Togal vs STACK 2026: Takeoff, Estimating and Costs

Choose the estimating workflow before the software

Choose Togal when drawing measurement is your main bottleneck and you want to keep your existing estimating system. Choose STACK when you want takeoff, cost assembly and proposal preparation closer together. Both now advertise AI takeoff, so this is not simply a choice between automated measurement and manual software.

Construction takeoff is the process of measuring and counting the materials or work quantities represented in construction drawings. Those quantities become an estimate only after you apply scope rules, material costs, labor assumptions and commercial adjustments.

TL;DR: Start with Togal if your pricing workbook already serves you well; start with STACK if moving quantities into that workbook is itself the problem. For drywall, evaluate Togal’s newer assemblies before assuming its role ends at measurement. Neither choice removes estimator review.

The products retain their separate names and offerings in the official pages reviewed. Togal’s founder is Patrick Murphy, whose connection to Coastal Construction was documented in 2023, according to Construction Dive. STACK Construction Technologies remains an active investment in Level Equity’s portfolio, according to Level Equity. These sources establish company background and investor involvement, not a current ownership percentage or a complete shareholder register; ultimate ownership is unverified here.

Key Takeaways

• Togal is a sensible shortlist choice when you need drawing quantities and intend to preserve your established pricing process.

• STACK deserves the first look when your buying objective includes native estimating and proposals, rather than takeoff alone.

• AI availability does not establish trade suitability. Evaluate your own drawings, revisions, exclusions and correction work.

• Compare equivalent plan entitlements and billing terms. A displayed monthly rate can still require annual billing.

• Export quality and cost-code mapping can decide the purchase when your estimate must move into accounting or project systems.

Who this is for

This comparison is for estimators at general contractors and specialty contractors choosing where to prepare quantities and bids. It is particularly useful if you already have a spreadsheet, estimating database or accounting system you are reluctant to replace.

Red flags: mandatory offline operation; an expectation of unattended final pricing; a required integration whose access or entitlement the vendor cannot demonstrate.

Those are potential disqualifiers, not minor preferences. A cloud workflow needs dependable access, automated quantities still need scope judgment, and an integration logo does not prove that your required records can move in the right direction. Resolve these requirements before comparing interface preferences.

Write down what you intend to retain. Your labor tables, waste assumptions, quote history and customer proposal conventions may hold more business knowledge than the drawing measurements. Replacing them without a migration plan can create additional work even if the new takeoff screen feels faster.

How we evaluated the buying decision

This guide uses official product and pricing information, primary documentation and independent industry reporting. It is a public-information buying guide, not a hands-on benchmark. The weights below are our proposed decision framework; they are not survey findings or vendor performance scores.

Score each criterion from 0 to 5 after a representative evaluation. Multiply the score divided by 5 by its weight to calculate weighted points. The suggested weights total 100%; adjust them before evaluating, rather than after seeing which product you prefer.

Treat a mandatory requirement as pass or fail outside that score. An unavailable export or unacceptable document-access policy should not be averaged away by attractive measurement features. Record unanswered questions as unknown until the vendor demonstrates the required behavior.

Hiring difficulty: 92% of surveyed contractors according to AGC (2025). That industry context supports examining repetitive work, but it does not establish a productivity gain for either product or prove that software will solve your staffing constraints.

A useful evaluation measures the whole bid process: importing drawings, checking scale, correcting quantities, applying costs, reviewing revisions and preparing the deliverable. Timing only the initial detection step can hide the effort required to make its output usable.

Normalize the features around estimator decisions

The matrix separates published product scope from purchase questions. “Confirm” means the available evidence does not settle your particular requirement. It does not mean the feature is absent.

Published availability is not evidence of equivalent behavior. A comparison overlay can help you see a change without automatically resolving its cost effect. An assembly library can provide a starting structure without matching the installation method your crew actually uses.

For each relevant feature, ask the vendor to show the resulting artifact. Inspect an exported quantity file, a revised takeoff and a proposal produced from your sample scope. The artifact matters because another estimator must be able to understand and correct it after the original author leaves the project.

Togal: preserve the pricing system you trust

Togal’s strongest buyer fit is a team that wants to concentrate on obtaining usable drawing quantities while retaining its preferred estimating process. Its own comparison describes exports into an estimating system, Excel output and a dashboard with 8 buttons, according to Togal. Use that as evidence of its intended workflow, not as independent proof of superiority over STACK.

A natural evaluation starts with a familiar project. Check whether your classifications translate into the rows your workbook expects, whether units survive export and whether you can trace a questionable quantity back to its drawing. Compare the correction effort with your current method, including time spent cleaning the spreadsheet.

