Lumos or Axiome³: two Quebec platforms, two philosophies

Axiome³ and Lumos arrived on the Quebec market at roughly the same time, with the same ambition: covering the full inspection mandate, not just report writing. Both are built in Quebec, structured around the BNQ 3009-500 standard, the one REIBH will require of certified inspectors from October 2027. Where they diverge is on a fundamental question: does AI have a place in writing an inspection report? Axiome³ answered no, publicly, and built a findings library written entirely by hand. Lumos answered yes, on the condition that the inspector keeps the last word on every sentence. Here is the comparison, section by section.

In 60 seconds

Consider Axiome³ if

you want a findings library written entirely by hand with no AI involvement at all, you work exclusively in a browser from a connected workstation, and you want to test for a long time before deciding: their trial covers ten complete inspections. Both platforms otherwise handle APCHQ and AIBQ agreements, digital signatures, the public intake form, the BNQ 3009-500 structure, and public pricing.

Consider Lumos if

you spend time in the field in places with no signal, you want the option to dictate your findings or batch-import your photos depending on the day, you want to build your own templates without limits, and and you want your client to receive an interactive web report in their portal, not just a PDF.

The AI question

With Axiome³, the position is public and deliberate: according to their site, each of their 1,800+ bilingual findings was written, reviewed, and approved by a human. They present it as an intentional design choice: the inspector signs a legal document, so every word must come from a verified source. It is a serious argument and we are not going to pretend otherwise.

With Lumos, we agree on the principle and disagree on the conclusion. Yes, the inspector signs a legal document. That is exactly why nothing goes to the client without being read and approved. But between 'the inspector is responsible for every word' and 'no machine should ever propose a first draft', there is a gap nothing forces you to cross.

Comparison table, Lumos and Axiome³: The AI question
LumosAxiome³
Verified findings bank1,165 bilingual: 710 pre-purchase, 455 pre-delivery1,800+ bilingual, according to their site
Findings linked to their sourceTraceable in the reportNot announced
BNQ qualification of deficiencies (apparent defect, deficiency indicator, safety risk)On every findingNot announced
AI-assisted writingOptional, approved by the inspectorNo, a deliberate choice
Using the software without any AI featureYes, fully functionalYes, by design
Automated compliance review before deliveryYesNot announced
What changes

Axiome³ protects you from AI by removing it. Lumos protects you by making it optional and leaving you the last word. If your position is 'no AI, ever', both tools suit you; the difference is that with Lumos, you can change your mind.

Field capture

With Axiome³, everything happens in a modern browser, with no installation: according to their site, the platform is cloud-based and responsive on phone and tablet, and a mobile app is mentioned as planned.

With Lumos, you choose how to work depending on the day. Classic: you inspect with your camera, batch-import your photos afterwards, and attach them to your findings. Voice: you dictate on site and Lumos Capture assembles photos, audio, and notes into a single capture, processed in the background while you keep going. Mixed: most inspectors. Lumos Capture is a native iOS and Android app built for rooftops, crawl spaces, attics, and winter: dark mode by default, touch targets sized for gloved fingers, and capture works without a network, stored locally and synced automatically when the signal returns. One nuance, and we name it: creating a new inspection and delivering the final report require a connection. Collection and review work fully offline.

Comparison table, Lumos and Axiome³: Field capture
LumosAxiome³
Native iOS and Android appLumos CaptureMentioned as planned on their site; responsive web today
Offline captureOffline-first, automatic syncNot announced
Hands-free voice dictationYesNot announced
Batch photo import from any deviceYesNot announced
Photo annotations (arrows, frames, text)Native, linked to the findingNot announced
Browser-based work, no installationYesYes
What changes

if you mostly work from the office and on properties with good coverage, the difference is small. If you spend your days in basements and on roofs, it is decisive.

BNQ 3009-500 compliance

With Axiome³, the normative structure is provided and you work inside it: their site describes an editor organized component by component with the essential information fields built in, announced as ready for REIBH.

With Lumos, the same base is provided, and you can build on top of it. The compliance gauge shows you in real time where the report has coverage gaps, before you close it; you can turn it on or off. The BNQ qualification of deficiencies, apparent defect, deficiency indicator, or safety risk, is carried by the finding itself, independently of its severity level: severity says how serious it is, qualification says what it is in the sense of the standard, and a normative decision cannot be overwritten by editing a label. And if you have developed your own method over fifteen years in the trade, the template editor lets you carry it, with version history.

