Score the estimate. Price what it missed.
Estimate Review reads a single Xactimate or Symbility estimate against a deterministic rubric keyed to the job type and the confirmed Category and Class of loss, then reports a grade, a list of gaps, and the citation behind each one. Attach your job file (drying logs, photos, field notes) and it also returns a 0–100 file readiness score with every deficiency named. Then it goes one step further: every gap that maps to a real line item is priced from that estimate's own measurements and unit prices, and totalled, so you see the value of the items missed instead of a list of complaints. It never runs on a guess: you confirm the facts it reasons from before it runs.
A score, a gap list, the citation behind each one, and what each one is worth.
A rubric, not a language model guessing at scope.
Estimate Review's grading logic is a fixed set of rules keyed to job type (mitigation, reconstruction, contents, other) and to the loss facts you confirm up front, never inferred silently from the PDF alone.
The intake gate
Before the first run, you are asked directly: age of home, Category of water (1/2/3), Class of water intrusion (1–4), and source of loss. An honest "unknown" is a valid answer and still unlocks the run. A silent guess never is.
What you get back
One 0-100 File Readiness score, a list of scope findings by severity, a standards dossier citing named sources like ANSI/IICRC S500 and S520, EPA and OSHA lead/asbestos rules, or the applicable IRC/IBC/IECC roofing section, and any hazard triggers that need field confirmation, organized as three tabs for three different audiences. Alongside them: the recommended Xactimate line item for each gap, what it is worth on this estimate, and a total for the items missed.
Upload the job file. Get a 0–100 score, and the reasons behind it.
An estimate alone only tells half the story. Attach the PDF of your job file (drying logs, moisture readings, equipment records, field notes, photo pages) and Estimate Review reads it alongside the estimate, then scores how the file will read to whoever picks it up next. Every point deducted is named, sourced to a page, and paired with the fix.
The needle is the score. The band it lands in sets the verdict, and the verdict is worded for your role, not for both sides at once.
Every gap, priced against your own estimate.
Knowing an item is missing is half of an argument. Estimate Review closes the other half: it picks the one Xactimate line item that covers the gap, takes the quantity from that estimate's own measurements, prices it from that estimate's own numbers, and totals the result at the top of the findings. No invented figures, and anything it cannot defend stays unpriced and is counted as such.
6 findings priced · 2 unpriced, not included
Illustration of the roll-up card as it appears above the findings. Figures shown are an example, not a typical result.
Where the quantity comes from
The estimate's own facts, matched to the unit of the line item: room floor, wall and ceiling areas and perimeters for SF and LF work, room volume for CF, roof facets for SQ, and the S500 equipment sizing worksheet for air movers, dehumidifiers, and scrubbers. Equipment is priced at the shortfall against the sizing minimum, never the whole requirement, and an underscoped line is priced at the delta, never the whole line.
Where the price comes from
- 1This estimate, same code. If the code already appears on the estimate, its own unit price is used. A figure built from the estimator's own pricing cannot be argued away.
- 2This estimate, same item family. A line with the same unit and the same underlying item, when only the selector grade differs.
- 3Your published price list. Your own price list for the loss region: material, labor, and equipment.
- 4Reference median. A k-anonymized median across the reference corpus, and only when at least five organizations contribute.
Each card prints the basis it used and the arithmetic, so the number can be checked rather than trusted. Figures are line-item values before overhead, profit, and tax. Not a settlement demand. How this turns into a supplement.
Six weighted dimensions, each one readable on its own.
Nothing here is a black box. Each dimension carries a published weight, gets its own 0-100 sub-score and a status of complete, partial, deficient or not documented, and every deduction traces back to something in your own documents.
Drying documentation
Dated log entries are read out of the file and checked for continuity. A gap between readings, a log that stops before the equipment does, or moisture readings with no dry standard all cost points.
Equipment duration & justification
Dehumidifier and air-mover days on the estimate are checked against what the logs actually support and against S500 sizing math. Over-billed days and unsupported run time are both flagged.
Photo support
Photo pages are counted and mapped to the scope they are supposed to prove. Rooms with scope and no photograph are called out by name.
Category & Class support
The Category and Class you confirmed at intake are checked against what the file documents. A Category 3 loss with nothing in the file supporting it is a documentation problem, not just a scope problem.
Estimate alignment
The file and the estimate have to describe the same job. Rooms, affected materials and durations that appear in one and not the other are surfaced side by side.
File completeness
Authorization, scope of work, certificate of completion, signatures and dates (the paperwork a reviewer looks for before they look at the money).
A low score without reasons is useless. So it never comes without them.
Deficiencies are listed worst first, with what a complete file would have, what yours has, what it cost you in points, and the page it was read from.
