Skip to main content
AMESTRATICON

Full supply, surplus or contracting?
The structured comparison.

Three tenant electricity models, three completely different return, risk and effort profiles. Here's the systematic comparison - without bias.

Neutral. Data-based. Decision-ready.

Why model selection is decisive

Wrong model selection can halve returns, or double them.

PV providers usually recommend full supply, because they earn most from it.

Tax and regulatory differences are often not explained.

No standardised comparison - decisions based on gut feeling.

Does this sound like your situation?

Let's clarify in a free initial consultation whether and how we can help.

The three basic models

Full supply: The landlord becomes an energy supplier, selling PV electricity plus residual power to tenants. Highest return, highest effort. Surplus feed-in: Only PV surplus goes to tenants, the rest is fed in. Simpler, but lower return. Contracting: A service provider handles planning, operation and billing. No own investment, but lower margin.

How we compare models

01

Identical Input Data

Same system size, same consumption profiles, same financing - only the model differs.

02

Return Comparison

IRR, NPV, cash-on-cash return and payback period for each model.

03

Risk/Effort Matrix

Regulatory effort, operational risk and management intensity per model.

Typical comparison results

Case-based

Return profile full supply

Case-based

Return profile surplus

0% invest

Contracting (no equity)

Frequently asked questions about model comparison

Related Topics

Calculate your model

In the cashflow calculator, compare all three models with your real data.

AME Module en--Energie
Energie & ESG - Nächster Schritt

Gemeinsam Ihr Energie-Portfolio in 60 Minuten sondieren.

Unter NDA. Wir schauen auf Ihre größten 3 Assets und nennen Ihnen die größten Hebel - kostenfrei. Yield-Modelle und Förder-Stack besprechen wir konkret.

NDA-First
P50/P90-Modell
Förder-Stack inkl.