Comparison table, Lumos and Axiome³: BNQ 3009-500 compliance
LumosAxiome³
Editor structured component by componentYesYes, according to their site
Ready for the standard REIBH will make mandatoryYesYes, according to their site
Real-time compliance gaugeYesNot announced
BNQ qualification carried by the findingYesNot announced
Two normative templates included (pre-purchase and pre-delivery)YesNot announced
Full template editorSections, subsections, inspection items, automatic findingsNot announced
Customizable severity levelsColor, icon, label, definitionNot announced
Unlimited templates, shareable across the teamYesNot announced
What changes

with Axiome³, the normative structure is provided and you work inside it. With Lumos, it is provided too, but you can build on top: your templates, your severity levels, your findings. If you have developed your own method, you carry it with you.

Mandate administration

With Axiome³, this is the ground they staked out first, and credit where it is due: they set the standard. Public intake form without an account, APCHQ and AIBQ agreements generated automatically, DocuSeal electronic signature, automated bilingual emails, and ICS calendar, according to their site.

With Lumos, the full cycle is covered as well: public intake form, quote signed online, AIBQ, APCHQ, and BNQ agreements with custom templates, calendar sync with Google, Apple, and Outlook, invoicing with GST and QST calculation, email templates with variables, team management with roles and permissions, an optimized daily route between visits, and full project export as a .zip.

Comparison table, Lumos and Axiome³: Mandate administration
LumosAxiome³
Document Center: status and history of every documentBy inspection, by status, activity feedNot announced
Document requests to the client, with automatic remindersYesNot announced
Public intake formThe client fills it in themselvesNo account needed, according to their site
Quote sent and signed onlineYesYes, according to their site
AIBQ, APCHQ, and BNQ agreementsTemplates, annexes, archivingAPCHQ and AIBQ, according to their site
Digital signatureYesDocuSeal integration, according to their site
Custom agreement templatesYesNot announced
Calendar syncGoogle, Apple, OutlookICS subscription, according to their site
Optimized daily route between visitsYesNot announced
Invoicing with GST and QST calculationYesInvoice created at intake, according to their site; tax calculation not announced
Email templates with variablesQuote, agreement, delivery, invoiceAutomated bilingual emails, according to their site
Team management with roles and permissionsYesNot announced
Full project export and import (.zip)YesNot announced
What changes

on pure administration, it is parity. The difference is at the edges: team management, the daily route, and the portability of your data are not announced at Axiome³.

What your client receives

With Axiome³, the report is delivered through a secure portal the client accesses without creating an account, according to their site.

With Lumos, your client opens a portal with no account either: one secure link per client, where they read and sign the quote, the agreement and the BNQ prerequisites — up to two signatories when the agreement calls for it, with a sealed copy and a signature certificate — upload the documents you asked for, and open their interactive web report: navigation by section, severity filters, full-screen photos and videos. The professional PDF remains available for download, customizable to your brand: density, colors, fonts. Two things speak to client acquisition rather than productivity: view tracking, so you know when your client opened their report, and the widgets for your own site, an embeddable service request form and a Google review request triggered after delivery.

Comparison table, Lumos and Axiome³: What your client receives
LumosAxiome³
Client uploads documents in their portalYesNot announced
Delivery without account creationWith an access codeSecure portal, according to their site
Interactive web report with severity filtersYesNot announced
Customizable PDF (density, colors, fonts)YesNot announced
Agreement and invoice accessible with the reportYesNot announced
Client consultation trackingYesNot announced
Service request widget for your websiteYesNot announced
Automated Google review collectionYesNot announced
Bilingual deliveryYesYes, according to their site
What changes

with Axiome³, delivery ends the mandate. With Lumos, it feeds the next one: the report carries your brand, your contact details, and your review request.

Concretely, how AI is framed in Lumos

Axiome³'s position deserves a precise answer rather than a slogan. Here is, point by point, what frames the assistance in Lumos.

The bank comes first the bank of 1,165 findings is written and verified, exactly as at Axiome³. Each finding is qualified under BNQ 3009-500 and linked to its source, which is verifiable in the report.

