Cupix

Name: Cupix
Brand: Cupix 3D spatial digital twin platform
Rating: 4 (14 reviews)

We serve the entire AEC ecosystem across the entire built-world lifecycle. Build Smart.

Est 2015|Raised $55.8M|28 Ref Customers

LinkedIn 12K|Web traffic 25K|FTEs 141|HQ Round Rock, Texas, US

01Competitive Landscape

Narrative analysis

Cupix vs OpenSpace: - Both target construction reality capture and progress documentation. - OpenSpace differentiates with an emphasis on enterprise/government security posture and a publicly documented trust center. - Cupix emphasizes 4D documentation and the unification of several spatial data types. Cupix vs HoloBuilder: - HoloBuilder uses a quote-based pricing model and focuses on standardized 360 capture and progress workflows. Cupix emphasizes 3D/4D mapping from 360 video and analytics add-ons. Cupix vs Matterport: - Matterport is often considered for virtual tours and general digital twins across industries; Cupix is positioned more toward construction operations and BIM integration.

Market adoption signals

The vendor makes adoption claims on its site that should be validated for relevance to the procuring organization.
Competitors also present large-scale adoption claims; procurement teams should verify region- and use-case relevance through references.

Buyer guidance: Validate vendor scale claims for relevance to the buyer's region, project type, and BIM maturity using reference checks.

	Cupix	OpenSpace	HoloBuilder
Starting Price	Not clearly published; appears sales-led with add-ons (SiteInsights, EverHosting)	Public guidance suggests projects may start at a high project-level price (quote-based)	Customizable pricing based on project needs (quote-based)
Typical fit	Teams seeking 3D/4D digital twins from 360 video, with BIM/schedule overlays and collaboration	Construction teams seeking streamlined 360 capture aligned to models with an enterprise security posture	Construction photo documentation and progress workflows where standardized 360 capture and integrations are primary
Key strength	Emphasis on space + time documentation and integrations with BIM/schedule	Security posture and dedicated trust center including government authorization for regulated buyers	Established construction documentation product with enterprise packaging
Key weakness	Reviews cite usability friction, potential alignment issues at scale, and operational capture effort	Pricing can be high and sales-led; enterprise-level models	Pricing not transparent; product emphasis may be less focused on 4D digital twins

01Competitive Landscape

Narrative analysis

Cupix vs OpenSpace:

Both target construction reality capture and progress documentation.
OpenSpace differentiates with an emphasis on enterprise/government security posture and a publicly documented trust center.
Cupix emphasizes 4D documentation and the unification of several spatial data types.

Cupix vs HoloBuilder:

HoloBuilder uses a quote-based pricing model and focuses on standardized 360 capture and progress workflows. Cupix emphasizes 3D/4D mapping from 360 video and analytics add-ons.

Cupix vs Matterport:

Matterport is often considered for virtual tours and general digital twins across industries; Cupix is positioned more toward construction operations and BIM integration.

Market adoption signals

The vendor makes adoption claims on its site that should be validated for relevance to the procuring organization.
Competitors also present large-scale adoption claims; procurement teams should verify region- and use-case relevance through references.

Buyer guidance: Validate vendor scale claims for relevance to the buyer's region, project type, and BIM maturity using reference checks.

	Cupix	OpenSpace	HoloBuilder
Starting Price	Not clearly published; appears sales-led with add-ons (SiteInsights, EverHosting)	Public guidance suggests projects may start at a high project-level price (quote-based)	Customizable pricing based on project needs (quote-based)
Typical fit	Teams seeking 3D/4D digital twins from 360 video, with BIM/schedule overlays and collaboration	Construction teams seeking streamlined 360 capture aligned to models with an enterprise security posture	Construction photo documentation and progress workflows where standardized 360 capture and integrations are primary
Key strength	Emphasis on space + time documentation and integrations with BIM/schedule	Security posture and dedicated trust center including government authorization for regulated buyers	Established construction documentation product with enterprise packaging
Key weakness	Reviews cite usability friction, potential alignment issues at scale, and operational capture effort	Pricing can be high and sales-led; enterprise-level models	Pricing not transparent; product emphasis may be less focused on 4D digital twins

Cupix

01Competitive Landscape

Narrative analysis

Market adoption signals

02Market Map

01Competitive Landscape

Narrative analysis

Market adoption signals

02Market Map