Sitewise vs CompanyCam: a crew tool and a report tool

CompanyCam and Sitewise get compared because both start at the same moment: someone on a job site holding a phone. They diverge immediately after. CompanyCam is built so a crew and its office share one photo stream all day. Sitewise is built so one person finishes one document before leaving.

Everything below about CompanyCam was checked against companycam.com and its App Store listing on September 3, 2026. Everything about Sitewise comes from its own documentation. Prices change, so verify before you commit a budget.

Sitewise makes a file, CompanyCam makes a feed

CompanyCam wins on reach, crew coordination and integrations

Reach, first. CompanyCam runs on iOS, Android and the web, so a crew with mixed phones and an office coordinator on a desktop are all in the same product. Sitewise has no answer to this. If two of your six guys carry Android, the comparison ends here.

Team coordination is the next one. CompanyCam's design is a live project feed everyone contributes to, with photos organized by GPS location, in-app discussion, and translation so a bilingual crew can work in one thread. Their site describes it as field work management, not a camera, and that is fair. Sitewise has no crew feed, no assignment, no comments, no roles.

Integrations are the third. Their site lists more than sixty, and the App Store listing names fifty-plus CRMs and field service platforms. If your photos need to land against a job in Jobber or an estimate in AccuLynx without anybody re-uploading them, that plumbing already exists and it is not something a small app replicates.

Scale is the fourth. Enterprise plans cover fifty or more users with SSO and a corporate portal. Unlimited cloud storage is part of every plan. Companies that have to answer questions about who accessed what, when, are the customer CompanyCam is designed for.

Sitewise wins on voice, sketching and the finished file

Voice, and where it runs. You hold a button, say what you are looking at, and the transcript appears attached to that photo, produced on the iPhone itself rather than sent somewhere for processing. Talking about a defect while standing in front of it produces a better note than typing about it in a truck an hour later, and the difference shows up in the finished report.

Sketching on the photo. Draw an arrow at the crack, circle the missing hanger, add a text label, and the marked-up image goes into the document. CompanyCam has annotation too, so this is a matter of degree rather than a feature only one product has, but the sketch tools are the point of the app rather than an addition to a photo library.

The document itself. Sitewise generates a formatted PDF or DOCX on the phone: photos, captions, sketches and transcripts in the order you captured them, ready to email from the parking lot. DOCX matters more than it sounds. A client who edits your report before forwarding it cannot do that with a PDF or a share link.

Price and data handling. Sitewise is free during the launch period, and it carries no ads and no tracking, with voice transcription running on the device. What CompanyCam collects is described in its own privacy policy and its App Store privacy label, and if data handling is part of your decision, read those rather than take a comparison page's word for it.

Where they overlap and it does not matter

Both stamp photos with time and location. Both let you mark up an image. Both let you organize captures per project and share the result with someone who was not there. Choosing between them on those grounds is a coin flip.

The difference that decides it is the output. CompanyCam's natural product is a living record of a job that anyone with a link can watch. Sitewise's natural product is a file with a date on it that someone signs, files or forwards. A roofing company posting progress to homeowners wants the first. An inspector who owes a client a report by five o'clock wants the second.

Sitewise is not a platform and CompanyCam is not a report writer

Sitewise has no scheduling, no budgeting, no CAD or drafting, no e-signature routing, no Android and no web. It is a capture-and-report tool and nothing else.

CompanyCam is not a document authoring tool. It produces photo reports from what your crew shot, which is a different thing from a structured inspection report with numbered observations and acceptance criteria. Nor is it cheap for a solo operator: Core at $63 a month covers one user, which is real money for one person who mostly needs a PDF.

Running both is a real option

Plenty of companies already carry a crew documentation tool and separately owe a formal report to a client, an insurer or a municipality. Those are two jobs, and the second one gets done in Word today by someone who would rather not.

If that is your situation, the honest test is to walk one site twice, once in each, and compare what you send at the end. It will settle an argument that a comparison table cannot. The wider field is laid out in the best site inspection apps for iPhone, and several of those sit between these two in both price and ambition.

The deciding question is who else has to see the photos

If the answer is only your client, at the end, in a document, then the tool that finishes the document on the phone wins on the strength of that alone. If the answer is your crew, your office, your customer and your CRM, all day, then per-seat pricing on a platform with sixty integrations is what that costs, and no free app substitutes for it.