“Should I get it as IFC or RVT?” is one of the most common questions in BIM exchange. The short answer: they aren’t competing formats — they play different roles. This article sorts out the difference.
- RVT = Revit's native format. Preserves everything, but generally only opens in Revit
- IFC = open exchange format. Opens anywhere, but conversion drops some nuance
- Rule of thumb: keep designing = RVT / collaborate, review, archive = IFC
The fundamental difference: open vs native
- RVT is the native format of Autodesk Revit. It preserves everything Revit understands — parametric relationships, families, near-complete editing structure. But it generally only opens in Revit.
- IFC is the open exchange format defined by buildingSMART (what IFC is). It’s designed to be read and written by any BIM tool, independent of one vendor.
An analogy: RVT is “someone’s personal notebook,” IFC is “a clean copy anyone can read.” The notebook holds shorthand and structure only the author fully understands; the clean copy is universally legible but loses some nuance.
The personal notebook
- Nothing lost inside Revit
- Full parametric editing and families
- Generally only opens in Revit
- Version-compat limits; poor for archiving
The clean copy anyone can read
- Opens regardless of software
- Ideal for cross-vendor collaboration
- ISO standard, strong for long-term storage
- Some vendor features / editability are lost
RVT: strengths and limits
Strengths: as long as you stay inside Revit, nothing is lost. Full parametric editing, swapping families, continuing the design — all intact.
Limits: you can’t hand it to anyone without Revit. Version compatibility is constrained (an RVT saved in a newer Revit won’t open in an older one), and it’s poorly suited to long-term, vendor-neutral archiving.
IFC: strengths and limits
Strengths: opens regardless of software. You can hand it over even when the owner, contractor and trades all use different tools. As an international standard (ISO 16739) it’s well suited to long-term storage — it stays readable even if a particular vendor’s product disappears.
Limits: conversion isn’t perfect. Revit-specific features and parametric editing get “baked” into a fixed result (finalised geometry and properties) when exported to IFC. Bringing it back into Revit generally won’t restore the original parametric editability.
Which should you hand over?
The decision axis is simple:
- The other party also uses Revit and needs to keep editing the design → RVT (or Revit-to-Revit worksharing).
- Viewing, coordination, checking, cross-vendor collaboration, long-term storage → IFC.
In practice, teams commonly use “RVT within the lead design team, IFC for external exchange and deliverables.” Under the openBIM philosophy, cross-organisation handoffs favour IFC to avoid lock-in to a single vendor.
Tips to avoid losing data
- Decide the purpose first: “view only” vs “keep editing” determines the format.
- For IFC, check the export settings: which properties, which elements, and which IFC version (IFC2x3 vs IFC4) dramatically change the result.
- Open and verify on receipt: the receiver should always confirm properties aren’t empty and no elements are missing. Inspecting the file in an IFC viewer prevents most accidents.
- Don’t assume “export back to IFC fully restores Revit”: round-tripping has real limits.
Summary
RVT is the native format that shines inside Revit; IFC is the open format for collaborating and archiving across tools. It’s not about which is “better” — it’s about using the right one. Cross-tool or cross-organisation, reach for IFC; continuing the design inside Revit, stay in RVT. Keep that in mind and the handoff decision rarely trips you up.