Dutch solar proposals are being rewritten from the ground up, and most installers have not caught up. For over a decade the salderingsregeling made the arithmetic trivial: every exported kilowatt-hour netted against an imported one at full retail value, so the biggest array won. That regime is ending, suppliers have started charging customers who export heavily, and in much of the country the grid cannot accept more feed-in anyway. A proposal built on the old logic now overstates the return.
Direct answer. The best solar proposal software in the Netherlands is any tool that models hourly self-consumption rather than annual netting. For domestic work that means a Dutch-market tool or OpenSolar with careful configuration. For commercial work, SurgePV or PVsyst, because the proposal has to show generation against a capped grid connection and quantify curtailment.
TL;DR
- Annual netting logic is obsolete. Model hourly self-consumption or the number will be wrong.
- Terugleverkosten mean heavy exporters can face charges, so a bigger array is not automatically a better one.
- Commercial proposals must state the connection capacity and the curtailment it causes.
- Battery attachment is rising fast because the export case has weakened. Model storage separately.
- Dutch customers are numerate and have watched the rules change. Show the assumptions.
What the Netherlands Actually Changes About Proposal Software
Netting is going away. Under the salderingsregeling, exported energy offset imported energy at retail value on an annual basis, so the timing of generation did not matter. As the scheme is phased out, timing becomes everything: a kilowatt-hour used on site is worth the full retail price, one exported is worth a much lower feed-in rate. Any tool that models on an annual netted basis is modelling a regime that is disappearing.
Export can now cost money. Several Dutch suppliers have introduced terugleverkosten, charges applied to customers exporting significant volumes. A proposal that shows export as pure upside can therefore be wrong in sign, not just in magnitude.
Congestion caps commercial systems. In large parts of the country the distribution operators, Liander, Stedin, and Enexis, cannot offer additional feed-in capacity. A commercial proposal has to state the available connection capacity and quantify the energy that will be curtailed because of it. Presenting an uncurtailed generation figure for a capped connection is not a rounding error, it can be a large fraction of the modelled revenue.
Storage is becoming standard. As the export case weakens, home and commercial batteries improve the self-consumption share and therefore the return. The proposal has to model the battery’s incremental benefit separately so the customer can see whether it pays.
The customer is informed. Dutch households have followed the salderingsregeling debate closely. A proposal that does not acknowledge the phase-out reads as either uninformed or evasive.
The Platforms Ranked for the Netherlands
| Platform | Best for | Hourly self-consumption | Curtailment modelling | Design output | Price per seat per year |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SurgePV | Commercial proposals plus design | Yes, 8,760-hour | Yes | Full, with DWG | $1,299 to $1,899 |
| PVsyst | Financed and larger commercial | Yes | Best in class | Yield only | ~$500 |
| Dutch-market domestic tools | Residential workflow | Yes | Basic | Layout | Subscription, EUR |
| OpenSolar | Low-volume domestic | Yes | Basic | Basic | $0 plus transaction fees |
| HelioScope | Commercial layout and yield | Yes | Yes | Layout only | ~$1,188 |
| Aurora Solar | Larger commercial-facing teams | Yes | Configurable | Good | $1,908 to $3,108 |
| Spreadsheet | Bespoke commercial cases | Manual | Manual | Manual | Time |
SurgePV covers the commercial case: hourly generation against a capped connection, the string and inverter sizing that follows, the single-line diagram, and the customer-facing proposal from one model. Technical detail in best solar design software in the Netherlands.
PVsyst is the rigorous option for curtailment analysis and the model Dutch lenders accept. See PVsyst price.
OpenSolar works for domestic volume provided the configuration reflects the new export economics rather than the old netting assumption. See OpenSolar pricing.
Try the software behind this guide
Show the curtailment before the customer discovers it
SurgePV models 8,760 hours of generation against the connection cap, quantifies clipped energy, and produces the single-line diagram and a white-label proposal from the same model.
Book a free SurgePV demo →No credit card. 20-minute walkthrough on one of your own projects.
What a Dutch Proposal Has to Contain
- System specification with modules, inverter, and kWp.
- Generation forecast with the data source named.
- Self-consumption share, modelled hourly, stated explicitly.
- Export treatment under the current salderingsregeling position, with the phase-out trajectory acknowledged.
