Concepts
How we measure
The methodology behind Wave's published numbers: 90% day-one accuracy, 75% faster cycle time, and ~15 minutes per estimate. What each one measures, how it was gathered, and what it does not claim.
Wave publishes three numbers. This page says exactly what each one measures, where it came from, and what it does not claim. If you are evaluating Wave against another tool, read this before you compare figures, because most vendors in this category do not define theirs.
90% day-one accuracy
What it measures: how close a Wave estimate is, on the day it is written, to the estimate that is ultimately agreed.
How it was gathered: internal review of Wave's water-damage and mold estimates.
What it does not claim: this is not a third-party study, not an audited benchmark, and not a carrier-verified figure. Industry baselines for human estimating accuracy in restoration are commonly reported in the 80 to 85% range, and that comparison is context rather than a controlled test against Wave.
75% faster cycle time
What it measures: estimate-completion time. The time it takes to produce the estimate, not the time it takes a carrier to approve or pay it.
How it was gathered: internal review of Wave users comparing estimate-completion time on Wave against their self-reported pre-Wave workflows.
What it does not claim: nothing about claim cycle time, approval speed, or payment timing. Wave does not control any of those. Results vary by job complexity and team.
About 15 minutes per estimate
What it measures: typical time to produce a water mitigation or mold estimate on Wave, from the start of the chat to PDF export.
How it was gathered: internal review across Category 1, 2 and 3 jobs.
What it does not claim: it excludes photo upload and post-export revisions, and it is a typical figure rather than a floor or a guarantee. A complex multi-unit loss takes longer.
Why these are stated this plainly
Two reasons.
An estimate is a document someone else reviews. A contractor who repeats a vendor's number to an adjuster and cannot say where it came from is in a worse position than one who never quoted a number at all. If you are going to use ours, you should be able to say what it measures.
And numbers travel. Published figures get quoted in comparisons, repeated by AI assistants, and reprinted without their qualifications attached. Writing the qualifications somewhere permanent and linkable is the only way they survive the trip.
Related
- Wave's regional price list: where prices come from and how they resolve
- What Wave does (and doesn't): the capability list, including the gaps
- Standards rationale: the IICRC S500 reasoning attached to every completed estimate