Short answer: public pricing clarity varies sharply across property management software vendors. In our August 21, 2026 review, some providers disclosed a complete starting price, billing basis, commitment, trial or free entry point, and common additional fees. Others required a sales conversation before a buyer could calculate even a starting recurring cost. This benchmark measures disclosure, not software quality or total value.
Download the complete benchmark dataset to inspect every criterion, evidence note, official source, and verification date. Buyers can also use the software fit assessment before comparing price, because an inexpensive system that cannot complete a required workflow is not a bargain.
What this benchmark measures
We reviewed the official public pricing or product pages for JHA Solutions, AppFolio, Buildium, DoorLoop, TenantCloud, Yardi Breeze, RentRedi, Avail, and Innago. Each vendor received one point for each disclosure that a buyer could verify without creating an account, submitting contact information, or speaking with sales.
- Starting cost: a recurring platform price is visible, or the page clearly says pricing is quote-based.
- Billing basis: the page explains whether the price is flat, per unit, tiered, free, or custom and identifies material minimums.
- Commitment: monthly, annual, contract, cancellation, or equivalent commitment terms are stated.
- Plan scope: the public page shows what the plan or plans include.
- Additional fees: common transaction, screening, payment, signature, or add-on fees are disclosed or clearly identified.
- Setup and onboarding: the presence or absence of setup, implementation, training, or onboarding charges is stated.
- Entry terms: a free plan, trial, guarantee, or the absence of a trial is clear.
- Scale boundary: unit limits, high-volume thresholds, unlimited scope, minimums, or a custom-pricing boundary is explained.
A score of 8 means all eight categories were publicly addressed. It does not mean the product is less expensive, better suited to a portfolio, or free from costs that arise in a written agreement. A zero in the dataset means we could not verify the disclosure on the cited official public material, not that the vendor never provides it.
Results at a glance
Free platform; official FAQ discloses tenant transaction and screening fees.
Tier starting prices plus detailed service and transaction fees.
Tiered unit pricing with billing, add-on, and onboarding details.
Flat price by billing term with unlimited stated scope.
Free plan and $5 monthly All Access plan.
Tiered monthly and annual prices plus custom Business pricing.
Per-unit pricing with monthly minimums and annual agreements.
Free plan and $9 per-unit monthly paid plan.
Quote-based Core, Plus, and Max plans with minimums.
These results should be read as a disclosure map. AppFolio, for example, publishes substantial plan capabilities while withholding the recurring price and minimum details behind a quote. Innago publishes a free platform model and explains the transaction fees that fund it. Those are different commercial choices, not a quality ranking.
What the clearest pages did well
The strongest public pages let a buyer build a realistic first-pass budget. Buildium publishes plan starting prices and many payment, screening, signature, inspection, and bank-account charges. DoorLoop explains plan prices, annual and monthly billing, onboarding, payments, screening, signatures, and the threshold where a demo is required. RentRedi states one feature set, three billing terms, unlimited properties and teammates, cancellation, and a money-back guarantee.
Innago is the only reviewed provider with no recurring landlord platform fee, no setup fee, and no contract stated together. Its official FAQ explains that revenue comes from tenant payment and screening transaction fees. Avail also makes the free-versus-paid distinction easy to understand and publishes common payment fees.
Where buyers still need a written answer
A starting number is not a complete cost. Several pages use words such as "starting at," "additional fees apply," or "contact sales" without enough public detail to model the final bill. Buyers should request the following in one written schedule:
- platform subscription, unit minimum, portfolio minimum, and required billing term;
- implementation, migration, training, support, bank-account, and merchant setup charges;
- ACH, card, screening, signature, messaging, inspection, listing, insurance, and website fees;
- required add-ons, third-party contracts, minimum spend, renewal rules, and price-change terms;
- cancellation, data retention, full export, archive access, and exit-assistance charges.
Use the three-year property software cost method to compare the written schedules at the current portfolio size and a plausible growth case. Keep assumptions visible instead of collapsing uncertain costs into one confident-looking total.
Why JHA Solutions did not receive a perfect score
JHA Solutions publishes a free plan for up to three properties and a $5 monthly All Access plan with unlimited properties, team members, documents, and current features. It also states that customers can cancel online without a long-term contract. At the review date, the public pricing material did not separately state setup or onboarding fee policy, and it did not provide a detailed schedule of possible transaction or third-party service fees. We scored those two categories as not publicly verified.
That result is intentional. JHA Solutions publishes this benchmark and has a commercial interest in the comparison. Giving itself points for claims that are not clearly on the public page would make the method useless. The same standard will be used in future updates.
How to reproduce or challenge the result
- Open the official source URL recorded for a vendor in the downloadable dataset.
- Look for each of the eight disclosures in visible public content.
- Record the exact statement or mark it not publicly verified.
- Do not use review sites, old screenshots, sales emails, or search snippets as a substitute for the current official page.
- Send a correction with the vendor, criterion, official URL, and visible evidence.
Pricing changes frequently. This is a dated snapshot, not a permanent claim. Promotional prices were recorded as promotions rather than treated as standard pricing, and taxes were not treated as hidden vendor fees. We did not create accounts, negotiate quotes, test products, or evaluate legal, accounting, security, service, or feature quality in this benchmark.
Use price after workflow fit, not before it
A transparent price can make a shortlist easier, but it cannot prove that a platform supports your accounting, maintenance, resident, owner, field, migration, or data-export requirements. Use the 40-question requirements checklist, run the same five-workflow demonstration with each finalist, and then compare the complete written cost.
Official sources and disclosure
All observations were verified on August 21, 2026. JHA Solutions publishes this research and sells property-management software. Vendor names and trademarks belong to their respective owners. No vendor paid for inclusion or placement.