Want this analysis for your own home?
Send us your email and home address. Within one business day we'll email you a report on your home, about 25 pages:
- Your best system, with and without a battery
- Payback and 25-year savings for cash, a loan, a lease and a PPA
- What changes the answer: your bill, the system's size, an EV, the price you pay
- Every incentive that applies to you, and the ones that don't
- A detailed shading analysis of your roof, hour by hour and month by month
- No strings. It's free, you owe us nothing, and nobody will call you.
- An honest verdict. If solar is a good investment for your home, we'll say so. If it isn't, we'll say that too.
- An installer only if you ask. If the numbers work and you want to go ahead, we'll introduce you to one installer we've vetted by hand: at least ten years under one name, a clean electrical licence, their own crews. Never a list or an auction, and up to $500 of our finder's fee comes back to you. How matching works
Opens your email app. Or write to contact@siapolicy.ai with your home address.
Where your email and address go. They go to our inbox and nowhere else. We use them only to prepare your analysis. We never sell them, and never pass them to an installer or anyone else unless you ask us for an introduction. Want them gone? Email contact@siapolicy.ai and we'll delete them within two business days. Privacy policy
Is solar worth it in Massachusetts? We modelled 62 real homes to find out
We modelled 62 real homes across Massachusetts — in Eversource and National Grid territory — roof by roof, to answer one question: is going solar worth it here in 2026, and how much of that is the state's incentives? Here is what we found, in plain English.
The short answer
Yes — and Massachusetts is one of the best places in the country to own a roof right now, because of a stack of policies that will not last forever. Of 62 homes, 61 come out ahead and the typical one pays for itself in about eight years, then keeps paying for two decades more.
Our three takeaways
Payback
8.3 years
for the typical home, then 17 years of profit
The incentives
$3,500 + 1.2 yrs
what SMART and the state credit add, on top of net metering
Batteries
0 of 62
homes where a battery paid off
Why Massachusetts is a good place to go solar
- You still get full retail net metering. Every kilowatt-hour your panels send back to the grid is worth exactly what you would have paid for it — about 30¢. California cut that to a quarter of retail in 2023; Massachusetts did not. This one rule is worth more than everything else combined.
- SMART pays you for making power. On top of the bill savings, the state's SMART programme pays roughly 3¢ for every kilowatt-hour your system generates, for twenty years. On the typical roof that is about $200 a year of pure income.
- A $1,000 state tax credit. Fifteen percent of what you spend, capped at $1,000 — which every real system hits — comes straight off your Massachusetts income tax the first year.
- High electricity prices. At about 30¢ a kilowatt-hour, Massachusetts has some of the priciest power in the country, so every unit your panels offset is worth a lot.
What it looks like without the incentives
- Net metering alone — no SMART, no credit — still pays: 9.6 years, and 59 of 62 homes come out ahead. The incentives are a bonus on a deal that already works.
- But strip net metering too, to the quarter-of-retail export credit California moved to, and the picture flips: payback jumps to 15.7 years, the typical home loses money in present-value terms, and barely half the roofs are worth doing at all.
- That gap — roughly $15,000 of lifetime value on the median roof — is what Massachusetts homeowners have that Californians lost. It is the whole reason to act while the rules still favour you.
See the best layout for your own roof, free →
The best design for a Massachusetts roof
- Build to cover your yearly use. Because a kilowatt-hour is worth the same whether you use it or sell it, you simply size the system to your annual consumption — there is no California-style penalty for a bigger array, up to the 25 kW residential net-metering cap.
- South is best, but east and west are fine. Full net metering means a roof that faces the morning or afternoon still banks everything it makes.
- Shade is the real enemy. The handful of homes that struggled in our sample were heavily shaded or on poor roofs, not in the wrong town.
Does a battery make sense?
- Not for the money — not on one of the 62. Adding a battery subtracted about $15,000 of value on the typical roof.
- The reason is net metering itself: the grid already pays you full retail for what you export, so a battery has almost nothing to arbitrage. It buys you backup power in an outage, which is worth something — but not as an investment.
