Choosing the best commissioning software is essential for project success, but with options like CxPlanner and Facility Grid, how do you know which one fits your needs? As commissioning professionals who have used both platforms in real-world projects, we at CxPlanner aim to share an objective, side-by-side comparison to help you understand key differences, from usability to advanced features.
While this comparison reflects our hands-on experience with each software, we've made every effort to keep the analysis fair and focused on what matters most: giving you the tools to enhance efficiency and effectiveness in your commissioning work. Explore the features, benefits, and potential drawbacks of both solutions below to see which might suit your workflow best.
The commissioning software market is a specialized space with a few major players. Facility Grid represents an older, established solution, while CxPlanner offers a modern, streamlined alternative.
This comparison evaluates key aspects such as user interface, usability, design, and other practical elements, because the right commissioning software should make your job easier! We don't want to click and scroll, we want to work efficiently with the commissioning process!
We have summarized the key findings when we have used and compared CxPlanner and Facility Grid in the chart below.
General conclusion from the commissioning comparison
We are commissioning professionals, so we know the way around a real Cx project. We have used both CxPlanner and Facility Grid in real projects, and we have compared them in a real-life scenario.
Both software does the job, but there's a major difference in the approach and workflows, and also in the features available. Facility Grid has a strong integration to Procore, where as CxPlanner provides modern tools such as gantt chars, design review, and AI.
Facility Grid is more used globally, and you might already stumpled upon it. But CxPlanner is the new kid on the block, and it's designed by commissioning professionals for commissioning professionals.
| Feature | CxPlanner | Facility Grid |
|---|---|---|
| Test Structure | Flexible, customizable, designed for complex projects | Rigid, predefined structure |
| Asset Management | Customizable, easy navigation, percentage tracking | Limited, hard to navigate, no percentage tracking |
| Issue Management | Quick access, fast responses, intuitive UI | Slow navigation, multiple clicks, poor image handling |
| Mobile Support | Responsive, works across devices, no app needed | Poor mobile experience, requires app |
| Pricing | Flexible, free for idle projects, cost-effective | High base cost, extra charges for users and projects |
Test Structure and Overview
How your commissioning software allows you to structure your tests is crucial to ensure efficient workflows. Imagine scrolling and clicking around to find the needed test - that's just bad!
With our testing we experienced that CxPlanner gives you the freedom to build your tests in a way that best fits your project, while Facility Grid limits you to a more rigid, predefined structure.
CxPlanner
Build a project the way you want. No limits on structure and easy to use forsimple and complex projects.
CxPlanner's flexible structure allows for building structures on test type, system, sub-systems, etc.
Read more hereFacility Grid
Predefined and locked structure, limiting flexibility and customization.
Facility Grid's structure may be restrictive for larger projects or projects in other industries, e.g. Data centers.
Summary of comparison
- Flexible Project Setup:
Build your project as you see fit. Organize tests your way, including IST, levels for data centers, and more. - No Sidebar Limitations:
Avoid rigid checklists, PFVs, and FPTs. Create new test structures and modules with the overview and name you need! - Scalable for Projects:
You can scale the platform and projects up and down, whether you need it for a single Fancoil Unit, or a mega complex project with 10,000 assets.
- Rigid Structure:
Predefined test formats with limited flexibility. It's called Checklist, PFV and FPT - but what if I need Levels for data center? Or an IST area? - No Client Customization:
Cannot adapt the structure to specific project needs and scopes. - Limited by list view:
Everything is seen as lists, e.g. one item, next item, etc. No way to build structures.
Asset Structure
Managing assets effectively is key to tracking progress. An asset is an essential “block” in our commissioning process. You are attaching checklists and issues to assets. And often you will receive large Excel lists with asset names.
Facility Grid's options to customize the asset overview is limited to an “Equipment type” and the “Equipment”. That will create lists you need to scroll through, and there's no quick filtering/searching. Whereas CxPlanner provides a fully customizable, intuitive asset structure that adapts to your needs as you go.
CxPlanner
Build custom asset structures with tree or list views. Group by category or system with real-time filtering and sorting.
CxPlanner provides complete flexibility in asset management with advanced features and custom data.
Read more hereFacility Grid
Asset management is limited to list views, with restrictions on how many items you can see or interact with at once.
Facility Grid's limited asset structure may hinder managing large or complex asset lists and requires many clicks.