- Expected
- Daily readings for every day equipment was on site
- Found
- Readings on 3/4, 3/5, then nothing until 3/10
- How to close it
- Add the missing daily readings or a note explaining the site access gap
- Expected
- Before, during and post photos for each room with scope
- Found
- 12 photo pages covering the kitchen and hall only
- How to close it
- Attach room photos for the primary bath and bedroom 2
- Expected
- Billed equipment days supported by the log
- Found
- 6 days billed, 4 days logged
- How to close it
- Reconcile the billed days or document the extra run time
Every finding cites the estimate line and the standard behind it.
Findings are never generic. Each one names the rubric rule that fired, the line item it is about, and, where a reference chunk exists, the named citation -- ANSI/IICRC S500, a 2015 IRC roofing section, or another source from the standards library.
Category- and Class-driven scope
A confirmed Category 2 or 3 water loss checks for antimicrobial application and removal scope; a confirmed Class 3 intrusion checks for wall-cavity drying. Skipped entirely when the loss facts are unknown.
Sewage and biohazard scope
A loss source that names sewage or a biohazard is checked for remediation scope, at elevated severity when it is missing.
Internal consistency
Equipment line items (dehumidifiers, air movers) with no run-time quantity, and priced-quantity lines with a zero total, are flagged regardless of job type.
Permit-requirement flags
Structural, electrical, plumbing, and mechanical scope that typically requires a permit is flagged for field confirmation, cited against the estimate line that triggered it.
It can also check the estimate against your carrier's own rules.
Published standards say what good practice is. The carrier's estimating guidelines say what they will actually pay for, and the two do not always agree. Upload the guideline and Review reads both.
Flags what they disallow
Line items the guideline refuses, caught before you submit rather than after it comes back. Each one quotes the sentence and the page it came from.
Warns before it recommends
When a gap Review would normally tell you to fill is something that carrier will not pay for, the finding says so, and the amount comes out of the total.
Your rules, reviewed by you
Nothing takes effect until an admin approves it. Guidelines and the rules read out of them stay inside your organization.
Rules come out of the document with the sentence and page they sit on, so a flag can be checked rather than taken on faith. An admin approves each one and picks the line items it covers before it affects anybody’s review.
“HMR line items should not be utilized on any water mitigation project.” (Allstate GHRN, p.13)
When the carrier named the estimating code, that is a fact and it is graded as one. When they described it in words and the match is on wording, it reads as worth checking. Saying both with the same confidence is how a compliance check stops being believed.
Rules the estimate cannot settle (whether prior approval was obtained, whether a photo exists) are shown as reminders and cost nothing.
Asbestos, lead, and permit flags: never guessed, always confirmable.
R7/R8-style hazard checks only ever run against facts you have confirmed. If you have told Estimate Review the year built is unknown, it says so plainly instead of assuming.
Asbestos
Triggers when the home is confirmed built before 1980 and the scope disturbs a suspect material (e.g. 9x9 vinyl floor tile). Flags for field confirmation, never asserts a positive result, and cites against the EPA Asbestos NESHAP (40 CFR Part 61, Subpart M).
Lead (RRP)
Triggers when the home is confirmed built before the 1978 RRP threshold and the scope disturbs painted surfaces. Cites against the EPA Lead RRP Rule and OSHA's lead standards (29 CFR 1926.62 / 1910.1025).
Permit required
Structural, electrical, plumbing, or mechanical scope (a panel upgrade, foundation repair) is flagged independently of the home's age. Cosmetic, like-kind repairs are not.
One score, worded for the side of the table you sit on.
You choose your role once, at signup: contractor, carrier adjuster, independent adjuster, public adjuster, attorney, appraiser or other. It is written to your organization and locked, so nobody flips sides to preview the other perspective. The facts and the score never change; only the verdict wording does.
Contractors and public adjusters
The question is is this file complete enough to submit. A low score reads as work to do before it goes out: the missing log days, the unphotographed rooms, the paperwork that is not signed. Findings are framed as scope-strengthening.
Carrier and independent adjusters, attorneys, appraisers
The question is is this file good enough to pay. The same bands read as full review recommended, light review recommended, or pay with confidence (with the named deficiencies as the basis for what to ask for).
Readiness findings are yours to use, never auto-attached.
A readiness run does not quietly rewrite anything else. Its findings sit in the same picker as the scope findings when you write a response letter, so you choose which ones become part of the record.
Fix it before anyone sees it
Close the deficiencies, re-run the review, and watch the needle move. The score is recorded on every run, so the history shows the file getting stronger.
Or cite it as support
Where the file is strong, the same findings become exhibits, selectable alongside F9 notes, photographs and weather history when the response letter is drafted.
What people say after
a real review.
Unedited feedback from contractors, carriers, and adjusters who use Estimate Review.
"Used Estology on a $47,000 water loss. It found the missing line items and price drift in about ten minutes. The carrier accepted the supplement the same day."
"As a general contractor, I used to spend hours cross-referencing estimates. Now I upload both PDFs and have a defensible line-by-line report before lunch."
