How We Compare

FieldWorks vs Jobber

Jobber is strong for office-heavy operations. FieldWorks is built for teams who close jobs faster when the conversation stays in iMessage.

Pricing & Economics

How you pay and how predictable your margin is

FieldWorks

10% when paid in-app, no lead fees, no annual contract lock-in

Jobber

Plan-based monthly subscription (often tiered by features/users) adds fixed software cost before the first payout

Lead-to-Cash Workflow

How fast jobs move from inquiry to paid

FieldWorks

Conversation-first flow keeps quote, approval, and payment tightly connected

Jobber

Moves quote-to-payment through dashboard and portal steps with more handoffs

iPhone & iMessage Experience

How native the customer experience feels on iPhone

FieldWorks

Built around iMessage + Apple Pay + App Clip/QR entry points

Jobber

Supports iOS, but does not center the close loop in iMessage

Service Operations

How well day-to-day scheduling and job execution are supported

FieldWorks

Strong core scheduling, assignments, status tracking, and payment handoff

Jobber

Strong fit for office-led scheduling and back-office control

Customer Conversion UX

How much friction exists between quote, approval, and payment

FieldWorks

Low-friction quote-to-payment path designed to reduce drop-off

Jobber

Extra customer steps can slow approval-to-payment

Ease of Use

How quickly teams can get operational without heavy setup

FieldWorks

Lightweight onboarding for growing teams without enterprise overhead

Jobber

Best for teams already trained on traditional FSM dashboards

Best fit for FieldWorks

Service businesses that win work through texting and want less friction from quote to payment.

Not ideal fit for Jobber

Teams that need to close most jobs directly in iMessage with minimal portal switching.

How FieldWorks stands out

  • Close quotes in iMessage with in-thread Apple Pay, so customers don't leave the conversation.
  • Share one QR code for instant booking, even when customers have never used your app before.
  • Pay only when work is completed and paid in-app, with no monthly software contract.
  • Keep admin and field workflows connected without forcing every user into the same desktop-heavy process.

Where they may still fit

  • Can be a fit for teams that prefer traditional back-office scheduling workflows.
  • Includes mature operational modules for larger multi-role office setups.
  • May be better when your operation is dispatch-center first and less message-thread driven.

Workflow proof points

  • • Customer approves and pays from the same message thread where the quote was sent.
  • • Workers and admins stay aligned without forcing every user into a desktop-first flow.
  • • Teams reduce manual follow-up when quote, approval, and payment live in one customer conversation.
Back to all comparisonsStart Free Today