Summary of comparison
- Customizable Asset Structure:
Build in list or tree format; by using a tree structure you can easily group by category or system and create quick navigation methods. - Efficient Navigation:
Collapse groups for easy overview; filter and sort quickly. Search in 10,000 assets in just 200ms. - True Progress Tracking:
Get percentage completion at any level (groups, systems, equipment). That allows you to keep track of the actual progress. - Modern, Intuitive Interface:
Fully customizable columns and data display. - Secure tracking and signatures:
Integrate all sign offs with a signature to ensure valid history.
- List-Only Format:
Fixed list structure, requiring more scrolling. - Limited Asset View:
Can only view up to 1,000 assets per page. - Poor Navigation:
No option to open assets in new tabs due to inline JavaScript. - Percentage completion but with a catch:
The calculated percentage does not take into consideration that items can fail, so a “failed item” counts upward to 100%.
Issue Management and Workflows
Efficient issue management is essential for minimizing delays. CxPlanner offers a streamlined workflow with fast access to issues and easy management of data. If an item in a checklist fails, well, CxPlanner automatically creates the issue.
On the other hand, Facility Grid's workflows tend to be slower, requiring more navigation and multiple clicks to manage issues effectively, and checklist items (line items) are not connected to issues in the punch list.
CxPlanner
Issues open instantly in modals, with all relevant data, comments, and images visible at once. Quick and responsive interactions.
CxPlanner's smooth issue handling makes managing workflows seamless and efficient.
Read more hereFacility Grid
Opening issues requires navigating multiple pages, making it harder to track and manage workflows efficiently.
Facility Grid's workflow handling may feel slow and cumbersome for day-to-day use.
Summary of comparison
- Quick Issue Access:
1-click issue opening via a modal; no need to switch screens. - Comprehensive Overview:
See all comments and images in a modern, chronological layout inspired by popular messaging platforms like Facebook Messenger and WhatsApp. - Fast Responses:
Respond with comments or photos in just one click. - Lightning-Fast Load Times:
Never wait when opening an issue. Issues load in just 250 ms. - Integrated punch list:
Issues are automatically created from checklists and integrated fully with all the tools. Mark issues on drawings etc.
- Cumbersome Navigation:
Opening an issue requires navigating to a new page. - Limited Image Viewing:
Images aren't displayed in the comment log; each must be opened individually. - Slow Workflow:
Adding comments requires multiple popups, and issues take 1.5 seconds to load.
Mobile and Tablet Compatibility
Mobile compatibility is a must for modern teams who work on the go. CxPlanner delivers a seamless experience across desktop, tablet, and mobile, while Facility Grid struggles to adapt to mobile devices effectively.
Note: Facility Grid provides a mobile application that needs to be installed on your device, whereas CxPlanner is fully responsive and works in your browser. See section on mobile app below.
CxPlanner
Fully optimized for mobile, tablet, and desktop without the need for a dedicated app. Pages automatically adapt to your device.
CxPlanner is fully responsive, making it easy to use across any device.
Facility Grid
The platform doesn't scale well to mobile devices, often displaying desktop views that are hard to navigate on smaller screens.
Facility Grid's lack of mobile optimization may frustrate users working on the go.
Summary of comparison
- Responsive Design:
Works seamlessly across desktop, tablet, and mobile. - App Optional:
Full functionality without needing to download an app. - Automatic Adaptation:
Pages automatically adjust to your device.
- Poor Mobile Support:
Website does not scale to mobile devices; small fonts and cramped layout on mobile view.
Mobile App
Both CxPlanner and Facility Grid offer mobile apps, but CxPlanner's app offers more flexibility and a faster, more user-friendly experience. Facility Grid requires additional manual syncing and offers fewer options for annotating and managing data on the go.
CxPlanner
Access via browser or app with seamless offline support. Data syncs automatically, so you never lose progress.
CxPlanner's mobile solution provides flexibility and reliable offline support.
Facility Grid
Requires manual data syncs. Navigation and data handling on the mobile app can feel slow and cumbersome.
Facility Grid's mobile experience lacks the polish and automation of CxPlanner.
Summary of comparison
- Browser or App Access:
Access via browser or dedicated apps (apps not required). - Offline Support:
Projects sync automatically; data is always updated and secure. - Advanced Photo Handling:
Take photos with direct annotation features. - High Performance:
Fast navigation and syncing, with smooth offline functionality.