Is a 12% return good?
| The typical roof here | 12.1% a year, tax-free |
| Worth, before tax | ~14% — a bill you stop paying, not income you declare |
| S&P 500, long-run average | ~10% a year, before tax |
| A 25-year municipal bond | ~4.5% a year |
It is not a jackpot. It is a solid, fixed return that beats the market after tax and is locked in the day you sign — and it is riding on incentives that will not be this generous forever.
Three sales pitches, checked
Solar's a no-brainer in Massachusetts with all the incentives.
Mostly true. 61 of 62 homes came out ahead. But a heavily shaded roof can still take 15+ years — the incentives help a good roof, they do not rescue a bad one. Get the shade measured first.
Add a battery, it'll pay for itself.
False. On none of the 62. Full net metering removes the thing a battery is supposed to earn. Buy one for backup power if you want it, not for the return.
Prices only go up, so lock in now.
The real clock is the incentives. The stronger reason to act is that SMART and full net metering are policy choices the state can change — as California did. Today's terms are generous; they are not promised.
Before you sign: five checks
- Confirm you are on Eversource or National Grid, not a municipal light plant — the municipals do not offer SMART or the same net metering.
- Get a real shade measurement of your roof, not an eyeball.
- Get the price per watt in writing. Around $3.10–$3.40 is a good price for an owned system.
- Make sure the quote sizes to your usage, and that SMART and the state credit are both in the numbers.
- Treat a battery as a backup-power purchase, priced separately — not as part of the investment case.
The fine print
- Is there still a federal tax credit?
- No. The 30% residential credit (Section 25D) ended for anything installed after 31 December 2025. Every number here is without it.
- What did you assume I pay for power?
- About 30¢ a kilowatt-hour, the Massachusetts all-in residential average. If your Eversource or National Grid bill runs higher, solar does better than we show.
- Does this include the fixed monthly charge?
- No — solar does not offset the utility's fixed customer charge, so we leave it out of the savings.
How we worked it out
We drew 62 real houses at random across 17 Massachusetts cities, built each one on the SIA calculator — the same tool you can use free — using Google's 3-D roof model and NLR's PVWatts engine, then valued every roof four ways: with the full stack of incentives, without SMART, without any state help, and stripped to a California-style export credit. Prices are frozen at what the calculator uses for a Massachusetts address.
Read the full study, with every figure and caveat →
What about your home?
Every number here comes from a tool you can run on your own address, free.
No phone number, no sales calls.
We ran the SIA calculator (officially the SIA Solar Design Studio) on 62 randomly selected houses across Eversource and National Grid territory in Massachusetts. Massachusetts pairs some of the highest electricity prices in the country with a policy stack — full retail net metering, the SMART incentive and a state tax credit — that California has already dismantled. We wanted to know what that stack is worth today, and what the same roofs earn once it is stripped away.
Companion study: we ran the same method across Pacific Gas & Electric territory in California, where NEM 3.0 cut export credits to about a quarter of retail. Massachusetts is, in effect, the California of three years ago — which is exactly what the last row of every comparison here shows.
The short answer
Fifty-four of sixty-two rate a good investment on the bar our calculator holds a design to — payback inside ten years and more than $15,000 saved over 25. Seven rate marginal and one poor. Best payback 6.4 years, median 8.3, and every roof but one clears a positive net present value. Median saving $177 a month, $46,871 over 25 years. That is at $3.12 a watt, the calculator's modelled Massachusetts price, and without the federal tax credit, which expired at the end of 2025.
It beats the market after tax. The median roof returns 12.1% a year, tax-free, because it is a bill you stop paying rather than income you declare. That is worth roughly 14% before tax — above the S&P 500's long-run average of about 10%, and several times what a municipal bond pays. Fixed the day you sign.
The incentives are real, and worth capitalising on. SMART and the $1,000 state credit, stacked on net metering, take the median roof from 9.6 years to 8.3 and add $3,526 of net present value. SMART alone is worth about $2,573 of that. None of it is promised beyond its current term.
But net metering is the foundation. It is worth about $15,000 of lifetime value on the median roof — more than the SMART incentive and the credit combined. Strip it to California's quarter-of-retail export credit and the median roof pays back in 15.7 years with a negative net present value; only 27 of 62 stay worth doing. That is the deal Massachusetts still has and California gave up.
