The short answer
Reapit and Alto are built for letting and estate agencies managing tenancies across a team, and they're usually overkill for a self-managing landlord. Arthur and compliance-focused tools like Landlord Vision sit a tier below, aimed more at landlords and smaller agencies, with published subscription pricing that scales with the number of units or tenancies you add. For a portfolio of 5 to 20 properties managed by one person or a small team, a simple CRM or dashboard, built once around exactly what you track, is often the better fit: no per-unit fee that grows every time you buy a property, and nothing to learn beyond what you actually use.
Who actually needs Reapit or Alto
Reapit and Alto (Alto now sits within the Reapit group) are agency-grade platforms. They're built to run the whole operation of a letting or estate agency: multiple staff logging in at once, sales and lettings pipelines, compliance and client accounting across a large number of tenancies, often across several branches. Neither publishes pricing; both direct you to request a demo and get a quote tailored to your agency. That's a reasonable model for their actual market, a business with staff and a managed portfolio on behalf of others, but it also means you're buying into a sales process built for agencies, not a landlord managing their own properties.
If you're a landlord rather than an agency, the honest answer is that you almost certainly don't need either of these yet. The point where they start to make sense is when you're effectively running an agency: multiple staff, a managed portfolio for other landlords, or a scale where a dedicated account manager and agency-grade reporting earns its cost.
Where Arthur and compliance-only apps fit
Arthur and tools like Landlord Vision are a tier below Reapit and Alto, and they're a closer fit for a landlord managing their own portfolio directly. Both publish tiered pricing based on the number of properties or tenancies: Arthur's published plans start at around £82.50 a month including 55 units, rising through higher tiers for larger portfolios (checked on their pricing page, October 2026, so check current figures before deciding). Landlord Vision's published plans start lower, from around £19.97 a month for a handful of tenancies, rising with portfolio size and feature tier (checked on their pricing page, October 2026).
These tools genuinely do more than a spreadsheet: compliance tracking, document storage, tenant portals and, in Arthur's case, maintenance workflow. For a landlord who wants an off-the-shelf system and is happy with a recurring per-unit cost, either is a reasonable choice. The trade-off is that the fee scales with your portfolio indefinitely, and you're working within whatever structure the vendor has built, rather than one scoped to exactly what you track.
The subscription maths over three years
A per-unit subscription is attractive at the start because the monthly figure looks small against eight or ten properties. The thing to model is where it goes as the portfolio grows, and over time: a tool charging per unit costs more every time you add a property, indefinitely, with no point at which the fee stops. A one-off system, built once around your compliance dates and document storage, has a build cost up front and little or no ongoing licence fee beyond basic hosting, so the three-year total can work out lower once the portfolio's past a certain size, though it depends on how much ongoing change you need and how much of the subscription's other features (tenant portals, maintenance workflow) you'd actually use.
Neither shape is automatically cheaper. A landlord who wants tenant-facing features out of the box, and doesn't mind the ongoing fee, is often better served sticking with a published-pricing tool like Arthur or Landlord Vision. A landlord who only needs compliance dates, documents and reminders, and dislikes paying more every time the portfolio grows, tends to come out ahead with a one-off build.
A one-off alternative: what it looks like
The alternative isn't a spreadsheet with extra columns, it's a proper system built once: every property, tenancy and compliance date in one place, a document attached to each certificate, and reminders that fire automatically weeks ahead of a deadline. It can be a CRM configured around your portfolio rather than around sales leads, or a lightweight dashboard if your needs are specific enough that an off-the-shelf CRM doesn't quite fit. Either way, it's scoped to what you actually track, rather than a general-purpose property management platform you're using for a fraction of its features.
Decision by portfolio size and team
| Factor | Reapit or Alto | Arthur or Landlord Vision | A one-off CRM or dashboard |
|---|---|---|---|
| Suits portfolio size | Agency-scale, many tenancies | Roughly 10 to 100+ units, scaling by tier | Any size, often 5 to 40 properties |
| Solo landlord or team | Built for a team | Works for either | Works for either |
| Cost shape | Quote-based subscription | Published subscription, scales with units | Mostly one-off, minimal ongoing fee |
| Compliance reminders | Yes, agency-grade | Yes | Yes, scoped to what you track |
| Document storage | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Tenant-facing portal | Yes | Arthur: yes. Landlord Vision: more limited | Optional, adds to the build |
What we'd suggest at 5, 15 and 40 properties
At around 5 properties, a well-built compliance tracker template or a light CRM is usually enough, and a subscription platform is rarely worth it yet. At around 15, the case for a proper system strengthens, whether that's a one-off CRM set-up or a published-pricing tool like Arthur, depending on whether you value the lower long-run cost or the off-the-shelf tenant features more. At around 40, you're close to agency scale: if you've taken on staff or you're managing for other landlords too, Reapit or Alto start to make sense; if it's still you managing your own portfolio, a one-off system scoped properly usually still beats a per-unit subscription on cost.
When to get help, and what we'd do
We'd usually start with a CRM or simple system set up around your portfolio, a guide price from £900, typically live in two to four weeks, built around your actual compliance dates rather than a general-purpose platform's full feature set. If the portfolio's grown enough that compliance, rent and maintenance together have genuinely outgrown that, an internal tool or dashboard starts from £3,000. These are guide prices for a typical project; the fixed quote comes after a free 30-minute call. For the full list of what to track regardless of which system you choose, see our landlord compliance checklist, and for the general question of off-the-shelf versus custom, our guide to off-the-shelf or custom software covers the same trade-off from a wider angle.
This builds on the wider fix for a creaking compliance spreadsheet: whichever system you choose, the point is getting off a single file one person maintains, onto something that reminds you automatically.
Related
- General guide: The business runs on a spreadsheet that's creaking
- Sector pillar: Property spreadsheet chaos
- Example project: a letting agent with a maintenance portal for tenants and landlords
- Guide: Off-the-shelf or custom software? An honest comparison
Frequently asked questions
Do I need Reapit or Alto as a self-managing landlord?
Almost certainly not, unless you've effectively become an agency: staff, a managed portfolio for other landlords, or a scale where agency-grade reporting earns its cost. Both are built and priced for agencies, not individual landlords.
Is Arthur or Landlord Vision cheaper than building something custom?
It depends on your portfolio size and how long you'll run it. A per-unit subscription costs more as your portfolio grows, indefinitely, while a one-off build has an upfront cost and little ongoing fee. Over several years, the one-off option can work out cheaper, though a subscription tool gives you tenant-facing features out of the box that a basic build wouldn't include.
How many properties before I need any kind of software?
There's no fixed number, but once checking a date takes real effort, or you've found a conflicting entry in the past few months, that's a clearer signal than a property count. See our compliance checklist for the dates worth tracking regardless of system.
Can I move from Arthur or Landlord Vision to a custom system later?
Yes. Your compliance dates and documents can be exported and imported into a new system, the same way they would be moved off a spreadsheet. It's worth checking the export format before you commit to either tool, so you're not locked in if your needs change.
What does Reapit or Alto actually cost?
Neither publishes a price. Both work on a quote after a demo, tailored to your agency's size and branch count. If you want a specific figure, you'll need to contact them directly, since any number quoted elsewhere should be treated as unverified.