Functional Obs
Member
- Joined
- Jul 2, 2004
- Professional Status
- Certified Residential Appraiser
- State
- Virginia
For me, Spark.
I tried QuickSource back in 2017. I liked it. It covered the top half of the grid pretty well. I loved that it snagged the MLS comp photos.
I had some issues, though, and it took a while for their tech support to get back to me. I remember they were nice, but they were not what I was looking for.
I gave Spark a try in 2018 or 19 (I forget). I like it—I don't love it, but I like it a lot.
Here's what it does, and here's how I use it:
First, it imports tons of comps well. This is its main job. It gets well over 50% of what I need. Our MLS (Bright) needs to be re-configured for it to do any better. I import far more comps than I used to b/c so much of the form is completed. I can always cut them later.
Unlike QuickSource, it does not grab MLS photos. It will take them from Google if you set a switch, but Google photos without any editing are typically garbage.
Could I get all of that info from a local import? Mostly, but not everything. Spark is more complete than what I can accomplish alone.
Second, it's linked to Dwelling Cost. I run cost approaches for almost every non-condo report because it's so fast (compared to M&S, which is clunky as sh#t). It's also free, whereas Marshal & Swift charges $50 / month or $17 / report (I think).
Interestingly, it can also generate a PDF version of just a cost approach (much more detailed than page 3 of the URAR). Not often, but once or twice a year, I need that, and that feature comes in handy.
Third, it does do the MC form, market trends, etc. ... all of the market sections. I don't use this most of the time. I prefer to do my own, and I get slightly different results. I'm interested in the previous year as well, so I'm deep into the market section already. I like that it's there to double-check, though.
Spark also wins in the tech support department. They respond to emails and answer the phone. You can also do a Zoom session with the creator during Friday afternoon office hours.
Then there's Synapse. It's cool. It's a work in progress, though, and I don't know how long I'll keep it at $30 / month. I use it for my court cases and more difficult properties.
The biggest problem I have with Spark and Synapse?:
The writing (in the support-for-adjustments' comments and in the cost approach) is pretty bad. I'll post an example in a minute.
Conclusion:
Spark saves me some time, but I use it because it's just more thorough overall, allowing me time for other parts of the form and problem. Synapse increases the amount of time I spend on a report, not saves, but it gives me something useful to talk about, for court or for those times when a reviewer is going to actually read your report.
QuickSource wasn't there for me in full 7 years ago. A lot can happen in 7 years, so it might be worth doing a trial and see if they have figured some things out since then.
I tried QuickSource back in 2017. I liked it. It covered the top half of the grid pretty well. I loved that it snagged the MLS comp photos.
I had some issues, though, and it took a while for their tech support to get back to me. I remember they were nice, but they were not what I was looking for.
I gave Spark a try in 2018 or 19 (I forget). I like it—I don't love it, but I like it a lot.
Here's what it does, and here's how I use it:
First, it imports tons of comps well. This is its main job. It gets well over 50% of what I need. Our MLS (Bright) needs to be re-configured for it to do any better. I import far more comps than I used to b/c so much of the form is completed. I can always cut them later.
Unlike QuickSource, it does not grab MLS photos. It will take them from Google if you set a switch, but Google photos without any editing are typically garbage.
Could I get all of that info from a local import? Mostly, but not everything. Spark is more complete than what I can accomplish alone.
Second, it's linked to Dwelling Cost. I run cost approaches for almost every non-condo report because it's so fast (compared to M&S, which is clunky as sh#t). It's also free, whereas Marshal & Swift charges $50 / month or $17 / report (I think).
Interestingly, it can also generate a PDF version of just a cost approach (much more detailed than page 3 of the URAR). Not often, but once or twice a year, I need that, and that feature comes in handy.
Third, it does do the MC form, market trends, etc. ... all of the market sections. I don't use this most of the time. I prefer to do my own, and I get slightly different results. I'm interested in the previous year as well, so I'm deep into the market section already. I like that it's there to double-check, though.
Spark also wins in the tech support department. They respond to emails and answer the phone. You can also do a Zoom session with the creator during Friday afternoon office hours.
Then there's Synapse. It's cool. It's a work in progress, though, and I don't know how long I'll keep it at $30 / month. I use it for my court cases and more difficult properties.
The biggest problem I have with Spark and Synapse?:
The writing (in the support-for-adjustments' comments and in the cost approach) is pretty bad. I'll post an example in a minute.
Conclusion:
Spark saves me some time, but I use it because it's just more thorough overall, allowing me time for other parts of the form and problem. Synapse increases the amount of time I spend on a report, not saves, but it gives me something useful to talk about, for court or for those times when a reviewer is going to actually read your report.
QuickSource wasn't there for me in full 7 years ago. A lot can happen in 7 years, so it might be worth doing a trial and see if they have figured some things out since then.