A battery still does not pay for itself. Not on one of the 62. Because full net metering already pays retail for exports, a battery has nothing to arbitrage and subtracts about $14,600 of value on the median roof. Backup power, not an investment.
1. Research question
Is solar a good financial investment for homeowners in Massachusetts, and how much of the answer is the state's incentives? We ran the SIA calculator over 62 randomly selected rooftops, designing an optimal layout for each and assessing payback period, monthly and lifetime savings, return on investment and net present value — then re-valued every one with the incentives peeled back, one layer at a time, down to a California-style export credit, to measure exactly what each layer is worth.
2. Method
We sampled 68 detached houses at random from OpenStreetMap across 17 Massachusetts cities: four per city, drawn with a fixed random seed so anyone can pull the same houses again and check our work. The cities span the state — Worcester, Springfield and Pittsfield in the centre and west; Lowell, Haverhill, Brockton, New Bedford, Fall River and Attleboro around the edges; and a cluster of Greater Boston towns.
Six were then dropped for want of usable roof geometry, leaving 62 homes across 17 cities, all in Eversource or National Grid territory. That boundary matters here: Massachusetts has more than forty municipal light plants — Reading, Wellesley, Concord, Peabody, Braintree, Taunton and the rest — and a house in one of those towns is on a different deal entirely. The municipals do not offer SMART, and their net-metering terms differ, so the calculator resolves each address to its actual utility rather than assuming, and this study is about the two investor-owned utilities only.
Figure 1. Left: the seventeen cities at their true coordinates, gold where the utility lookup returned Eversource or National Grid. The eight Greater Boston towns crowd the east, so that corner is enlarged underneath. The coastline is simplified; the dots are not. Right: the sun's track across a full day at six of the sampled homes, at each roof's own latitude, with the direction the roof faces marked in green. The yield underneath — kilowatt-hours per kilowatt of panel — runs from about 500 on a deeply shaded roof to over 1,400 on an open south-facing one.
Under the hood in the SIA calculator: runs for any address you enter.
| Held constant | Value | Source |
|---|---|---|
| Household consumption | 6,840 kWh/yr | Massachusetts residential average, 570 kWh/month — EIA (2024) |
| Average monthly electric bill | $171 | 570 kWh/month at the all-in rate below; excludes the fixed customer charge, which solar does not offset |
| Electricity rate | ~30¢/kWh | Massachusetts all-in residential average (EIA 29.6¢, June 2026; recent trackers 30–31¢). Used for every home because the URDB's Massachusetts residential tariffs are unreliable — National Grid's parses high and Eversource's western rate is a delivery-only stub. Conservative: below the utilities' own quoted all-in rates. See section 10 |
| Net metering | Full retail | Massachusetts Class I net metering credits exported energy at the full retail rate for residential systems up to 25 kW — the single biggest driver of the result |
| SMART incentive | $0.03/kWh, 20 yrs | Solar Massachusetts Renewable Target, paid on every kilowatt-hour generated, additive to net metering for residential systems |
| State tax credit | $1,000 | Massachusetts Residential Renewable Energy Income Tax Credit: 15% of cost capped at $1,000, which every real system reaches |
| Federal tax credit | 0% | Section 25D expired for expenditures after 31 December 2025 |
| Installed cost | $3.12/W | The calculator's modelled Massachusetts price (DOE benchmark, labour-adjusted). The $3.42/W U.S. median paid is swept in section 6 |
| Maintenance | $34/kW/yr | NREL Annual Technology Baseline, residential PV fixed O&M |
| Escalation / degradation / discount | 2.5% / 0.5% / 5% | Planning assumptions |
What "modelled individually" means
Each home is not a rule of thumb. The calculator pulls Google's 3-D model of the actual roof, splits it into planes at their real tilt and bearing, measures the sunlight falling on each with an irradiance raster, lays panels best-position-first until the system covers the year's use, runs PVWatts once per plane, then values the result against the rate, net metering, SMART and the credit. Sixty-two roofs, sixty-two separate models.
