Jobber vs AccuLynx
Feature-by-feature and cost side-by-side for your team size. Pricing as of October 2026.
Jobber vs Housecall ProAccuLynx vs JobNimbusAspire vs LMNFieldRoutes vs PestPacServiceTitan vs ServiceTrade
8 users
$42k
Jobber
Best for: Tighter books & small residential crews
Usability: not yet tested
VS
AccuLynx
Best for: Roofing CRM, production, and insurance restoration
Usability: not yet tested
Quote only
Software is quote only; card fees below are modeled from published rates where available.
Quote only
Card-processing rates
| Channel | Rate | Status |
|---|---|---|
| In-person (tap / swipe / chip) | 2.7% + $0.30 | Published |
| Online invoice | 2.9% + $0.30 | Published |
| Amex / commercial / keyed | 2.9% + $0.30 | Not published separately — modeled at the online rate |
| Channel | Rate | Status |
|---|---|---|
| Card processing | Not published | No processing rate on the pricing page (checked 2026-10-05) |
Money
✓Included
Invoicing & estimates
Included✓
✓Included
Built-in card payments
Add-on+
✓Connect+
QuickBooks sync
Included✓
Operations
✓Included
Scheduling & calendar
Included✓
✓Included
Dispatch board
Add-on+
–not listed
Commercial & contract jobs
Add-on+
–not listed
Inventory tracking
Included✓
Field & growth
✓Included
Tech mobile app
Add-on+
✓Connect+
GPS fleet tracking
Not available–
–not listed
Service agreements / plans
Not available–
✓Plus-included; add-on on other plans
Marketing automation
Included✓
✓Included
Customer portal
Add-on+
✓Included
Reporting & dashboards
Included✓
Bottom line: AccuLynx has no comparable all-in total (Pricing is quote only as of October 2026). Card fees use a documented mix (55% in-person, 30% online, 15% Amex/keyed) on $42,000 card volume — adjust in the calculator for your shop.
Jobber vs AccuLynx: how to choose
Jobber and AccuLynx get compared by small roofers choosing a generalist field-service tool versus a roofing CRM. Jobber publishes per-seat plans and lists scheduling, invoicing, QuickBooks, and a tech app; it does not list insurance restoration, production calendars, or aerial takeoffs. AccuLynx is quote-only and lists the lead-to-production workflow; the crew app and portal are add-ons. If you are a repair-and-replace shop that wants a published per-seat operations tool, Jobber lists that; if roofs, supplements, and production are the whole business, AccuLynx lists that quote-only.
Jobber vs AccuLynx — key takeaways
- Jobber is best for tighter books & small residential crews; AccuLynx is best for roofing CRM, production, and insurance restoration.
- Usability: not yet tested for either platform.
- Jobber: $1,443/mo; AccuLynx: Pricing is quote only as of October 2026.
- Commercial & contract jobs — Jobber: not listed; AccuLynx: add-on.
- QuickBooks sync — Jobber: Connect+; AccuLynx: included.
- Commission: Jobber — We may earn a commission if you sign up through our link; AccuLynx — We earn $0 from this vendor. Commission doesn't affect how either is described.
Pricing checked
How we tested
Done
- This comparison is based on published pricing and documentation. We have not done hands-on testing of either product.
Not done
- No product trial, demo, or in-app screenshots. We make no claims about ease of use, mobile UX, support, or implementation.
Pricing page captures
Jobber vs AccuLynx — frequently asked questions
- What is the difference between Jobber and AccuLynx?
- Jobber is best for tighter books & small residential crews, while AccuLynx is best for roofing CRM, production, and insurance restoration. Jobber targets residential shops; AccuLynx targets residential shops.
- Which is cheaper, Jobber or AccuLynx?
- AccuLynx: Pricing is quote only as of October 2026; Jobber models at $1,443/mo.
- Is Jobber or AccuLynx better for commercial work?
- Commercial & contract job support — Jobber: not listed; AccuLynx: add-on. Choose the one marked "included" if commercial work is a dealbreaker for your shop.
- Do you earn a commission from Jobber or AccuLynx?
- Jobber: We may earn a commission if you sign up through our link; AccuLynx: We earn $0 from this vendor. Both are scored with the identical methodology regardless.