FieldPulse, Housecall Pro, and ServiceM8 use different structures for multi-location customers. FieldPulse documents multiple sites within a customer profile, Housecall Pro uses parent and child companies, and ServiceM8 links client sites to a head office. This comparison considers only those structures and their effect on site records, service history, location selection, contacts, and billing relationships.
Multi-location or multi-site customer records
FieldPulse documents multiple sites and contacts within one customer profile, making it the most direct match of the three for one customer with several service addresses. Its official FieldPulse multi-site management page also connects those sites with site-based service history and scheduling.
Housecall Pro documents rolled-up customer visibility and location filters across related parent and child companies. ServiceM8 links multiple client sites to a head-office record, although Client Sites is an add-on.
Parent-child or head-office/site structure
Housecall Pro has the most explicit parent-child company model. Its Housecall Pro multi-location account help describes parent-level visibility, rolled-up customer lists, and location filtering, while noting that editing within a child company requires logging into that child account.
ServiceM8 uses a head-office and client-site model. The ServiceM8 Client Sites overview describes sites linked beneath a central head office. FieldPulse instead keeps sites within a customer profile rather than organizing them as separate child companies.
Site-level service history and notes
FieldPulse explicitly documents service history by customer site, allowing work at each location to remain distinguishable within the broader customer relationship. ServiceM8 documents site-specific information within its linked client-site structure, subject to the Client Sites add-on caveat.
The supplied Housecall Pro documentation establishes parent-level visibility and location filters but does not establish the same one-customer, site-level service-history model. Its parent-child company structure therefore should not be treated as interchangeable with FieldPulse’s customer-site structure or ServiceM8’s head-office/site model.
Scheduling the correct location
FieldPulse explicitly documents scheduling work for a particular customer site. ServiceM8 distinguishes the individual client site beneath its head office, while the supplied Housecall Pro documentation focuses on filtering and oversight across parent and child companies rather than the same customer-site scheduling model.
Day-to-day assignment after a location has been selected is a separate topic covered in the dispatch board workflow.
Billing and contact structure caveats
ServiceM8 explicitly documents billing through the head office while retaining information for individual client sites. FieldPulse documents multiple contacts and sites within one customer profile but does not establish the same head-office billing model on the supplied page. Housecall Pro’s parent-child company model likewise differs from a single payer associated with several service addresses.
QuickBooks compatibility does not by itself confirm that a platform’s site hierarchy will carry into another system; that adjacent issue is addressed in the QuickBooks integration comparison.
On the documented comparison criteria, FieldPulse is the closest match for one customer profile containing multiple service sites, contacts, site history, and site-based scheduling. ServiceM8 is the clearest match for a head-office/client-site relationship with centralized billing, subject to its add-on caveat. Housecall Pro is aligned more closely with oversight across parent and child companies, subject to its child-account login requirement.
Customer self-service is separate from multi-location account structure and is compared in the customer portal comparison. Product documentation, packaging, integrations, and availability can change, so current requirements require manual confirmation.