Quick Answer
Primer and RedIQ both automate CRE data extraction, but they serve different needs. RedIQ specializes in standardizing multifamily rent rolls and T12s with a proprietary database of 500+ historical deals. Primer works across any asset class and any document type, maps data into your existing Excel model (not a generic template), and cites every extracted cell back to its source document and page number.
Quick comparison
Start here if you want the key differences at a glance. Detailed explanations of each row follow below.
| Feature | Primer | RedIQ |
|---|---|---|
| Asset classes | All (MF, storage, industrial, hotel, senior housing, data centers) | Primarily multifamily and SFR |
| Document types | Any (OMs, rent rolls, T12s, Yardi exports, leases, broker packages) | Rent rolls and T12/operating statements |
| Output format | Your exact Excel template | Standardized RedIQ format |
| Source citations | Every cell traced to source doc, page, and table | No per-cell citations |
| Conflict resolution | Cross-references multiple documents, flags disagreements | Single-source extraction |
| Historical database | Builds your private comp database over time | 500+ historical deals for benchmarking |
| Pricing | Flat monthly fee per team (get quote) | Varies by volume (contact for quote) |
| Setup time | 48 hours | 1 to 2 weeks |
| Best for | Multi-asset teams wanting data in their own model, with audit trails | MF-only shops wanting standardized output and historical comps |
What is RedIQ?
RedIQ is a data extraction platform built specifically for multifamily acquisitions. Founded around 2013, it is one of the longest-running tools in the CRE extraction space. Its core workflow: you upload a rent roll and T12, and RedIQ standardizes the data into its own format for analysis.
RedIQ's strongest asset is its proprietary historical deal database. Teams that have used RedIQ for years accumulate hundreds of standardized deals, creating a benchmarking layer that is difficult to replicate. As one institutional buyer with 500+ deals in RedIQ over six years described it, the database becomes a competitive advantage for historical comparisons and market benchmarking.
The honest characterization from users: RedIQ is "data translation, not analysis." It standardizes documents into a consistent format. It does not reconcile conflicting data across multiple documents, map into your custom Excel model, or provide cell-level source citations. For multifamily-only teams that want a standardized workflow, those limitations may not matter.
What is Primer?
Primer is AI-powered document intelligence for CRE acquisition teams. It extracts data from any document type (OMs, rent rolls, T12s, Yardi exports, leases, broker packages), maps the results into your existing Excel underwriting model, and cites every extracted cell back to its source document, page, and table.
The core difference from legacy extraction tools: Primer works like an analyst would. It reconciles conflicting numbers across documents, resolves duplicates, handles inconsistent formatting, and flags discrepancies for your review. One acquisitions VP described the ideal: "I give you my model, upload docs, get my model back exactly the way I want it, like an analyst would do."
Primer covers any asset class: multifamily, self-storage, industrial, hotel, senior housing, data centers, and manufactured housing communities. Your team configures the Excel template mapping once, and every subsequent deal uses that same mapping. Setup takes 48 hours.
Key differences explained
How does asset class coverage compare?
RedIQ was built for multifamily and has added single-family rental support. If you acquire exclusively multifamily, this is not a limitation. If your team works across multiple asset classes (storage, industrial, hotel, or any combination), RedIQ does not cover those property types.
Primer handles any asset class. The same tool, the same workflow, the same Excel template mapping. Teams that acquire across property types use one extraction pipeline for everything, rather than maintaining separate tools or manual processes for non-multifamily deals. According to NAIOP's research on CRE technology adoption, multi-asset-class teams increasingly need tools that work across their full portfolio, not just one property type.
What format does each tool output?
RedIQ outputs data in its own standardized format. You then export that data into your underwriting model. This adds an extra step, and it means your team adapts to RedIQ's structure rather than the other way around.
Primer maps directly into your existing Excel template. You upload your model once during setup, define which cells map to which data points, and every subsequent deal populates your model exactly as you built it. No re-mapping, no export step, no adapting to someone else's format. This is consistently the biggest "aha" moment on demos: teams realize they get their own model back, populated and cited.
Does each tool cite its sources?
RedIQ does not provide per-cell source citations. When a number appears in your output, you cannot click it to see which page and table of the source document it came from. For teams that present underwriting to investment committees or outside investors, this means manually verifying outputs against source documents.
Primer cites every extracted cell. Click any value in your populated model, and Primer shows the source document, page number, and specific table where that number originated. If the AI could not find a value with high confidence, it flags it rather than guessing. This audit trail is what drops skepticism on every demo. As one prospect put it after seeing citations in action: "That's what I need for my IC deck."
How does each tool handle conflicting data?
A common problem in CRE underwriting: the rent roll says one number, the T12 says another, and the OM summary says a third. This happens frequently, because documents are prepared at different times, by different people, with different rounding conventions.
RedIQ extracts from individual documents but does not cross-reference them against each other. If the T12 and the rent roll disagree on gross potential rent, RedIQ will not flag the conflict. Your analyst catches it during review, or it goes unnoticed.
