“Construction software” covers two different businesses that only occasionally overlap: the trades contractor running crews of electricians or plumbers through hundreds of small jobs, and the builder or head contractor running a handful of projects worth millions each through progress claims and retentions. Australian software serves the first brilliantly (two of the world’s best trades platforms are local) and the second adequately. Know which business you are before reading a single vendor page.
Trades and field service: Simpro or AroFlo — both Australian-born, both built around quotes, scheduling, job cards and invoicing from the ute. They pair with Xero or MYOB rather than replacing them. Head contractors and commercial builders: you want job-cost ERP with progress claims and retentions native. That means Pronto Xi, MYOB Acumatica Construction, or Business Central with a construction ISV. The line between the camps: when Security of Payment claims, retention schedules and WIP accounting stop being paperwork and start being your P&L, you’ve crossed into ERP territory.
Top 20 ERP Software Report — independent vendor comparison with pricing and best-fit segments.
Both born here (Simpro in Brisbane, AroFlo in Melbourne), both mature, both loved by the businesses they fit. Simpro is the bigger platform — deeper estimating for project-style trade work, stronger inventory/supplier catalogue integration (the wholesaler feeds matter in electrical), now global. AroFlo keeps a loyalists’ reputation for field usability and value. Crews adopt it fast, and compliance workflows (SWMS, test certificates) are first-class. Both handle recurring maintenance contracts, asset service history and Xero/MYOB sync well. Pricing: per-user monthly, quote-based at both — neither publishes rates; third-party data puts AroFlo around A$65–75/user/month, with Simpro generally quoted above that. My honest sorting: complex projects and supplier-catalogue depth point to Simpro; field simplicity and price point to AroFlo. Either beats a generic ERP for a trades book of work. Don’t let anyone sell you NetSuite to run service calls.
| System | Best for | Progress claims & retentions | Typical first-year (AUD ex GST) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Pronto Xi | Contractors + service divisions | Native | Quote-only |
| MYOB Acumatica Construction | Mid-market builders, subbie-heavy | Native (claims, retentions, variations) | A$200,000–400,000 |
| Business Central + construction ISV | Mainstream mid-market | Via ISV | A$150,000–300,000 |
| Simpro/AroFlo + Xero | Trades up to project-lite work | Basic claims | A$20,000–60,000 |
Ranges from anonymised partner quotes, verified 7 August 2026. Specialist construction suites (Jobpac, Cheops, Viewpoint) serve the top end of town; they’re beyond this guide’s mid-market scope.
Simpro and AroFlo do not publish pricing; the per-user figures cited are third-party data, labelled as such, checked 8 August 2026. Job-costing, progress-claim and retention capability comes from vendor documentation. Cost ranges are editorial estimates, ex GST. No vendor sponsored or reviewed this page.
Simpro and AroFlo lead. Both are Australian-built, covering quotes, scheduling, job cards, invoicing and Xero/MYOB sync. Simpro suits complex project-style trade work; AroFlo wins on field simplicity and value.
Mid-market builders and head contractors use Pronto Xi, MYOB Acumatica Construction, or Business Central with construction ISVs. The differentiators are native progress claims, retentions and WIP accounting. Top-tier contractors run specialist suites like Jobpac or Cheops.
Simpro for deeper estimating and supplier catalogue integration, AroFlo for faster field adoption and lower cost; both are mature Australian products, so the right answer is whichever your crews will actually use daily.
Money withheld from progress payments (typically 5–10%) as security until practical completion and defect liability milestones. Release dates span years and run in both directions, held against you and held by you against subbies. Contractors routinely fail to reclaim retentions simply because no system tracked them.