- Download-Only Access:
Requires downloading projects locally (which can take several minutes). - Limited Photo Editing:
No markup or annotation options on photos. - Manual Syncing:
Changes must be manually synced to the cloud, otherwise they are not saved.
Data Ownership
When using commissioning software, it's vital to maintain ownership of your data. CxPlanner ensures you have complete control, offering multiple export options, while Facility Grid's limited export features might restrict your flexibility.
CxPlanner
You fully own your data. Easily export to open formats or take backups. No restrictions when moving platforms.
CxPlanner's open data policy ensures you have complete control and flexibility.
Facility Grid
Data export options are limited to PDF, with slow report generation times.
Facility Grid's data export limitations may lock you into their platform.
Summary of comparison
- You Own Your Data:
Bring Your Own Data (BYOD); export and download data freely. - Flexible Export Options:
Easily export your data to multiple open formats. - Backup Ready:
Download your entire data set for local backups anytime.
- Limited Data Access:
Can only export PDFs of most data, but that is not open data and limits the user working with data after. - Slow Report Generation:
Exporting reports (even with minimal content) takes minutes. - Data Lock-In:
Difficult to migrate your data to another platform.
Pricing
Cost is a major factor in selecting the right software. CxPlanner provides a flexible, affordable pricing model, whereas Facility Grid's higher base cost and additional charges make it less competitive for larger projects.
CxPlanner
Flexible, practitioner-friendly pricing. Free test projects, and no cost for idle or closed projects.
CxPlanner's pricing model is transparent and scales with your project needs.
Facility Grid
High starting price with bulk billing for extra projects. Some charges are per user, adding to the cost.
Facility Grid's pricing structure can quickly become expensive for larger teams or multiple projects.
Summary of comparison
- Tailored Pricing:
Designed by practitioners for practitioners; pricing based on your business and projects. - Flexible Usage:
Free for test projects, idle projects, and closed projects. - Cost-Effective:
5 medium/large active projects = $430 (USD), with unlimited free users.
- High Base Cost:
Expensive upfront cost. - Additional Charges:
Are you exceeding your project limit you will automatically be bulk billed for extra projects beyond your license. - Per-User Fees:
May incur costs per additional user. - Price Example:
10 medium/large active projects = $1,950 (USD).
Gantt / Timeline
Project scheduling and task management often require a Gantt or timeline view. CxPlanner includes this functionality, helping you track the timeline of tasks, while Facility Grid lacks this feature.
CxPlanner
Integrated Gantt charts with seamless MS Project file imports to track project timelines and activities.
CxPlanner's Gantt integration is a valuable tool for complex project management.
Facility Grid
No Gantt chart or timeline support for project activities.
Facility Grid lacks Gantt timeline features, a major drawback for project tracking.
Summary of comparison
- Fully Integrated Gantt Timeline:
View project activities and all test activities in one place. - Seamless Import:
Import timelines from MS Project files effortlessly to get started quickly. - Subcontractor Assistance:
Help subcontractors keep track of deadlines and tasks.
- No Gantt Timelines:
Facility Grid does not offer a Gantt or timeline feature.
Floorplans and Design Review
Visual tools, like floorplans and design reviews, can enhance the commissioning process and specially ease the workflows when you need to communicate or find an issue.
CxPlanner integrates these features, allowing you to perform thorough design reviews, while Facility Grid lacks these capabilities.
CxPlanner
Integrate drawings into issues and checklists, allowing markups for clear design review and project tracking.
CxPlanner's floorplan integration enhances project oversight and communication.
Facility Grid
No support for floorplan markups or design reviews within the platform.
Facility Grid's lack of floorplan support is a significant limitation for design-focused projects.
Summary of comparison
- Integrated Drawings:
Attach and markup drawings directly in issues and checklists, making it easy to find issues later. - Complete Design Review:
Perform a full design review during design phases or with shop drawings. - Automatic Issue Creation:
Design review comments automatically create issues and send notifications.
- No Floorplans or Design Review:
Facility Grid does not support integrating floorplans or conducting design reviews.
Conclusion
Conclusion:
When comparing CxPlanner to Facility Grid, it's clear that CxPlanner offers greater flexibility, better performance, and modern user experiences that streamline the commissioning process. From customizable structures to faster workflows and superior mobile functionality, CxPlanner is designed to meet the demands of modern commissioning professionals.