"I needed to explain why the contractor's estimate was higher than ours. Estology gave me a clear, sourced breakdown that both sides trusted."
"We had three competing estimates on one file. Estology showed exactly where each one differed and why, so the negotiation took one call instead of five."
"My position letter practically wrote itself. Every variance was sourced back to the original estimate pages, so the adjuster had nowhere to push back."
"I caught $12,000 in dropped scope the adjuster missed. Without a side-by-side comparison, that would have come out of my pocket."
"Used Estology on a $47,000 water loss. It found the missing line items and price drift in about ten minutes. The carrier accepted the supplement the same day."
"As a general contractor, I used to spend hours cross-referencing estimates. Now I upload both PDFs and have a defensible line-by-line report before lunch."
"I needed to explain why the contractor's estimate was higher than ours. Estology gave me a clear, sourced breakdown that both sides trusted."
"We had three competing estimates on one file. Estology showed exactly where each one differed and why, so the negotiation took one call instead of five."
"My position letter practically wrote itself. Every variance was sourced back to the original estimate pages, so the adjuster had nowhere to push back."
"I caught $12,000 in dropped scope the adjuster missed. Without a side-by-side comparison, that would have come out of my pocket."
What people ask about Estimate Review.
Short, direct answers about the readiness score, what gets checked, and what a review produces.
What is the File Readiness score?+
A single 0–100 measure of how defensible the file is, scored across weighted dimensions. It replaces letter grading entirely: one number, with the deductions itemized so you can see exactly which documentation gap cost what.
Do I have to upload the job file?+
No. A review runs on the estimate alone and still returns a real score. The documentation dimensions are left out of that score rather than counted as zero, so the number reflects what an estimate can actually answer instead of being dragged down by a file you did not attach. Attaching the job file PDF adds those dimensions, letting Review see moisture logs, notes, and photographs. The two are labelled differently on the report, because an estimate-only score and a full-file score are not measuring the same thing.
Does Review work on reconstruction, not just mitigation?+
Yes. The rubric is job-type aware: mitigation, reconstruction, contents and other each get the dimensions and hazard triggers that apply to them, so a reconstruction file is not judged against drying documentation it was never supposed to have.
What are the dimensions?+
Scope completeness, documentation, measurement and geometry support, pricing integrity, hazard and safety handling, and standards alignment. Each carries its own weight and reports its own deductions. Attach a carrier guideline and a seventh joins them (carrier guideline compliance, worth 5), scored only on files where you applied one, so scores stay comparable with files where you did not.
Where do the standards citations come from?+
A seeded reference library of published restoration and estimating standards. A finding cites the standard it rests on so the point can be argued from a source rather than from opinion.
Does it tell me which codes were missed?+
Yes. Where scope appears absent, Review suggests the Xactimate codes that would normally cover it, with the matched description, so a supplement can be written directly from the finding.
How does Estology know what a missing line item is worth?+
It prices the gap from the estimate itself. The quantity comes from that estimate's own room measurements, roof facets, or S500 equipment sizing. An air-mover finding is priced at the shortfall, not the whole requirement, and a quantity finding is priced at the delta, not the whole line. The unit price comes from that estimate's own price for the code where the code already appears on it, then the same item family on the estimate, then your published price list, then a k-anonymized reference median. Every card shows which basis it used and the arithmetic behind the figure.
What if the missing item is not priced anywhere in my estimate?+
Then it stays unpriced. A finding with no defensible quantity or no available unit price shows the quantity it can confirm and is counted separately in the roll-up as unpriced, so the total never pretends to be complete. Estology does not invent a price to fill the gap.
Does the total value of items missed include overhead, profit, or tax?+
No. Each figure is quantity multiplied by the unit price for that line item, rounded to whole dollars: the same basis the estimate itself uses before overhead, profit, and tax are applied. It is the value of the line items, not a settlement demand or a prediction of what will be paid.
Can Review check my estimate against the carrier's own guidelines?+
Yes. Upload the estimating guidelines your carrier or TPA publishes and Review reads what they refuse to pay for. When you run a review you pick which guidelines govern that claim, and Review then flags line items they disallow (quoting the sentence and the page) alongside the standards findings. See the Carrier Guidelines page for how the rules get read and approved.
What if the standards recommend something my carrier will not pay for?+
You are told both, on the same card. The finding still appears, because the standard behind it has not changed and you may need that argument. It carries a note saying the guideline governing this claim disallows it, with the carrier's own sentence quoted, and the item is left out of the value-of-items-missed total. Money the carrier has already refused is not money on the table.
Is a low score a failure?+
No. A low score is a to-do list. Each deduction names what is missing and what would recover it, and re-running after you add documentation shows the movement.
Included in every project.
A $10 project includes up to 5 Review runs across every job in it. Review is never billed separately. Your first project is free to try, with one run of each tool and no downloads. Team plans remove the cap entirely.