The scope has expanded: Togal now offers Assemblies aimed initially at drywall, with customizable templates and migration of existing build libraries described by the publisher, according to Walls & Ceilings. That makes an absolute “takeoff only” description too narrow for a drywall buyer.

The limitation to investigate is how far that assembly workflow matches your trade and existing formulas. Do not infer that a drywall capability settles mechanical, electrical, civil or another specialty’s requirements. Ask which calculations remain your responsibility and where material pricing, labor productivity and final proposal preparation occur.

Implementation should begin with a classification convention and a controlled export template. Have an estimator approve the mapping before using it for another project. If importing an existing build library, reconcile representative formulas against their original outputs and retain the original library until discrepancies are resolved.

Togal is a poor replacement choice if your real objective is to retire an entire estimating and proposal system but its demonstrated scope covers only part of that system. Conversely, retaining a familiar pricing workbook can be a deliberate advantage when it avoids rebuilding proven estimating rules.

STACK: bring quantities and bid preparation together

STACK’s case is consolidation. Its published paid-plan descriptions cover takeoff tools, while Pro extends into worksheet-style estimating, cost libraries and proposals. Its pricing page also lists AI Takeoffs in the paid takeoff offering. Confirm the exact entitlements in the pricing section before treating a broader product description as your purchased package.

The buyer fit is an estimator who wants quantities to remain connected to pricing within the chosen platform. That can make sense when spreadsheet transfers, inconsistent assembly definitions or proposal preparation create more friction than the measurement itself.

The practical limitation is setup responsibility. A native estimating workspace still needs your cost assumptions, scope conventions and review rules. A supplied cost library is not a substitute for current supplier quotes or your own labor knowledge. Check whether your estimator can explain and adjust the resulting estimate without rebuilding it elsewhere.

Implementation should focus on a representative estimate rather than importing the entire historical library immediately. Establish item naming, units, labor treatment and markup policy, then reconcile the generated bid with the method your team already trusts. Have the person accountable for pricing approve the calculation rules.

Treat connectors as a separate requirement. Identify the target accounting or ERP system, the records needed and the direction of transfer. Obtain written entitlement details and inspect a sample mapping. Native proposal generation also deserves a review of exclusions, alternates and customer formatting.

STACK is a poor consolidation choice if you intend to keep all pricing outside it and would rarely use its estimating functions. In that situation, evaluate its takeoff tier against Togal on drawing fit and export effort, rather than buying broader functionality simply because it exists.

Pricing and the cost of keeping another system

Pricing checked October 12, 2026.

The table reports published rates from each vendor’s own pricing page. It groups STACK’s paid tiers in one row so you can see the progression without confusing a takeoff subscription with an estimating subscription.

The monthly figures above are the vendors’ annual-billing presentation, not evidence of a cancel-anytime monthly arrangement. Confirm payment timing, renewal terms and the rights of reviewers before choosing based on the displayed rate.

For total cost of ownership, compare the subscription with the work and tools that remain. Togal may preserve a useful estimating system but leave its maintenance cost in place. STACK may bring more bid preparation together, but that benefit depends on adopting and maintaining its estimating structure.

Separate conversion effort from recurring effort. Initial work includes classification mapping, library cleanup and training. Recurring work includes supplier updates, formula maintenance, permission changes and failed-transfer review. Ask who owns each task; an unassigned task is a future interruption to an estimator.

Also compare reversibility. Can you export the data needed to continue bidding if you leave? What happens to historical project access? Keep a sample exit package and confirm that someone other than the account owner can interpret it before committing to a broader migration.

Prove fit with a controlled bid rehearsal

Use a project for which you already understand the scope and estimating assumptions. Include an awkward drawing and a revision, not only the clean sheet a vendor might select. The point is to expose correction work and handoff problems while you can still change the buying decision.

The following numbers are suggested evaluation targets, not published product limits or reported results. They define a small buyer-designed rehearsal. Increase the sample wherever your trade needs more coverage.

Illustrative example: an estimator considers STACK’s free plan, which allows 1 active project per month, up to 300 plan pages and Free-plan ceiling: 50 measurements per project, according to STACK (2026). Suppose the rehearsal requires 30 area measurements plus 25 counts: 30 + 25 = 55 measurements, exceeding that ceiling by 5, assuming each operation consumes one measurement. For a later accounting handoff, QuickBooks Online’s SDK documents the quantity property qualified as SalesItemLineDetail.Qty, according to Intuit. The workload is hypothetical, the plan limits are published, and an estimator must approve units and item mapping before any accounting write.

