Comparison
IssuesId vs Autodesk Forma
Autodesk Forma is the platform that was called Autodesk Construction Cloud until Autodesk folded it into the Forma brand in March 2026. Forma Build carries the field side — issues, RFIs, submittals, daily reports — alongside document and model management, takeoff and estimating, with PlanGrid and BIM 360 in its lineage.
At a glance
IssuesId vs Autodesk Forma, side by side
A quick, honest summary of where each tool focuses. Both are capable products; the right choice depends on what you need most.
Where Autodesk Forma is strong
- —Unmatched model and drawing depth, with clash detection and coordination upstream of the field
- —One vendor from design through construction if the design side is already Autodesk
- —Enterprise licensing, security and support that large clients often mandate
Where IssuesId differs
- —Defects are the whole product rather than one feature inside a much larger platform
- —Rolls out in days without licensing negotiations or an Autodesk tenant
- —Trades open their work from an email link instead of needing a named seat
- —Per-site pricing rather than per-user bundles tied to document counts
Which should you choose?
An honest recommendation
Choose Autodesk Forma if…
If your design and coordination already live in Autodesk and you want the field issues attached directly to the models and sheets they came from, staying inside Forma removes a genuine seam — and nothing else matches the model depth.
Choose IssuesId if…
If you want the defect and QA workflow running on site next week, with sub-contractors participating without licences, and you do not need model coordination to do it.
Frequently asked
Is Autodesk Construction Cloud still called that?
Not officially. Autodesk moved ACC under the Forma brand in March 2026, so Autodesk Build is now Forma Build and Docs is now Forma Data Management. Projects, data and workflows carried over unchanged, and most of the industry still says ACC.
Is IssuesId an alternative to Autodesk Forma?
For the defect and QA part of it, yes. Forma is a much larger platform that also covers models, drawings, takeoff and estimating. Teams that need the model depth generally keep Forma; teams that mainly needed the field issues often find a focused tool faster to roll out and cheaper once sub-contractors are counted.
Can we use both?
Plenty of teams do, particularly where the client mandates Autodesk as the project record but the site team wants something lighter for day-to-day defect capture. Check how you would reconcile the two registers before committing to running both.
Competitor details are compiled from public sources and were accurate to the best of our knowledge in 2026. Products change — check the vendor’s own site for the latest. We’ve aimed to be fair; if you spot something out of date, tell us and we’ll fix it.