Three of the 62, chosen to span the shading range rather than to flatter the result. The left column is Google's aerial photograph. The right column is the same roof as Google's annual flux raster measures it — one reading of annual sunlight for every 10 cm of roof — with the panels the model actually placed drawn on top.
What the roof looks like
What the model measures
Fall River — open. Mean shade factor 0.83 · 1,285 kWh per kW per year · 5.6 kW, 14 panels on 1 plane.
Newton — a typical roof. Mean shade factor 0.87 · 1,088 kWh per kW per year · 6.4 kW, 16 panels on 4 planes.
Quincy — shaded. Mean shade factor 0.70 · 872 kWh per kW per year · 7.6 kW, 19 panels on 2 planes.
Figure 2. Each frame is 28 m across; the scale bar is 5 m. Faded roofs are the neighbours'. A dark plane is not automatically a shaded one — a north face is dark because of where it points. Homes are identified by city only.
Under the hood in the SIA calculator: measured on every roof it models.
Figure 3. One sampled roof, broken into the planes Google resolved. Gold planes carry panels; grey ones were resolved but not worth a panel. Each is drawn at its own bearing and foreshortened by its own pitch — the geometry PVWatts integrates for that home.
Figure 4. Every panel position Google finds, ranked by output, with the point the calculator stops. Because Massachusetts pays full retail for exports and SMART on every kilowatt-hour, a panel is worth about the same whether the house uses its output or sends it back — so the system is simply sized to cover the year's own use, then stopped.
Figure 5. Every step between an address and a payback number, with what each produced for the median home — a 6.4 kW system in Newton that pays back in 8.0 years.
Under the hood in the SIA calculator: this is the pipeline it runs on every address.
3. What the model runs on
Two inputs decide the answer as much as the roof does: when the household uses power, and what it pays for it. The first we take from NLR's ResStock model of Massachusetts single-family homes; the second is the all-in rate above. Under full net metering, though, the timing of use barely matters — a kilowatt-hour is worth retail whenever it is made or sold — which is itself the difference from California.
Figure 6. When a Massachusetts home actually uses electricity, month by hour, scaled to 6,840 kWh a year. Winter evenings peak; summer is flatter. In a state with time-of-use export penalties this shape would drive the economics. Under full retail net metering it barely moves them — the annual balance is what counts.
4. Results
On the full Massachusetts stack — net metering, SMART and the credit — the median roof pays back in 8.3 years, returns 12.1% a year, saves $46,871 over 25 years and clears a net present value of $16,935. Fifty-four of the 62 rate a good investment; 61 of 62 finish ahead. The eight that lag are shaded or poorly oriented roofs, not homes in the wrong town.
Figure 7. Years to break even across the 62 homes, on the full stack of incentives at $3.12 a watt. The bulk clear inside ten years; the lone home past sixteen is a deeply shaded roof in Newton making barely 500 kWh per kilowatt.
Figure 8. The median roof's 25-year cash position. The outlay on day one, softened by the state credit and the first SMART payment; break-even at 8.0 years; SMART payments ending at year 20; and the discounted line ending exactly at the published net present value.
5. What the incentives are worth
This is the question the study was built to answer. We valued the same 62 roofs four ways, changing only the policy, so each layer's contribution is exact.
Figure 9. The same 62 roofs, valued four ways. From the top: the full Massachusetts stack; without SMART; with net metering only; and stripped to a California-style quarter-of-retail export credit. Bars are median payback; the line under each is median return, net present value and 25-year saving.
Read from the bottom up. A California-style export rule would leave the median Massachusetts roof at 15.7 years, a 4.6% return and a negative net present value — only 27 of 62 worth doing. Full retail net metering is what lifts that to 9.6 years and a $13,343 net present value: worth about $15,000 on the median roof, the single largest lever, and the thing Massachusetts still has.
On top of that, SMART adds about $2,573 and pulls payback in to 9.1 years, and the $1,000 state credit adds the rest, landing at 8.3 years and $16,935. Together the two incentives you can act on are worth $3,526 and 1.2 years — a clear bonus on a deal that already works, and one with an expiry date attached.
