Softwr

Construction · head to head

Sitemark vs Trunk Tools

Sitemark logo

Sitemark

Construction

Drone-based progress tracking, quality control and commissioning built specifically for solar farms

From
On request
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite
Trunk Tools logo

Trunk Tools

Construction

Answers questions from a project document set with citations, so field staff stop hunting drawings

From
On request
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite

The short version

  • Each has a real cost: Sitemark it only does solar, so a mixed renewables portfolio still needs a second platform for wind, storage and substations, and the consolidation argument for buying it collapses.; Trunk Tools nothing about pricing is published, and because it is quoted by project rather than by seat, the cost of standardising it across a portfolio of jobs is hard to model before a sales process
  • They diverge on capability: Sitemark covers Construction progress tracking, Trunk Tools covers Question answering with citations.
  • Prices and features above were last checked on 1 September 2026.

Where they differ

Only the attributes on which Sitemark and Trunk Tools actually diverge.

Attributes where Sitemark and Trunk Tools differ
AttributeSitemarkTrunk Tools

Identical on both: starting price (On request), pricing model (quote), free tier (No), platforms (Web, iOS, Android), user rating (Not yet rated), category (Construction).

What each one covers

Drawn from each product's published feature list. An absence here means we hold no record of it - not that the product lacks it.

Only in Sitemark

  • Construction progress tracking
  • As-built versus design comparison
  • Thermographic inspection
  • Defect localisation
  • Commissioning workflows
  • Ticketing and work management
  • Portfolio dashboards
  • Drone and robotics ingestion

Only in Trunk Tools

  • Question answering with citations
  • Text message interface
  • Submittal review
  • RFI drafting
  • Schedule agent
  • Drawing and specification ingestion
  • Change awareness

What people use each for

The jobs each tool is most often brought in to do.

Sitemark

  • An EPC contractor on a multi-hundred-megawatt ground-mount plant that must report weekly installed counts to a lender and cannot do it by walking the rowsnot Trunk Tools
  • An asset owner accepting a plant at provisional acceptance who needs documented evidence that what was built matches the issued design before signingnot Trunk Tools
  • An operations team running annual thermographic inspection across a portfolio, wanting defects mapped to module positions so a technician goes straight to the faultnot Trunk Tools
  • A developer comparing defect and underperformance rates across contractors and module suppliers to inform the next procurement roundnot Trunk Tools

Trunk Tools

  • A superintendent on a data centre project who needs to know the required fire rating of a specific partition type without leaving the decknot Sitemark
  • A project engineer reviewing 300 submittals who wants conflicts against the specification flagged before the architect sees themnot Sitemark
  • A contractor whose RFIs are being rejected as already answered in the specification and wants the document checked firstnot Sitemark
  • A team that has just received a revised drawing set and needs to know which in-progress work is now affectednot Sitemark

Where each one falls short

Documented limitations, not opinions. Every one is a constraint you would hit in normal use.

Sitemark

  • It only does solar, so a mixed renewables portfolio still needs a second platform for wind, storage and substations, and the consolidation argument for buying it collapses.
  • Pricing is quoted on site count and unpublished variables, which penalises owners of many small distributed assets relative to one operator of a single large plant with the same total capacity.
  • You still need someone to fly the site, and Sitemark does not remove the drone operator cost, permits or airspace constraints; it monetises the data after the flight.
  • Automated progress counting depends on a clean, current design layout, and on projects where the layout changes weekly the comparison generates false deviations that erode trust in the numbers.
  • Thermographic defect detection needs the plant producing at sufficient irradiance, so inspection windows in northern latitudes are narrow and a missed window pushes findings into the next season.