Do not treat that example as a free-plan recommendation for production estimating. Establish whether the evaluation account provides the features you are trying to assess, and distinguish temporary evaluation access from the capabilities retained afterward.

Record original quantities, corrections and the reason for each correction. Keep the generated estimate alongside the reviewed version. The most useful result is a clear account of where human judgment remains and how another estimator can reproduce it.

Keep the bid handoff accountable

A proposed, configurable workflow from US Tech Automations could begin when an estimator places an approved quantity export in a designated folder. It could validate units, map classifications to approved cost codes and produce a draft import file plus an exception report. Prerequisites include an accessible export format, stable project identifiers and a maintained mapping table; API access is necessary only if the design writes directly into another system. The estimator reviews unmapped items and approves the output before downstream entry.

A separate proposed US Tech Automations workflow could begin when a reviewed revision export arrives. It could compare that file with the previously approved version, flag changed quantities and create an internal review packet showing affected estimate lines. It would require consistent revision labels, retained source files and authorized access to the receiving system. A human decides which changes affect scope, rates or exclusions; the proposed design does not issue a bid automatically.

These workflows sit above the selected takeoff product. They do not supply missing trade functionality or establish that either vendor exposes a particular API. Start with supported files and only add direct writes after confirming access, permissions and a recoverable update process.

Zapier, Make, n8n or an in-house integration can also support run histories, retries, error branches and audit evidence when configured. The buyer must design and own observability, idempotency, escalation, access controls and maintenance. A proposed US Tech Automations design could configure project-and-revision duplicate checks, a held exception queue and approval before writes, provided the required identifiers and system access exist. Those controls are design choices, not exclusive features.

The distinction between buying a platform and owning the connections around it also appears in the Ramp Stack explanation. That finance offering is separate from STACK Construction Technologies; the shared question is which system owns the authoritative record.

For accounting-side handoff considerations, see what Ramp Stack means for accounting firms. For a different category’s approach to comparing an existing platform with surrounding workflow needs, see the dental membership platform comparison. Neither substitutes for evaluating construction drawings.

Questions to settle before signing

Is Togal better than STACK for an estimator?

Togal is the stronger starting point when takeoff is the bottleneck, while STACK is the stronger starting point when you also want native estimating. Validate that recommendation on your trade and drawings. A required capability should decide the shortlist before interface preferences or headline automation claims.

Can Togal replace an estimating platform?

Togal can replace a takeoff component, but replacing your broader estimating workflow depends on its demonstrated scope. Its drywall assemblies deserve evaluation, especially if your current library is central to bidding. Confirm where final rates, labor assumptions and proposals will remain before retiring anything.

Does STACK offer AI takeoff?

STACK currently lists AI Takeoffs in its paid takeoff plans. Ask the vendor to show performance on the drawing types you actually receive and to explain the review process. Availability alone does not establish coverage of every trade, detail or scanned document.

Which product is cheaper overall?

Overall cost depends on your purchased tier, retained software and implementation work. Use the published billing basis above, then add the costs you can actually document. Do not assume consolidating tools reduces cost unless you will retire the replaced subscriptions and workflows.

Can either tool send quantities into accounting automatically?

An automatic accounting handoff requires confirmed export or API access, compatible fields and an approved mapping. Do not infer those prerequisites from an integration logo. Review customer or project assignment, item references and units, and require approval before creating or updating accounting records.

When NOT to use US Tech Automations?

Keep the simpler existing tool when a reviewed export already reaches your pricing workbook reliably. Native vendor functionality may also be sufficient when it covers the required handoff, or a maintained no-code flow may be appropriate when your team already owns its controls and support. Adding another orchestration layer without a specific recurring failure would add responsibility without a clear purpose.

Make the choice at the last handoff

Use this decision checklist before committing:

• Your actual drawing types and trade scope have been demonstrated.

• A reviewer can trace exported quantities to their source.

• Retained pricing rules produce an explainable estimate.

• The purchased plan includes the capabilities used in the evaluation.

• Someone owns revisions, access changes and failed handoffs.

Choose Togal if the drawing-to-quantity step needs improvement and your pricing system deserves to stay. Choose STACK if you want to bring quantities, estimating and proposals into a broader shared workflow. For drywall, examine assemblies on both sides before deciding that scope alone settles the comparison.

Keep the final decision tied to your reviewed bid artifact: correct quantities, explainable costs, traceable revisions and usable output. If a recurring failure remains between approved exports and the next system, see how US Tech Automations could configure that handoff with explicit prerequisites and a human approval point.