$99/firm/month Founding Partner pricing ends October 1, 2026.
Offer ends October 1.Start the free trialA transparent, source-linked comparison for public-adjuster firms evaluating CRM and claims-management software—without pretending one tool is right for every firm.
AdjusterDesk publishes this page. Vendor facts below link to each vendor's public site so you can verify current terms directly.
No sponsored ranking
Platforms are not numbered from best to worst.
Official sources
Pricing and product emphasis link to vendor pages.
One repeatable test
Use the same fictional workflow in every serious option.
Current public information
Prices and terms can change. These entries reflect public vendor pages reviewed on August 18, 2026; use the source link in every row to confirm the current offer.
Calculate the cost for your team →“Consider when” is AdjusterDesk's practical interpretation of the vendor's published positioning, not a vendor endorsement. Vendor names and marks belong to their respective owners. No vendor paid for placement.
Compare package limits, automation, mobile access, and firm pricing.
Read the comparison →Compare team tiers, PAC-CAM, field evidence, and connected workflow.
Read the comparison →Compare per-seat pricing, native field access, signatures, data, and AI.
Read the comparison →The test that matters
Do not compare polished dashboards. Compare what happens to one representative file as real work moves through the firm.
The first call, property, reported loss, source, notes, and retainer history should not need to be entered again when work becomes an active claim.
Test it: Create a fictional lead, move it into a practice claim, and verify which information and activity remain attached.
Photos, documents, notes, and next actions lose value when they stay on a personal phone or in a separate field tool without reliable claim context.
Test it: Open the same fictional file on a phone and desktop, upload an image, add a note, and assign a task.
Per-seat charges, envelope fees, AI add-ons, data services, onboarding, and mobile access can materially change the effective monthly cost.
Test it: Price the real number of owners, adjusters, office users, expected signature sends, and optional services your firm would use.
A claims workspace can contain policyholder contact information, documents, property details, and internal firm activity.
Test it: Ask how tenant isolation, roles, signed file access, MFA, audit history, backups, deletion, and vendor subprocessors are handled.
Summaries and drafts can help organize work, but firms need to know what data is sent, what is logged, and where human approval remains required.
Test it: Use fictional data to test one AI workflow, then confirm the source material, review step, credit use, and failure behavior.
Starting with contacts?
See how lead intake, follow-up, retainer context, and the handoff into active work fit together.
Explore public adjuster CRM →Starting with active files?
Review how documents, evidence, tasks, deadlines, communication, and claim history stay connected.
Explore claims management software →Ready to test the handoff?
Open a guided workspace and evaluate the operating path before entering policyholder information.
Start the 14-day trialCommon questions
There is no universal best platform. The right choice depends on firm size, workflow, mobile requirements, pricing model, integrations, security expectations, and whether the team needs lead management, active claim operations, or both. Test the same fictional workflow in every product you seriously consider.
Published prices vary by platform and may be based on a firm, a user, a package, or optional services. Compare the effective cost for the full team and include signature, AI, data, mobile, onboarding, and storage charges when they apply.
A CRM commonly centers on contacts, opportunities, and follow-up. Claims-management software centers on the active file, documents, field evidence, tasks, deadlines, communication, and operational history. Many firms need a clear connection between both jobs.
It can, but the pricing and permission model matter. A small firm should test whether the platform remains understandable with one or two users while still supporting role controls, assignments, and visibility if the team grows.
Use fictional information during trials. Test intake, retainer setup, mobile uploads, task ownership, deadlines, document retrieval, exports, user roles, and cancellation or data-export procedures before adding real policyholder information.