Primer cross-references multiple documents and flags disagreements explicitly. When numbers conflict between the OM, rent roll, and T12, Primer surfaces the discrepancy, shows both values with their sources, and lets your team decide which to use. This catches errors that even experienced analysts miss, because the conflicts are often subtle (rounding differences, different periods, or stale data in one document).
What about historical deal data?
This is RedIQ's strongest differentiator. Teams that have used RedIQ for years have built databases of hundreds of standardized deals. That historical data serves as a benchmarking and comp layer: you can compare a new deal's rent roll against hundreds of similar properties you have previously underwritten.
Primer takes a different approach. Every deal you process through Primer builds your private comp database over time, creating what several users have described as an "internal CoStar" for their firm. The data belongs to you, structured consistently, and grows more valuable with each deal. The tradeoff: if you are starting fresh, you do not have a pre-built database on day one the way you would with RedIQ.
When to choose RedIQ
RedIQ is the better fit in specific scenarios. Here are the situations where it makes sense to stay with or adopt RedIQ.
- You are a multifamily-only shop. If you acquire exclusively multifamily and never touch other asset classes, RedIQ's specialization is an advantage rather than a limitation.
- You rely on historical deal benchmarking. If you have years of deals in RedIQ and actively use that database for comp analysis and benchmarking, the switching cost is real. That historical data is proprietary to RedIQ.
- You do not need custom Excel template mapping. If your team is comfortable working in RedIQ's standardized output format and does not require data mapped into a specific proprietary model, the output format difference is not a pain point.
- Your workflow already integrates with RedIQ. If RedIQ feeds into other systems (Dealpath, internal databases, reporting tools), switching requires updating those integrations.
When to choose Primer
Primer is the better fit when your workflow demands flexibility, auditability, or multi-asset coverage.
- You work across multiple asset classes. Self-storage, industrial, hotel, senior housing, data centers, or any combination alongside multifamily. One tool, one workflow.
- You have your own Excel underwriting model. If your team has built a proprietary model and needs data mapped into it (not exported into a generic template and re-keyed), Primer is designed for exactly this.
- You need source citations for audit trails. If you present underwriting to investment committees, outside investors, or lenders, per-cell source citations eliminate the manual verification step.
- You need AI that reconciles conflicting data. When the rent roll, T12, and OM disagree, Primer flags the conflict and shows both values. This catches errors that manual review often misses.
- You evaluate 10 or more deals per month and need speed. Primer processes documents in minutes. At high volume, the speed advantage compounds: your team evaluates more deals without adding headcount.
- You receive documents beyond rent rolls and T12s. Yardi exports, property management reports, lease abstracts, broker packages, and other non-standard documents all work in Primer.
What about switching from RedIQ?
Switching is straightforward on the workflow side and does not require a long migration. Primer onboards in 48 hours: upload your Excel template, configure the field mapping once, and run your first deal through it the same week.
The one consideration: your historical RedIQ data stays in RedIQ. It is their proprietary database, and it does not export in a way that transfers to another tool. If your team actively references that historical data for comp analysis, you have two options: maintain a RedIQ subscription for historical lookups while using Primer for new deals, or accept that your Primer comp database starts fresh and grows with each deal you process.
Some teams run both tools in parallel during a transition period, processing the same deals through each to validate outputs and build confidence before fully switching. There is no technical conflict between the two, and the parallel approach eliminates risk. According to Deloitte's proptech research, CRE teams that run parallel pilots before full adoption report higher satisfaction and faster team buy-in.
Upload your Excel template (Day 1)
Send your current underwriting model. Primer's team configures the field mapping: which cells map to which data points from your documents.
Run a real deal through both tools (Day 2 to 3)
Process a recent deal you have already underwritten. Compare Primer's output (in your model, with citations) against your RedIQ output and your manual work.
Decide based on your own data (Week 1 to 2)
After running 3 to 5 deals through both tools, you will know which output format, citation depth, and asset class coverage matches your workflow. No pressure to commit before you have validated.
Pricing comparison
Primer charges a flat monthly fee per team. Pricing does not vary by deal volume, so your cost per deal decreases as you process more deals. Contact us for current pricing.
RedIQ pricing varies by volume and contract terms. RedIQ does not publish standard pricing publicly, so you will need to contact them for a quote based on your deal volume. Pricing is typically structured per-deal or as a monthly subscription with a deal cap.
| Factor | Primer | RedIQ |
|---|---|---|
| Starting price | Flat monthly fee per team | Contact for quote |
| Deal volume cap | Unlimited | Varies by plan |
| Cost per deal (at 40/mo) | Decreases with volume | Depends on contract |
| Setup / onboarding cost | Included | Varies |
The real cost comparison is not tool A versus tool B. It is tool cost versus analyst time cost. A two-analyst team spending 1.5 hours per deal on data entry, at $50 per hour loaded cost, spends $78,000 per year on extraction alone. A flat-fee AI tool pays for itself within weeks. The JLL CRE technology survey confirms that document extraction automation has the fastest payback period of any CRE technology investment.