How does a permit-first platform like Shovels stack up to a broad property data catalog like ATTOM? We break down key considerations like sourcing, enrichment, refresh cadence, and more.
We get a lot of questions about how Shovels stacks up to similar services and platforms. Here, we try to answer your questions as honestly as we can.
ATTOM and Shovels both sell nationwide building permit data, but they take different approaches to getting it. ATTOM's strength is aggregation: it brings together datasets from many sources, including licensed permit data, into one catalog you can buy in a single contract.
Shovels works the other way around: it collects permits first-party from jurisdictions, derives its insights directly from those records, and expands outward from that foundation, with contractors, parcels, and pre-permit Decisions all built on the same base.
This page compares the two solutions so you can decide which fits your use case, or whether you need both.
KEY TAKEAWAYS
ATTOM Data Solutions is one of the largest property data providers in the country, covering residential and commercial properties nationwide with data aggregated from counties across the country. Its catalog spans tax assessments, deeds, mortgages, foreclosures, AVMs, hazard data, and neighborhood data. Building permits are one dataset within that catalog. ATTOM describes its platform as multi-sourced, and its permit dataset comes with permit type classifiers and, per ATTOM, monthly updates.
Shovels is the intelligence layer for the built world. Shovels collects permit data first-party from jurisdictions nationwide, then uses AI and quality-control workflows to turn messy municipal records into standardized, searchable data. Each permit is enriched with categories, contractor intelligence, and parcel links, and delivered through an API, web application, or a direct data warehouse share. Shovels also includes Decisions, a dataset of zoning, planning, and entitlement records that surfaces projects before permits are filed.
| Dimension | ATTOM | Shovels |
|---|---|---|
| Core product | Property data catalog (permits are one dataset) | Permit intelligence platform (permits are the product) |
| Sourcing model | Licensed from upstream data suppliers | First-party collection from jurisdictions, including offline ones |
| Permit records | Sourced from building departments nationwide (per ATTOM) | Collected first-party from jurisdictions nationwide, standardized and deduplicated |
| Permit refresh | Monthly per published specs; delivery cadence varies by contract | Core permit data multiple times a month |
| Contractor intelligence | Contractor information listed as a data element; no standalone contractor dataset | Full profiles: permit history, inspection pass rates, build speed, revenue estimates, contacts |
| Permit categorization | Permit type classifiers | AI-standardized categories (solar, roofing, HVAC, EV, and more), consistent across jurisdictions |
| Pre-permit signal | None | Decisions: zoning, planning, and entitlement records before permits are filed |
| Property data breadth | Deep: deeds, mortgages, AVMs, foreclosures, hazard data | Parcel links and enhanced property data focused on construction context |
| Delivery | API, bulk licensing, cloud delivery | REST API, web app (Shovels Online), Snowflake, BigQuery, and Databricks |
| Non-technical access | Property reports; no self-serve permit exploration app | Shovels Online with Charlie built in, no SQL required |
| Getting started | Contact a data expert (sales-led) | Self-serve signup, explore the data the same day |
Both providers start from the same public filings. The difference is what happens to each record afterward. ATTOM attaches permits to its property records so you can see the permit history of a given parcel. Shovels standardizes every field, deduplicates filings, tags each permit with a consistent category, and links it to a contractor profile and parcel ID.
If your analysis depends on comparing permit activity across jurisdictions, standardization is the difference between a dataset and a cleanup project. Classification method matters too: keyword matching mislabels edge cases (a pool permit that mentions an ADU is not an ADU permit), which is why Shovels uses AI classification that is retrained with each data release rather than static keyword rules.
ATTOM lists contractor information among its permit data elements. The question to ask is completeness: pull a sample for your market and check how often contractor name and contact fields are actually populated. Shovels turns each contractor name into a full profile: how many permits they have pulled, where they work, how quickly they build, how often they pass inspections, estimated revenue, and contact information. Teams use this for lead scoring, contractor vetting, and market analysis.
Shovels refreshes core permit data multiple times a month and documents every release in public release notes. ATTOM's published materials cite monthly updates, and delivery cadence can vary by contract. For teams using permits as a demand signal, such as identifying homeowners who just filed for solar or a remodel, don't settle for a brochure number: ask each provider what cadence your configuration actually gets, and how status changes on existing permits reach you.
Permits are not always the earliest signal. Shovels Decisions captures zoning, planning, and entitlement activity months before a permit is filed. ATTOM's construction signal begins when the permit appears.
This is the deepest difference between the two models. Shovels collects permits first-party, directly from jurisdictions, including a dedicated team that files public records requests for areas that never publish data online. ATTOM assembles its catalog from many sources, which is what makes its breadth possible.