The no-AI mode you can work with this bank alone, without ever turning on the assistance. Findings bank, keyboard entry, batch photo import, custom templates: it is a complete, supported workflow, not a degraded mode.

The approved draft if you turn on assisted writing, it produces a draft from your photos and your dictation. You read it, correct it, approve it, or discard it. It never writes itself into the report.

The compliance review an automated pass reviews the report before delivery and flags omissions. The last word stays with the inspector, on every sentence.

Pricing and trial

See full pricing details

Axiome³ and Lumos both publish their pricing, which is not the case for UDATA, Vesta, or Enzo Solution. Here are the Lumos plans.

  • Starter$10 per inspection. Your first 3 inspections are free, no credit card required. Ideal if you want to test on real files before committing.
  • Pro$110 per month for unlimited inspections, advanced BNQ compliance, the unlimited AI Assistant, and unlimited assisted writing. Annual plan with two months free.
  • Team$99 per additional seat per month.
  • Student programfree for the full duration of your inspection program, plus two months post-graduation.

Axiome³ also publishes its pricing. According to their site (checked August 28, 2026): - Free trial: 10 complete inspections, no credit card - Block of 10 inspections: $250, valid one year - Unlimited: $175 per month with no commitment, $157.50 per month on a 6-month term, $131.25 per month on an annual term - Student program: free during studies (RBQ-recognized AEC) - Additional seat: not announced Let's be clear about the trial: ten complete inspections is more generous than three. If you want to test at length on real files before deciding, that is a real advantage for Axiome³. On the monthly price, Lumos is cheaper at the published amounts. But compare what is included on each side rather than the numbers alone, and above all compare what you pay in total to produce a report, counting the tools each platform lets you stop paying for.

The questions we get asked

Is Lumos legally riskier than Axiome³ because of AI?

No, and it matters to understand why. The report you sign is yours, whatever the platform. In Lumos, the bank of 1,165 findings is written and verified, each finding is linked to its source and qualified under BNQ 3009-500. Assisted writing produces a draft you read and approve. Nothing leaves without your sign-off. If you prefer, you can never turn it on: the software works entirely with the bank and keyboard entry.

Can you use Lumos exactly like Axiome³, without ever touching AI?

Yes. Findings bank, keyboard entry, batch photo import, custom templates. It is a complete, supported workflow, not a degraded mode.

Does Axiome³ work offline?

It is not announced on their public site. Their architecture is described as cloud-based, accessed through a browser, and a mobile app is mentioned there as planned. On our side, Lumos Capture is a native iOS and Android app whose capture works without a network.

Axiome³ has more findings than Lumos. Does that matter?

1,800 on their side according to their site, 1,165 on ours: 710 pre-purchase, 455 pre-delivery. We publish the exact number rather than rounding up. In practice, what determines your speed is finding the right finding, not having many. In Lumos they live in two distinct normative banks, so when you do a pre-delivery you search among 455 findings made for that, not a general library. Each is qualified under the BNQ and linked to its source, and you add your own with version history.

Can I migrate from Axiome³ to Lumos, or the other way?

Neither platform announces a direct import from the other. Your custom findings can be recreated in a few hours. Lumos allows a full project export as a .zip, so your data remains yours.

Are both ready for the 2027 REIBH?

Both announce it, and both are structured around BNQ 3009-500. It is the point where the two tools differ the least.

Which one should I choose if I am starting my practice?

Test both, it is free on both sides. If you want as much time as possible to evaluate, Axiome³ offers ten inspections. If you want to know right away how it goes in the field, do a real inspection with each.

In summary

Axiome³ and Lumos cover the same cycle and target the same Quebec inspector. Functional parity is real on mandate administration: agreements, signatures, public intake form, public pricing. The gap plays out elsewhere. Axiome³ chose to keep AI out of the writing and owns it as a position of integrity. Lumos chose to make it optional, under the inspector's control, and to invest in what happens around it: offline capture in the field, template customization, and a report your client understands and shares. Both answers are defensible. The right one for you depends on where you spend your days and what you want your client to receive.

Try Lumos on your next inspection

Three complete real inspections, free, no credit card. Your account is ready in minutes.

No commitment.

Information about Axiome³ comes from their public website at the time of publication. Both platforms' features evolve. If something seems inaccurate, write to us and we will correct it.