- Terugleverkosten exposure if the supplier levies them.
- Connection capacity and curtailment for commercial systems, with the curtailed energy quantified.
- Battery case, if included, with the incremental self-consumption gain shown separately.
- Assumptions for electricity price and degradation.
Item 4 is now the honesty test in the Dutch market. A twenty-five year savings figure that assumes the netting scheme persists throughout is not defensible.
Pricing in Euro
| Stack | Annual cost | Covers |
|---|---|---|
| OpenSolar | €0 plus fees | Domestic proposal |
| PVsyst | ~€460 | Yield and curtailment, no proposal |
| HelioScope | ~€1,093 | Commercial layout and yield |
| SurgePV | ~€1,195 to €1,747 | Proposal plus design and SLD |
| Aurora | ~€1,755 to €2,859 | Proposal plus design |
Converted at an illustrative 0.92.
What Most Dutch Installers Get Wrong
They model the full contract term at today’s netting rules.
A twenty-five year savings figure built on the salderingsregeling continuing indefinitely overstates the return, and Dutch customers know the scheme is being withdrawn. The credible approach models the transition explicitly: netting on the current basis for the period it applies, then self-consumption plus feed-in value thereafter. It produces a smaller number and a far more defensible one.
The second mistake, on commercial work, is quoting generation rather than delivered energy. Behind a capped connection those are different numbers, and the gap is the customer’s loss.
When Proposal Software Is Not the Constraint
Dutch commercial rooftops frequently fail on structure rather than economics. Older warehouse and greenhouse roofs often cannot carry a conventional array without strengthening, and that assessment is engineering work.
Our solar civil and structural engineering and STAAD Pro report calculations services cover it, with solar rooftop detailed engineering design for the full pack. See the sample design pack.
Conclusion
- Model the netting phase-out explicitly. A flat twenty-five year assumption is no longer defensible.
- Quote delivered energy, not generated energy. Behind a capped connection the difference belongs to the customer.
- Show the battery separately. As export value falls, storage is increasingly what makes the case, and it should stand on its own numbers.
In this country series: solar software in the Netherlands, best solar design software in the Netherlands, shading analysis software in the Netherlands, Pvcase review. Tool deep dives: Pvsyst review, Helioscope review.
More from our network
Disclosure and accuracy note
Commercial relationship. Heaven Designs and SurgePV are part of the same group. Treat our recommendation of SurgePV as a vendor making its own case, not an independent verdict. We have tried to describe every other product fairly, and to say plainly where a competitor is the better choice.
Pricing. All prices are indicative, compiled from public sources when this page was written. They vary by tier, region, contract term and exchange rate, and change without notice. Several vendors quote rather than publish, and some price in currencies other than the US dollar, so a converted figure moves with the exchange rate. Confirm current pricing with the vendor before you decide anything.
Trademarks and corrections. All product names and trademarks belong to their respective owners, and are used here for identification and comparison only. Their use does not imply affiliation with or endorsement by those companies. If anything here is out of date or wrong, tell us and we will correct it.
FAQ
What is the best solar proposal software in the Netherlands? Any tool that models hourly self-consumption rather than annual netting. For domestic work a Dutch-market tool or carefully configured OpenSolar, and for commercial work SurgePV or PVsyst so curtailment against a capped connection can be quantified.
How does the salderingsregeling phase-out change the proposal? It moves value from export to self-consumption. Timing of generation starts to matter, so annual netting models produce the wrong answer and hourly modelling becomes necessary.
What are terugleverkosten and do they belong in the proposal? They are charges some Dutch suppliers apply to customers exporting significant volumes. If the customer’s supplier levies them, they belong in the model, because they can turn export from low-value into negative-value.
How should netcongestie be handled in a commercial proposal? State the available connection capacity, model generation against it hourly, and quantify the curtailed energy. Presenting uncurtailed generation for a capped connection overstates revenue.
How much does solar proposal software cost in the Netherlands? From €0 with OpenSolar to roughly €2,900 per user per year at Aurora’s higher tiers. Cross-platform math is in our solar design software pricing breakdown.
Are batteries now standard in Dutch proposals? Increasingly, because the weakening export case makes self-consumption more valuable. Model the battery’s incremental benefit separately so the customer can judge it on its own merits.
What about the design software decision separately? Covered in best solar design software in the Netherlands.
