FieldAware

Name: FieldAware
Brand: FieldAware
Rating: 3.7 (108 reviews)

FieldAware is now a part of GPS Insight. Visit fieldaware.com/about/faqs/gpsi-fieldaware/ for more information.

Est 2009|Raised $39.5M|20 Ref Customers

LinkedIn 5K|Website|Web traffic 109K|FTEs 19|HQ Plano, Texas, US

01Competitive Landscape

Narrative competitive analysis

ServiceTitan vs FieldAware (head-to-head): - ServiceTitan’s comparison materials argue that FieldAware’s broader industry coverage may reduce depth for specific vertical workflows; this is a vendor-authored claim and should be treated as biased. Independent review themes align in part: FieldAware is characterized as suitable for standard workflows but potentially limited for highly specialized scheduling or billing. - Review aggregators suggest higher satisfaction for ServiceTitan in some metrics, while FieldAware is described as simpler to set up for basic use cases. Sources: - Vendor comparison page published by ServiceTitan - G2 product and comparison pages Market share/adoption signals: - Market-share estimates from vendor-agnostic modeling firms are directional and model-based; treat these as estimates rather than authoritative figures. Source: - Market intelligence / vendor-agnostic modeling firm report Where competitors may be better: - Organizations needing deep residential sales, proposals, financing, or complex project management may find some specialized competitors stronger in those workflows. - Enterprises that require CRM-native workflows and extensive customization may prefer a Salesforce-native approach, acknowledging higher platform complexity and TCO. Sources: - Vendor comparison page published by ServiceTitan - Published Salesforce add-on documentation

	FieldAware	ServiceTitan	Salesforce Field Service
Starting Price	Not consistently published; many deals appear quote-based; third-party sites cite low-end per-user pricing but accuracy uncertain	Not covered in available sources as a published rate card; commonly sold via direct sales	Salesforce add-ons/pricing are complex; published add-on documentation exists
Best For	Mid-market service operations seeking a mobile-capable FSM with dispatch and back-office integrations where standard workflows are acceptable	Trades-focused (HVAC/electrical/plumbing) and organizations requiring deeper, specialized workflows and revenue operations	Enterprises standardizing on the Salesforce platform needing deep CRM/workflow customization and ecosystem integrations
Key Strength	Mobile-oriented workflows and multi-industry applicability; emphasis on integrations such as NetSuite	Depth in vertical workflows and revenue operations; strong automation and trade-specific features (per competitor materials)	Platform extensibility and broad ecosystem integration capabilities
Key Weakness	Review literature cites integration and reporting limitations and constrained customization for complex scheduling/billing	Can be expensive and complex; implementation friction reported by some users	Complexity and cost; requires Salesforce expertise and can increase TCO

01Competitive Landscape

Narrative competitive analysis

ServiceTitan vs FieldAware (head-to-head):

ServiceTitan’s comparison materials argue that FieldAware’s broader industry coverage may reduce depth for specific vertical workflows; this is a vendor-authored claim and should be treated as biased. Independent review themes align in part: FieldAware is characterized as suitable for standard workflows but potentially limited for highly specialized scheduling or billing.
Review aggregators suggest higher satisfaction for ServiceTitan in some metrics, while FieldAware is described as simpler to set up for basic use cases.

Sources:

Vendor comparison page published by ServiceTitan
G2 product and comparison pages

Market share/adoption signals:

Market-share estimates from vendor-agnostic modeling firms are directional and model-based; treat these as estimates rather than authoritative figures.

Source:

Market intelligence / vendor-agnostic modeling firm report

Where competitors may be better:

Organizations needing deep residential sales, proposals, financing, or complex project management may find some specialized competitors stronger in those workflows.
Enterprises that require CRM-native workflows and extensive customization may prefer a Salesforce-native approach, acknowledging higher platform complexity and TCO.

Sources:

Vendor comparison page published by ServiceTitan
Published Salesforce add-on documentation

	FieldAware	ServiceTitan	Salesforce Field Service
Starting Price	Not consistently published; many deals appear quote-based; third-party sites cite low-end per-user pricing but accuracy uncertain	Not covered in available sources as a published rate card; commonly sold via direct sales	Salesforce add-ons/pricing are complex; published add-on documentation exists
Best For	Mid-market service operations seeking a mobile-capable FSM with dispatch and back-office integrations where standard workflows are acceptable	Trades-focused (HVAC/electrical/plumbing) and organizations requiring deeper, specialized workflows and revenue operations	Enterprises standardizing on the Salesforce platform needing deep CRM/workflow customization and ecosystem integrations
Key Strength	Mobile-oriented workflows and multi-industry applicability; emphasis on integrations such as NetSuite	Depth in vertical workflows and revenue operations; strong automation and trade-specific features (per competitor materials)	Platform extensibility and broad ecosystem integration capabilities
Key Weakness	Review literature cites integration and reporting limitations and constrained customization for complex scheduling/billing	Can be expensive and complex; implementation friction reported by some users	Complexity and cost; requires Salesforce expertise and can increase TCO

FieldAware

01Competitive Landscape

Narrative competitive analysis

02Market Map

01Competitive Landscape

Narrative competitive analysis

02Market Map