Encompass Alternatives: What Independent Brokers Should Consider in 2026

Encompass from ICE Mortgage Technology is the industry standard, but its pricing puts it out of reach for many independent brokers. With costs starting at $500-1,500 per user per month plus implementation fees that can run $50,000-200,000+, small to mid-size shops are increasingly evaluating Encompass alternatives that deliver core functionality at a fraction of the cost.

This guide covers four alternatives worth evaluating, with honest tradeoffs on cost, features, and workflow fit.

What should you evaluate in an Encompass alternative?

Before comparing platforms, define what you actually need. Most brokers use a fraction of Encompass's feature set. Focus your evaluation on:

Origination workflow. Can you take a loan from application through submission to the lender? This is the baseline.
Compliance tooling. Does the platform handle disclosure generation, TRID timelines, and audit trails?
Lender integration. How many of your lenders accept submissions from this platform?
Cost structure. Per-user monthly, per-loan, or annual flat rate? Factor in implementation and training costs.
Migration path. Can you export your data if you need to switch again?

How does ARIVE compare?

ARIVE (formerly Wizni) is built exclusively for mortgage brokers and is one of the most direct Encompass alternatives for small to mid-size shops.

Cost: Starting around $50 per user per month. No large upfront implementation fee.
Strengths: Full LOS with built-in POS, product and pricing engine, and a lender marketplace with 200+ wholesale lenders. Bi-weekly release cycle driven by broker community feedback. Over 25,000 loan officers and 200,000+ monthly applications processed.
Limitations: No AI-powered features (guideline search, document extraction). The platform is comprehensive but does not address the knowledge layer of mortgage origination.
Best for: Brokers who want a full origination platform at a manageable price point and value rapid feature development.

Is Calyx still a viable option?

Calyx has been in the mortgage software business for decades. Their two products (Point and Path) serve different segments.

Cost: Point starts around $60 per user per month. Path pricing varies by configuration.
Strengths: Calyx Point is familiar to many veteran brokers. It supports FHA, VA, USDA, and conventional loans with built-in compliance tools. Path is the cloud-based successor with a more modern interface.
Limitations: Point is desktop-based software that shows its age (3.5/5 average rating with complaints about stability and support responsiveness). Path is newer but still building out integrations. No AI features in either product.
Best for: Brokers who are already on Calyx Point and want a known quantity, or those evaluating Path as a modernization step.

What makes AcutisLOS different?

AcutisLOS is the newest entrant and the most AI-forward of the alternatives.

Cost: $295 per user per year. By far the lowest price point in this comparison.
Strengths: AI-powered document extraction (W-2s, tax returns, pay stubs) with reported 99%+ accuracy. Built-in POS and borrower portal. Modern, cloud-native architecture. 14-day free trial.
Limitations: Very new; limited public reviews and track record. AI extraction is capped at 50 documents per month on the base plan. Integration depth with wholesale lenders is still developing.
Best for: Tech-forward brokers who want AI document processing at an aggressive price point and are comfortable being early adopters.

How does Floify fit in?

Floify is not a full LOS; it is a point-of-sale platform focused on borrower communication and document collection. It often supplements an existing LOS rather than replacing one.

Cost: Starting around $70 per user per month.
Strengths: Excellent borrower portal (97.6% customer satisfaction, 84% reported efficiency improvement). Strong document management with automated follow-ups. e-signature and co-borrower support. Integrates with Encompass, Calyx, and other LOS platforms.
Limitations: Does not handle origination, compliance, or lender submission. You still need an LOS alongside Floify. No AI features.
Best for: Brokers who want to improve the borrower experience and document collection workflow without changing their LOS.

How do these alternatives stack up side by side?

| Platform | Type | Starting Cost | AI Features | Lender Integrations | |----------|------|---------------|-------------|---------------------| | Encompass | Full LOS | $500+/user/mo | ICE Aurora (coming) | 1,000+ | | ARIVE | Full LOS | ~$50/user/mo | None | 200+ | | Calyx Point/Path | Full LOS | ~$60/user/mo | None | Varies | | AcutisLOS | Full LOS | $295/user/yr | Document extraction | Developing | | Floify | POS only | ~$70/user/mo | None | N/A (pairs with LOS) |

What does it cost to switch back out again?

The cost of getting onto a new LOS is the easier number to estimate. The cost of getting back off it later is what most evaluations under-weight, and it is where the LOS market quietly extracts margin from brokers.

Three categories of switching cost matter at evaluation time:

Data export. Can you get every borrower record, every loan file's parameters, every condition, every uploaded document, and every audit log entry out of the system in an open format, on demand? Or is export gated behind a support ticket, an enterprise tier, a paid migration consultant, or a quarterly batch job?
Schema documentation. Even if you can extract the data, can you read it? Encompass exports are notoriously dense and require either a vendor-supplied translator or a third-party migration partner to ingest into another platform. Open schemas (CSV, JSON, documented SQL tables) cost nothing to consume.
Borrower communication continuity. If your borrowers have logins to a borrower portal that lives inside the LOS, switching breaks those logins. Tools that own the borrower-facing surface separately from the LOS (Floify is the canonical example) reduce this lock-in.

Practical evaluation questions to ask before signing:

Show me the export feature in a sandbox account. Can I trigger it myself or do I need to call support?
What format does it produce? Is the schema documented publicly?
Are uploaded documents (PDFs, images) included, or only metadata?
Does the export feature exist on the lowest paid tier, or is it gated to enterprise?
If I cancel, how long do I have to retrieve my data before it's deleted?

A vendor that hesitates on any of these is telling you something about how easy leaving will be.

For Loanwright's specific commitments here (one-click full-account export in open JSON, per-loan ZIP bundles with documents included, available on free Starter and paid Pro tiers alike, schema documented in our open-source Drizzle table definitions), see our data portability page. The point of publishing the export commitments separately is to make them inspectable before you sign up, not after.

What about the knowledge layer?

None of these platforms address one of the most time-consuming parts of a broker's workflow: looking up agency guidelines. Whether you use Encompass, ARIVE, Calyx, or AcutisLOS, you are still manually searching through Fannie Mae Selling Guides, FHA Handbooks, and VA pamphlets when a guideline question comes up.

Tools that handle guideline search, condition tracking, and file readiness complement any LOS by reducing the time spent on the knowledge and preparation side of origination.

For more on broker technology and operations, see the Mortgage Broker Operations guide series.

This article is for informational purposes only and is not professional advice. Always verify against current guidelines before making decisions.