6. What you pay is the part you control
The policy sets the value of what your roof makes; the installer's price sets what you pay to make it. It is the one number you negotiate. We priced the study at $3.12 a watt, the calculator's modelled Massachusetts figure. The U.S. median that owners actually paid in the last full year of national data is higher, about $3.42 a watt — and at that price the median roof still pays back in about 9 years and still clears a healthy return. A quote much above the mid-$3s, for an owned system, is a quote to negotiate or walk away from.
7. How much does your bill matter?
Less than installers imply. Under full net metering the system is re-sized to each household, so a bigger user simply builds a bigger array — the prize grows, but the payback barely moves.
Figure 10. Twenty-four homes, the array re-sized to four household usage levels. A three-and-a-half-fold range of consumption changes the 25-year saving a great deal and the payback period hardly at all: the bill sets the size of the prize, not the odds.
Figure 11. Holding the household at the Massachusetts average and varying only the array. Unlike California under NEM 3.0 — where value peaks below full offset because exports are underpaid — here the net present value keeps climbing with size, right up to full offset, because an exported kilowatt-hour is worth as much as one used at home. The only ceiling is the roof and the 25 kW cap.
8. Batteries: still no, even here
A battery earns its keep by storing cheap power to avoid buying expensive power — or by holding exports that would otherwise be underpaid. Full retail net metering removes the second job entirely, and Massachusetts has no residential time-of-use penalty to create the first. So there is almost nothing for a battery to arbitrage.
Figure 12. The median roof's net present value, solar alone against solar plus the best-fitting battery. The battery does not add value; it subtracts it. On none of the 62 homes did any battery in our catalogue pay for itself.
This is a verdict about money, not about backup power. A battery keeps your lights on in an outage, and that is worth something to many households. Just do not let it be sold to you as an investment on top of solar — in Massachusetts it is not.
9. So the honest headline is "Massachusetts works — and the clock is the policy"
Nearly every roof we modelled is a good investment today: 61 of 62 finish ahead, the typical one at a 12% tax-free return. That is not because Massachusetts has the best sun — it does not — but because it still pairs high prices with full retail net metering, and stacks SMART and a state credit on top. Take those away and the same roofs are ordinary or worse. The reason to act is not that panels get cheaper or rates rise; it is that the rules making this work are unusually good right now, and other states show they do not stay that way.
10. Limitations
- The rate is a single documented average, not a per-home tariff. The OpenEI URDB's Massachusetts residential tariffs proved unreliable — National Grid's parsed to 43¢/kWh (too high) and Eversource's western rate to 17¢ (a delivery-only stub, too low) — so rather than price 62 homes against three broken numbers we used one conservative all-in figure, about 30¢, from EIA and current rate trackers. It sits below the utilities' own quoted all-in rates, so if anything it understates solar's value; a homeowner on a higher effective rate does better than shown.
- SMART is modelled at a flat $0.03/kWh for 20 years. The real programme's rate steps down over time and varies by utility block and system size; we use a representative residential value. It is additive to net metering, as the programme allows for residential systems.
- Municipal light plants are excluded. Roughly forty Massachusetts towns run their own utilities with different net-metering and no SMART; nothing here applies to them.
- No federal credit. Section 25D expired at the end of 2025 and is not in any number here. If it returns, every payback shortens.
- Prices are frozen. $3.12/W modelled and $3.42/W paid are point-in-time figures; your quote is your own.
- Weather and degradation are modelled, not guaranteed — PVWatts typical-year weather, 0.5% annual degradation, 2.5% rate escalation.
11. Check it yourself
Every number here comes from a tool you can run on your own roof, free, at the SIA Solar Design Studio. Enter your address, accept the layout it designs or adjust it, and read your own payback, savings and return — with SMART, net metering and the state credit already built in. There is no login to see the numbers and no sales call attached. If you would rather we did it for you, ask for a of your home.
Read next
The same method across Pacific Gas & Electric territory in California, where NEM 3.0 cut export credits to a quarter of retail — the deal Massachusetts still avoids, and the last row of every comparison in this study.
Is solar worth it in California? →