Home / Compare / COMPASS by Bespoke Metrics vs Highwire
COMPASS by Bespoke Metrics vs Highwire
Two third-party subcontractor prequalification services that verify what subs submit. COMPASS centers on one standardized form, a numeric risk score and a rules-based limit model, while Highwire runs trade-specific risk assessments with safety and field applications. Vendor pages re-read Oct 18, 2026; desk research, not tested, no winner.
In short: COMPASS by Bespoke Metrics (Subcontractor prequalification; no public prices (quote / sales)) vs Highwire (Contractor prequalification & risk; no public prices (quote / sales)). Facts last checked Oct 18, 2026. No winner declared; not tested.
DESK RESEARCH, NOT TESTED. Compiled from vendors' public websites (accessed Oct 18, 2026). Vendor claims are not verified by Means & Methods Lab. No scores or rankings.
Side by side
| Sheet row | COMPASS by Bespoke Metrics | Highwire |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Subcontractor prequalification | Contractor prequalification & risk |
| AI role (our label) | Not AI-first | Not AI-first |
| What it does | Subcontractor prequalification, bidding and performance-evaluation suite with integrated bid management. It centralizes data collection and analytics. Re-read Oct 18, 2026: COMPASS SRP collects subcontractor data through the 1Form, a standardized qualification form, with a support team for subs; a data verification team of financial analysts reviews submissions, machine learning highlights potential issues and a person checks supporting documents, with alerts where data could not be verified. Its Q Score is a numerical, rules-based risk assessment covering business, finance and health and safety, and a GC-specific automated limit model suggests maximum subcontractor exposure that can be accepted, reviewed or overridden. COMPASS Eval holds internal subcontractor reviews; COMPASS Connect offers an API and Workato-based integrations. Its only AI-adjacent mention is machine learning in data verification, so we keep the Not AI-first tag. | Contractor risk software built around prequalification assessments and field applications, covering company, finance, safety and insurance risk. Vendor frames it as moving beyond pass/fail document checklists to understanding each contractor's risks and working with subs to mitigate default and safety risks. Its prequalification page lists financial analysis, project capabilities, past project experience, diversity classifications, corporate information, surety bond tracking, litigation and defaults, safety performance history, and client and supplier references, and says it helps GCs avoid costly defaults and meet SDI (subcontractor default insurance) prequalification requirements (vendor wording). Re-read Oct 18, 2026: the prequalification page also lists expert third-party validation and QA and Procore integrations for syncing projects and contractors and monitoring contract spend, and the pricing page covers Prequalification, Advanced Safety, Inspections and Incidents. The pages we read do not describe AI features, so we tag it Not AI-first. |
| Who it's for | General contractors managing subcontractor risk. | General contractors' preconstruction and risk teams, and owners running capital projects (vendor wording). |
| Pricing (as publicly stated) | No public prices found (checked Oct 16, 2026; unchanged Oct 18, 2026): the vendor site has no pricing or plans link in its navigation or footer, and /pricing and /plans return a not-found page. The site's calls to action are "Schedule a demo". Confirm current pricing with the vendor. | Not publicly listed (Get Pricing / Request a Demo forms; checked Oct 16, 2026; re-checked Oct 18, 2026). The pricing page FAQ says client pricing depends on assessment needs and the number of contractors you work with, contractor subscriptions are based on company headcount, and a free trial is offered for clients. Confirm current pricing with the vendor. |
| Test status | Not tested. No scores. | Not tested. No scores. |
| Vendor links | ||
| Sources |
Facts last checked: Oct 18, 2026. Prices change; check the vendor page before relying on them.
Where the vendor descriptions differ
- Starting point (vendor wording): COMPASS by Bespoke Metrics describes a suite of integrated preconstruction applications for subcontractor prequalification, bidding and performance evaluations, with multi-language concierge service for subcontractors and general contractors. Highwire describes contractor risk management through prequalification assessments and field applications, aimed at general contractors and owners across construction, data centers, health systems, manufacturing, renewables and other capital project sectors.
- What subs fill in: COMPASS collects data through the 1Form, a standardized qualification form it says was built to the data collection standards of many North American general contractors, so subs answer once for multiple GCs and keep control of their data; a dedicated team supports subcontractors by phone or email. Highwire's prequalification page lists financial analysis, project capabilities, past project experience, diversity classifications, corporate information, surety bond tracking, litigation and defaults, safety performance history and client and supplier references, and says it avoids irrelevant questions with trade-specific assessments.
- How the data is checked and scored: COMPASS says a data verification team of financial analysts reviews submissions, machine learning techniques highlight potential issues, a person manually checks supporting documents, and alerts show where data could not be verified; its Q Score is a numerical, rules-based risk assessment covering business, finance and health and safety, and a GC-specific automated limit model suggests maximum subcontractor exposure that you can accept, review or override. Highwire says it provides expert third-party validation and QA, frames the goal as moving from pass/fail checklists to working with contractors on their risks, and says its prequal helps GCs avoid defaults and meet SDI prequalification requirements (vendor claims).
- Around prequal: COMPASS Eval lets project staff review subcontractors with standardized questions, visible only inside your organization, and COMPASS Connect offers an API and Workato-based integrations (specific systems not named on the page we read). Highwire lists Procore integrations for syncing projects and contractors and monitoring contract spend and financial risk, a Companion integration tool, and pricing pages for Advanced Safety, Inspections and Incidents modules. AI: COMPASS's one AI-adjacent mention is machine learning in data verification, and Highwire's pages describe none, so both stay Not AI-first.
- Pricing: neither publishes prices. COMPASS routes to Schedule a demo and has no pricing page. Highwire's pricing page says client pricing depends on assessment needs and the number of contractors you work with, contractor subscriptions are based on company headcount, and a free trial is offered. Not used here: Highwire's contractor network counts, case studies, customer quote and its cost comparison with other systems; COMPASS's GC and surety coverage figures and its placeholder testimonial text.
Paraphrased from the sources listed above. Vendor claims are reported as claims.
What we can't tell you yet
Which tool is better for your work. That needs testing on the same package with a verified answer key. Planned measures for this comparison:
- How COMPASS's Q Score and Highwire's assessments treat the same subcontractor; ask for a sample report from each
- Which ERP and bid systems COMPASS Connect integrates with, and whether Highwire's Procore integration matches your workflow
- What either costs for your subcontractor count and who pays, the GC or the subs; neither publishes prices
See the methodology and leaderboard status.
Related
- Category hub: Construction finance, payments & risk tools
- Compare: Trayd vs Miter
- Compare: Sitewire vs Built Technologies
- Compare: Highwire vs Constrafor
- Compare: TrustLayer vs Jones
- Compare: bcs vs TrustLayer
- Compare: Jones vs Constrafor
- Compare: Avetta vs ISNetworld
- Compare: ISNetworld vs Highwire
- Compare: GCPay vs Trimble Pay
- Compare: Procore Pay vs GCPay
- Compare: Clearstory vs eSUB
- Compare: Adaptive vs SuperConstruct
- Compare: Billy vs illumend
- Compare: Adaptive vs Agave
- Compare: Siteline vs SuperConstruct
- Compare: Finvari vs Speedchain
- Compare: Agave vs Morpheus
- Compare: Sage for Construction vs C/F Data Systems
- Compare: Xpedeon vs Sage for Construction
- Compare: BlueTape vs Earlytrade
- Compare: EzzyBills vs Adaptive
- Compare: Ontollo vs Datagrid
- Compare: Lumber vs Miter
Means & Methods Lab has no commercial relationship with any vendor on this page. Rankings and placement are never for sale. See how we make money.