The sourcing model shapes what happens downstream. An aggregated catalog can only grow where its sources grow, and when a record looks wrong, the fix typically routes through whichever supplier provided it. Collecting first-party shortens both paths: Shovels can add a jurisdiction customers need and trace a questionable record back to the office that issued it. It also explains the enrichment difference, since contractor profiles, standardized categories, and pre-permit Decisions are all things you can only build reliably when you control collection end to end. Whoever you evaluate, it is worth asking where each dataset originates and what happens when you find a gap.
At the end of the day, ATTOM's advantage is everything else in its catalog. If your product needs AVMs, transaction history, foreclosure status, and permits from a single vendor under one contract, ATTOM's breadth is real and Shovels does not try to match it. Shovels' advantage is depth on the construction signal itself.
How Shovels fits. Shovels applies AI cleaning, standardization, and enrichment to permit, contractor, and property data from jurisdictions nationwide. Explore it through the Shovels Online web application, the Shovels API, or Shovels Enterprise warehouse delivery.
ATTOM makes sense when permits are a supporting attribute rather than the source of analysis itself. If you are building a property valuation model or a real estate product that needs deeds, mortgages, tax history, and AVMs, with permit history as added context, a contract with ATTOM covers all of it.
ATTOM's historical depth is a fair consideration as well: legacy property-data catalogs have long archives, and while Shovels includes years of permit history and keeps extending it, teams whose analysis depends on decades of records in a specific market should verify depth with both providers for that geography.
Shovels is the better fit when construction activity is the point: tracking demand signals, scoring contractors, monitoring markets, or building products where permit and pre-permit data drive the value. Some teams use both, with ATTOM supplying property fundamentals and Shovels supplying the construction intelligence layer.
Start with the question your team is actually answering. If it sounds like "what is this property worth and what is its history," you are describing a property data problem. If it sounds like "who is building what, where, and who is doing the work," you are describing a permit intelligence problem.
Then test the data on a market you know. Shovels offers self-serve signup, so you can query permits, contractors, and Decisions records the same day and judge coverage and quality directly. For ATTOM, request a sample of permit records for the same geography and compare field completeness (contractor name and contact fields are a good stress test), category consistency, and how each provider handles duplicates.
Finally, price the configuration you need. Both providers offer custom pricing solutions, but the access models differ: Shovels offers plans you can start on directly, while ATTOM scopes bulk and API licensing through its sales team.
Have questions about fit? Explore the Shovels permit database for free, or talk to us about your data needs.
Sign up free, pull the permits and contractors in a market you already know, and judge the coverage, deduplication, and enrichment for yourself.
Yes. ATTOM sells a nationwide building permit dataset sourced from building departments across the country, updated monthly per ATTOM, and available through its API, bulk licensing, and cloud delivery. Permits are one dataset within ATTOM's broader property data catalog rather than its core product.
ATTOM does not publish API pricing. Access is scoped through its sales team based on datasets, volume, and delivery method. Shovels publishes self-serve plans and offers an API you can start using the same day, with enterprise pricing for warehouse delivery.
ATTOM attaches permit records to property profiles for context. Shovels standardizes and enriches each permit: consistent categories across jurisdictions, deduplication, contractor intelligence (permit history, inspection pass rates, build speed, contacts), parcel links, and Decisions pre-permit records. Shovels documents its twice-monthly refresh in public release notes. Confirm ATTOM's delivery cadence for your configuration when you evaluate.
For building permit and construction data, yes. Teams that evaluated ATTOM for permit coverage typically choose Shovels when they need standardized categories, contractor enrichment, a documented refresh cadence, or pre-permit signal. For deeds, AVMs, and foreclosure data, ATTOM and Shovels are complements rather than alternatives.
ATTOM and CoreLogic (now Cotality) are the two largest general property data providers, and both cover assessments, deeds, mortgages, and valuations. Both treat permits as one attribute among many. Teams choosing between them for construction use cases often add a permit-first provider like Shovels for the construction signal itself.
ATTOM is generally described as a data aggregator: its catalog combines datasets licensed from multiple upstream suppliers, packaged for delivery through one contract. That model is useful when you need many data types from one vendor. The trade-off is distance from the source. For permits specifically, that affects how quickly gaps get fixed and how deep enrichment can go, which is where a first-party collector like Shovels differs.
With Shovels, coverage requests are part of the model. Because collection is first-party, new jurisdictions can be added on request, including rural markets where records are only available through public records requests. Shovels also publishes coverage transparently so you can see exactly which jurisdictions are included before you buy.
Mostly methodology, not coverage. Some providers create a new record every time a permit's status changes (applied, issued, completed), which multiplies the same permit into several records and inflates totals. Others count all-time jurisdictions rather than actively updated ones. Shovels deduplicates so each permit is one record with a unique ID that gets updated in place. When comparing providers, ask whether counts are deduplicated and how many jurisdictions are actively refreshed rather than historical.
Building permits are public records filed with local building departments. Every provider starts from the same municipal sources. The differences are coverage (which jurisdictions), refresh cadence, and how much cleaning, standardization, and enrichment happens before the data reaches you.