solar design software France guide, and the global solar proposal software ranking for the category without the local lens.

The Two Lines That Have To Come Out Of Your Template

The awkward part is that this is not a slow drift into obsolescence. It happened on a single date, and quotes issued the week before were correct. Any installer with a template that was accurate in May is now issuing documents that are wrong in a way a customer can verify with one search.

The replacement structure is simpler than what it replaces:

The document gets shorter and more honest. It also gets harder to write with a tool that cannot simulate self-consumption hourly, because the central claim is no longer “here is your generation” but “here is the share of it you will actually use.”

Show The Export Line, Small As It Is

There is a temptation to drop the export revenue line entirely on the grounds that a EUR 50 figure looks unserious next to a five-figure installation cost.

Include it anyway, for three reasons.

It pre-empts the question. A customer who does not see an export line will ask what happens to surplus, and the answer is better given in writing than improvised on a doorstep.

It makes your argument for you. A line reading “4,680 kWh exported, worth EUR 51” is the clearest possible demonstration that surplus is not where the money is, which is exactly the point you need the customer to accept before they will consider a smaller array or a battery.

It protects you against the competitor who inflates it. If a rival quote shows meaningful export revenue, a customer holding your itemised figure can see which of you is working from current rules.

The Objection You Will Get, And How To Answer It

Because pre-reform connections keep their tariffs for twenty years, France now has a large installed base whose owners quote genuinely excellent paybacks. Neighbours, forums and any article written before June describe economics that were real and are no longer available.

This objection will arrive in nearly every French sales conversation for the next several years. It is worth addressing in the proposal itself rather than leaving it to the salesperson, because a written explanation is more credible than a verbal one and because the alternative is losing jobs to whoever quotes the old numbers.

The framing that works is factual and brief. Connection requests validated by Enedis before 5 June 2026 retain the previous arrangements for twenty years. Yours will not, and any quote that shows otherwise is either out of date or optimistic. Then move directly to what does still work, which is displacing retail import.

What Still Belongs In The Document

A priced storage option. Not as an appendix. Under current rates a battery converts near-worthless surplus into full-retail avoided import, so it belongs in the main comparison with its own payback.

NF C 15-712-1, NF C 15-100 and Consuel. Naming the standards and the attestation requirement distinguishes a planned installation from a price.

Site-specific yield. France spans a wide latitude range, and the gap between Lille and Marseille changes the self-consumption balance rather than just the annual total.

The Six Platforms French Installers Should Evaluate

1. SurgePV, the integrated pick

Hourly self-consumption analysis, battery dispatch modelling, post-reform tariff logic, French standards library, and white-label proposals with e-signature in 9 languages including French, generated from the same design record. $1,299 to $1,899 per user per year.

2. PVsyst

Bankable simulation for large ground-mount and commercial work, frequently named by lenders. No proposal layer and no French incentive logic. See our PVsyst alternative review.

3. PV*SOL

Strong European residential and small commercial modelling with good self-consumption tooling. Desktop-based with partial proposal capability. Our PV*SOL alternative guide covers the trade-offs.

4. OpenSolar

Free, fast, and produces a decent customer-facing document. Weaker on the hourly self-consumption and storage modelling the reform made essential. See our OpenSolar alternative comparison.

5. Aurora Solar

Capable residential design and proposals built around US net metering, which France does not operate. See our Aurora Solar alternative comparison.

6. Spreadsheets plus a yield tool

Common in smaller French practices, and the single most likely place an abolished prime is still being subtracted from a customer’s total.

France Solar Proposal Software Comparison

Worked Example: Three Ways To Quote The Same Lyon Household

An illustrative calculation, not a specific customer project. Inputs: household consuming 4,000 kWh a year, usable roof supporting 6 kWp, roughly 7,200 kWh annual generation at that size, 35% self-consumption without storage rising to about 70% with a battery.

Column A is what a stale template produces and it is simply wrong. Column B is honest and will look worse than column A to a customer comparing quotes, which is the commercial problem the reform created for careful installers.

Column C is the answer to that problem. Doubling self-consumption roughly doubles the avoided-import benefit, which is the only benefit that still exists. Whether the battery cost justifies it depends on the household’s evening demand and on hardware pricing, and that is a calculation to run rather than a claim to make. But an installer who can only offer columns A and B is choosing between dishonesty and a weak quote, and column C is how you avoid that choice.

Who Should Choose What

• Choose SurgePV if you need post-reform tariff logic, hourly self-consumption and storage priced in the same document.
• Choose PVsyst where a lender names it on commercial or ground-mount work, paired with separate quoting.
• Choose PV*SOL if your team is desktop-based and does detailed European residential modelling.
• Avoid Aurora and any pre-June template. One assumes a scheme France never had, the other a scheme France no longer has.

After signing, pipeline and follow-up sit in a CRM. QuickEstimate takes the handoff from SurgePV by API.

The Bottom Line

The French proposal lost two revenue lines in June 2026 and has not been rewritten in most offices.

• Delete the prime and reprice the export. Both were correct in May and neither applies to a new installation now.
• Show the small export figure anyway. It proves the point you need the customer to accept before they will consider storage.
• Answer the neighbour’s-payback objection in writing. Pre-June connections keep old rates for twenty years, and that comparison will come up in every conversation.