Portfolio Scale
Model 10 buildings or 10,000. Same engine. Same physics. Comparable results. Ten simulations running concurrently in the cloud.
The Problem
A 200-building portfolio modeled one at a time takes years. But timeline isn't the real problem — consistency is. Each building uses a different modeler, different assumptions, different software versions, different calibration methods. Building A's EUI was modeled in eQUEST by an analyst in Denver. Building B was modeled in IES VE by a consultant in Boston. You cannot compare the results. You cannot rank buildings. You cannot prioritize capital. The data exists, but it doesn't speak the same language.
Portfolio-scale decisions require portfolio-scale consistency. Same engine. Same methodology. Same physics.
The Consistency Problem
Analyst A
eQUEST
78.2
kBtu/SF/yr
Analyst B
IES VE
91.5
kBtu/SF/yr
Analyst C
Trane TRACE
84.0
kBtu/SF/yr
Which number do you use to make a $2M retrofit decision?
83.7
kBtu/SF/yrSame engine. Every building. Comparable results.
0 / 200 buildings modeled
Every building gets the same ASHRAE 140-validated physics. The 200th building is as rigorous as the first.
Traditional: 3–4 buildings per month per analyst. Roovie: 200 buildings in days.
1
Single Building
Traditional
$25K–$100K · 250–500 hrs · 4–8 weeks
Roovie
Days · Subscription
Use case
Energy audit, ECM analysis, compliance
50
Portfolio
Traditional
$750K–$3M · 3,000–4,500 hrs · 2–4 years
Roovie
Weeks · Same subscription
Use case
BPS compliance, capital planning, ESG reporting
10K
Program Scale
Traditional
Not feasible at traditional per-building cost
Roovie
Months · Flat pricing
Use case
Utility program evaluation, territory-wide analysis
Economics at Scale
At 50+ buildings, the traditional per-building audit model breaks down. The timeline exceeds BPS compliance deadlines. The cost exceeds the first year of penalties. Portfolio-scale analysis requires a platform — not a headcount plan.
Portfolio Workflow
Data In
Building addresses + utility bills for every property. Bulk upload. No drawings, no site visits.
200 buildingsModel
Each building auto-modeled from address. Geometry, envelope, HVAC, schedules. All run concurrently in the cloud.
ConcurrentCalibrate
Every model calibrated against actual utility data. ASHRAE Guideline 14 thresholds met per building.
NMBE ±5%Analyze
Buildings ranked by EUI, carbon intensity, savings potential. ECM scenarios run for every non-compliant building.
RankedPlan
Portfolio-level capital allocation. Retrofit priority ranked by ROI, penalty avoidance, or carbon reduction. Multi-year phasing.
Capital planPortfolio Ranking
| # | Building | EUI (kBtu/SF) | vs. Median | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 450 Park Ave | 142.3 | +47% | Critical |
| 2 | 88 Broad St | 128.7 | +33% | Critical |
| 3 | 1200 Market St | 118.4 | +22% | Over limit |
| 4 | 500 Boylston | 104.1 | +8% | At risk |
| 5 | 200 Clarendon | 97.8 | +1% | Marginal |
| 6 | 101 Federal St | 91.2 | –6% | Compliant |
| 7 | 75 State St | 84.5 | –13% | Compliant |
| 8 | 225 Franklin St | 76.1 | –21% | Strong |
Ranked by EUI against CBECS national medians by building type. Worst performers identified for immediate attention.
Every number backed by a calibrated ASHRAE 140-2020 simulation — not a benchmarking estimate.
What Changes
Model every building from its address and utility data. Ten simulations run concurrently in the cloud. A 200-building portfolio that would take years with traditional methods is completed in weeks — with consistent methodology across every building.
Every building is modeled with the same engine, the same physics, and the same assumptions. Rank buildings by EUI, carbon intensity, or savings potential. The comparisons are valid because the methodology is identical.
Run the same upgrade scenarios across every building in the portfolio. Identify which buildings benefit most from each measure. Aggregate savings projections. Prioritize capital deployment where the physics shows the greatest return.
Who This Serves
Capital planning, BPS compliance, and asset-level energy intelligence across your entire portfolio. Rank buildings by performance, prioritize upgrades, and track improvement over time.
Scenario
A REIT with 85 office buildings across 4 BPS jurisdictions (NYC, Boston, Denver, DC). Traditional approach: $1.3M–$5.1M in audit fees over 3–5 years. With Roovie: entire portfolio modeled in weeks, buildings ranked by penalty exposure, multi-year retrofit capital plan prioritized by ROI.
Model every building in a service territory or program cohort. Design targeted rebate programs based on actual building physics. Defend savings claims with calibrated simulations.
Scenario
A regional utility evaluating 12,000 commercial buildings for a demand-side management program. Need to identify top 20% candidates for weatherization incentives. Traditional approach: not feasible at per-building audit cost. With Roovie: every building modeled with building-specific ECM savings. Program design based on actual physics.