Accuracy and methodology
How a RoofKarma measurement is produced, what the confidence grade means, and why this page publishes no accuracy figure.
RoofKarma publishes no accuracy figure
There is no accuracy scorecard for this platform and no independent benchmark of its measurements. Neither has been produced, so neither can be published, and quoting a figure from anywhere else would be a claim nobody has checked.
A scorecard needs a ground-truth set of roofs measured by hand, held out from the tuning data, stratified across roof styles and imagery quality, and evaluated by someone who did not build the system. Until that exists and an independent benchmark has been completed, any number on this page would be marketing.
What the measurement actually does
The roof is reconstructed from permitted aerial imagery and elevation data into facets with their own areas, pitches and orientations, and edges classified by type — eave, rake, ridge, hip, valley, step flashing, headwall, transition and parapet.
Areas are reported both as a flat footprint and as the sloped surface a roofer buys material for, because those are different numbers and confusing them is how estimates go wrong. Every figure carries its unit.
Public property records are read separately: assessor attributes, permits and dated weather events. They are shown as records with sources and dates, never merged into the measurement.
What the confidence grade means
The grade describes the evidence behind one report, not the platform. Grade A and B mean the roof was fully visible and the reconstruction was consistent. Grade C means the report is preliminary and its ranges are widened. Grade D means the evidence was not good enough to price, and the report says so instead of pricing it anyway.
The grade is computed on the server when a version is built and frozen into it. It is not a marketing badge, it cannot be raised by a checkbox, and the strictest applicable rule always wins.
What it is not
It is not an inspection. Decking, underlayment, ventilation, fastening and existing layer count are not visible from above, and a report that guessed at them would be inventing the expensive part of the job.
It is not a condition assessment. Where imagery cannot support a judgement, the report says "not assessable from available imagery" rather than inferring damage.
It is not certified, verified or guaranteed. RoofKarma sells no human-verification service, issues no certificate and offers no accuracy guarantee at any price.
How to check a report yourself
Every report has a Sources & limitations tab listing what was used, when each source was captured or retrieved, under what licence, and what the report could not determine. The version trail records which version produced which figure.
If something is wrong — the wrong building, a missing structure, imagery older than your roof — the report can be flagged. The original is preserved and the correction is routed as a structured issue, because a homeowner correction is evidence, not ground truth.