Replicost is built around the artifacts that get cost-approach testimony admitted under Daubert and Frye — published methodology, falsifiable inputs, peer-reviewable data, historical reproducibility, sourced citations. The things that make opposing counsel work for it.
These are the standard attack vectors on cost-approach testimony. Replicost is engineered to neutralize each one.
"Your manual is from January. The loss is from August. Why should we believe these numbers?"
"You testified that exterior cost was $42.17 per square foot. What is the source of that number?"
"Is the methodology you used published, peer-reviewed, and subject to error rate analysis?"
"If we ran this property through your software today, would we get the same number you got 14 months ago?"
"You assigned 18% physical depreciation. What is the basis? Show me the work."
"Your regional multiplier is for the state. The subject is in a rural county. Why is that appropriate?"
The cost on your report reflects the market as of the valuation date — not last quarter. Historical snapshots back to 2014 are kept forever, so you can defend any past number.
Every cost line points to its underlying data source & date — BLS series ID, ENR vintage, permit data range. Reviewable and falsifiable.
RPLX-2026 is published on this site. Updated quarterly. Peer-review correspondence is public. Validation against legacy manuals is documented.
Re-run any property as of any past date and get the exact same number. The full audit trail is preserved and exportable.
Physical, functional, and external obsolescence are separately scoped, separately defended, and reconcile to age/life curves that are themselves sourced and published.
Cost multipliers are ZIP-level, not regional or state. The opposing expert who hand-waves "regional adjustment" doesn't have what you have.
You'll notice we don't list specific cases by name on this page. That's deliberate. Many cost-approach platforms publish "case acceptance" lists that turn out to be unverifiable, mischaracterized, or attributable to the expert witness rather than the underlying methodology. We'd rather show you the design choices that make Replicost reports defensible than name-drop courts. If you'd like to discuss specific litigation experience, contact us and we'll connect you with users in your jurisdiction. Contact →
Talk to us about your litigation use case. We'll show you the audit-trail artifacts in detail — and connect you with appraisers who've testified using Replicost reports.