Trunk Tools

  • Nothing about pricing is published, and because it is quoted by project rather than by seat, the cost of standardising it across a portfolio of jobs is hard to model before a sales process
  • Answer quality is bounded entirely by the discipline of the underlying document control, and on a project with stale drawing revisions it will cite superseded sheets with the same confidence as current ones
  • It is an overlay on Procore or Autodesk rather than a system of record, so a contractor is now paying two vendors for the same document set and depends on the integration continuing to be maintained
  • The company is young and the product category is new, so there is little independent long-run evidence on accuracy, and a contractor putting field decisions on it should build its own verification sampling rather than trust vendor claims
  • Answers with citations do not carry contractual weight; an RFI response or a specification still governs, so the tool reduces search time without reducing the contractual review burden

Pricing, plan by plan

Sitemark

On request
  • Sitemark Construction$undefined/year
    • Priced on number of sites and other variables
    • Progress tracking across construction activities
    • As-built versus design quality control
  • Sitemark Operations$undefined/year
    • Thermographic inspection and defect detection
    • Ticketing and work management
    • Portfolio dashboards

Trunk Tools

On request
  • Trunk Tools$undefined/year
    • Quoted by project, user count and modules taken
    • Pilot projects commonly priced separately from an enterprise agreement
    • Document ingestion and integration setup scoped per customer

Which should you pick?

Choose Sitemark if

  • You need construction progress tracking.
  • You work on Web, iOS, Android.
  • You also want as-built versus design comparison.
Sitemark review

Choose Trunk Tools if

  • You need question answering with citations.
  • You work on Web, iOS, Android.
  • You also want text message interface.
Trunk Tools review

Questions people ask

Is Sitemark or Trunk Tools better?
Neither clearly leads. Sitemark starts at On request and Trunk Tools at On request, and user ratings are close enough to be indistinguishable. Choose on capability and platform support.
Which is cheaper, Sitemark or Trunk Tools?
Sitemark starts at On request and Trunk Tools at On request.
Does Sitemark or Trunk Tools run on more platforms?
Both run on Web, iOS, Android, so platform support will not decide this one for you.
What is Sitemark best used for?
Sitemark is most often used for an epc contractor on a multi-hundred-megawatt ground-mount plant that must report weekly installed counts to a lender and cannot do it by walking the rows, an asset owner accepting a plant at provisional acceptance who needs documented evidence that what was built matches the issued design before signing, an operations team running annual thermographic inspection across a portfolio, wanting defects mapped to module positions so a technician goes straight to the fault, a developer comparing defect and underperformance rates across contractors and module suppliers to inform the next procurement round. Of those, an epc contractor on a multi-hundred-megawatt ground-mount plant that must report weekly installed counts to a lender and cannot do it by walking the rows and an asset owner accepting a plant at provisional acceptance who needs documented evidence that what was built matches the issued design before signing are not what Trunk Tools is typically brought in for.
What can Sitemark do that Trunk Tools cannot?
Sitemark covers Construction progress tracking, As-built versus design comparison, Thermographic inspection, Defect localisation. Trunk Tools covers Question answering with citations, Text message interface, Submittal review, RFI drafting.

Answered from the vendors’ own pages

Sitemark: Is Sitemark priced per megawatt?

No. Sitemark states pricing is based on number of sites and other variables. Ask explicitly how a portfolio of small sites is treated, because per-site pricing is unkind to distributed assets.

Trunk Tools: Does it replace Procore?

No. It reads from Procore or Autodesk Construction Cloud and adds retrieval and review on top. You still pay for the document platform.

Sitemark: Do we have to use Sitemark drone pilots?

No. It accepts data from third-party drone operators, which lets you keep an existing flight contractor.

Trunk Tools: What does it cost?

Trunk Tools does not publish pricing. Expect a quote scoped by project, users and which modules you take.

Sitemark: Does it cover anything other than solar?

No. It is built specifically around solar plant structures and defect types.

Trunk Tools: Can it be wrong?

Yes. It cites its source, which lets you check, but if the document set contains superseded drawings it will answer from them. Document control discipline is a prerequisite, not an optional extra.

Sitemark: Can we export our data?

Yes, orthomosaics, defect lists and reports export. Confirm the format and whether historical inspections remain accessible after a subscription lapses.

Trunk Tools: Can field staff use it without the app?

Yes. TrunkText answers questions by text message, which is the main reason foremen adopt it.

Sitemark: Where is the company based?

Leuven, Belgium, with customers across Europe, the Middle East, Asia and the Americas.

Share

Related pages

More on Sitemark

More on Trunk Tools

Keep looking

Other head to heads