ToolsStrategy

Best Scenario Planning Software for Business Decisions

A comprehensive guide to the leading scenario planning tools in 2026, from enterprise FP&A platforms to modern decision intelligence software. Find the right fit for your team size, budget, and use case.

May 16, 2026·40 min read·By the Incertive Team

Table of Contents

  1. Why Scenario Planning Software Matters
  2. FP&A vs. Decision Intelligence
  3. Anaplan
  4. Workday Adaptive Planning
  5. Planful
  6. Pigment
  7. Board
  8. Vena
  9. Cube
  10. Incertive
  11. Comparison Matrix
  12. How to Choose
  13. Frequently Asked Questions

1. Why Scenario Planning Software Matters

The Problem with Single-Scenario Planning

Most business plans are built around a single expected scenario. The revenue forecast says $10 million. The project timeline says 18 months. The budget says $2.5 million. These single-point estimates create an illusion of certainty that is profoundly misleading. They imply that the future is knowable and that the plan will unfold exactly as described. It almost never does.

Research on planning accuracy paints a sobering picture. A landmark study by Bent Flyvbjerg and colleagues at the University of Oxford, published in the Journal of the American Planning Association (2002), examined over 200 major transportation infrastructure projects and found that 90% experienced cost overruns. The average cost overrun was 28% for roads, 45% for rail, and 20% for bridges and tunnels. In the technology sector, the Standish Group's CHAOS reports have consistently found that the majority of software projects exceed their planned budgets and schedules. These are not failures of execution alone - they are failures of planning, rooted in the assumption that a single expected scenario is a sufficient basis for decision-making.

Scenario planning addresses this problem by explicitly modeling multiple possible futures. Rather than committing to a single forecast, organizations that use scenario planning develop strategies that are robust across a range of plausible outcomes. The question shifts from "What will happen?" to "What could happen, and are we prepared?"

The Evolution of Scenario Planning Tools

Scenario planning as a formal discipline has its roots in military strategy and was pioneered in the corporate world by Royal Dutch Shell in the early 1970s. Shell's scenario planning team, led by Pierre Wack, developed a set of scenarios that anticipated the 1973 oil crisis, allowing Shell to respond more effectively than competitors who had planned only for continued stability. The practice spread through the strategic planning community over the following decades, but it remained largely qualitative - a process of crafting narrative descriptions of possible futures and using those narratives to stress-test strategies.

The software tools available for scenario planning have evolved through several generations. The first generation was simply spreadsheets: analysts would build a financial model in Excel and manually create "best case," "base case," and "worst case" versions by changing key inputs. This approach is still widely used but has significant limitations, including the difficulty of modeling more than a few scenarios, the risk of formula errors, and the challenge of maintaining consistency across scenarios.

The second generation was enterprise FP&A (Financial Planning and Analysis) software, which emerged in the late 1990s and matured through the 2000s and 2010s. Platforms like Anaplan, Workday Adaptive Planning (originally Adaptive Insights), Planful (originally Host Analytics), and others moved financial planning off spreadsheets and onto purpose-built platforms with better data management, multi-user collaboration, workflow automation, and reporting. These tools support scenario planning by allowing finance teams to create and compare multiple plan versions, but they still rely on users to manually define each scenario.

The third generation is what we might call decision intelligence or probabilistic planning software. These tools, exemplified by Incertive, use techniques like Monte Carlo simulation to generate thousands of scenarios automatically. Instead of asking "What are three scenarios we should plan for?", they ask "What are the uncertainties in our plan, and what is the probability distribution of outcomes?" This is a fundamentally different approach that provides quantitatively richer insight.

For a deeper exploration of the scenario planning methodology and how Monte Carlo simulation enhances it, see our scenario planning framework guide.

2. FP&A vs. Decision Intelligence: An Important Distinction

Before reviewing individual tools, it is important to understand a fundamental distinction in the scenario planning software landscape. The tools covered in this guide fall into two broad categories that serve different purposes, different users, and different organizational needs.

Enterprise FP&A Platforms

FP&A platforms (Anaplan, Workday Adaptive Planning, Planful, Pigment, Board, Vena, Cube) are designed primarily for the Office of the CFO. Their core function is to replace or augment Excel-based financial planning processes with a centralized, multi-user platform that provides better data management, auditability, workflow automation, and reporting. These platforms support scenario planning in the sense that they allow finance teams to create, maintain, and compare multiple plan versions - for example, a base case, an upside case, and a downside case.

The strengths of FP&A platforms include their ability to integrate with ERP systems and data warehouses, their support for complex multi-entity consolidation, their workflow and approval capabilities, and their enterprise-grade security and governance features. They are designed for recurring planning processes: annual budgets, quarterly forecasts, rolling forecasts, and monthly variance analysis.

The limitations of FP&A platforms for scenario planning include their reliance on manually defined scenarios (typically 3-5 discrete scenarios created by the finance team), their deterministic approach (each scenario produces a single set of outputs), and their primary focus on financial metrics rather than broader business decision analysis. They answer the question "What does the P&L look like under scenario A vs. scenario B?" but they do not answer the question "What is the probability that we achieve our revenue target?"

Decision Intelligence Platforms

Decision intelligence platforms (such as Incertive) take a different approach. Rather than building and maintaining comprehensive financial models, they focus on individual decisions and use probabilistic methods to quantify uncertainty. The user defines the key uncertainties in a decision (each represented as a probability distribution), and the platform uses Monte Carlo simulation to generate thousands of scenarios automatically, producing a probability distribution of outcomes.

The strengths of decision intelligence platforms include their probabilistic output (probability distributions rather than point estimates), their ability to handle any type of decision (not just financial planning), their lower implementation overhead (no ERP integration or data warehouse setup required), and their accessibility to users without finance backgrounds. They answer questions like "What is the probability that this project finishes on budget?" and "Which of these three strategic options has the highest expected value?"

The limitations of decision intelligence platforms include their focus on individual decisions rather than enterprise-wide planning processes, their lack of integration with ERP and accounting systems, and their different mental model (probability distributions rather than deterministic scenarios) which may require a shift in organizational thinking.

Which Do You Need?

Many organizations need both. An FP&A platform for recurring financial planning processes (budgeting, forecasting, reporting) and a decision intelligence platform for evaluating specific strategic decisions under uncertainty. These are complementary capabilities, not substitutes for each other.

If you are a CFO or VP of Finance looking for a platform to run your annual budget process, quarterly forecasts, and financial reporting, you should be evaluating FP&A platforms. If you are a business leader, consultant, or project manager who needs to make a specific decision under uncertainty - should we enter this market? Should we build or buy? Is this project worth the investment? - you should be evaluating decision intelligence platforms.

3. Anaplan

Overview

Anaplan is a cloud-based enterprise planning platform founded in 2006 in York, England, by Michael Gould and Guy Haddleton. The company is headquartered in San Francisco and went public on the New York Stock Exchange in 2018 before being acquired by Thoma Bravo, a private equity firm, in 2022 for approximately $10.7 billion. Anaplan positions itself as a "Connected Planning" platform, enabling organizations to link planning processes across finance, sales, supply chain, marketing, HR, and IT.

Anaplan has consistently been recognized as a leader in enterprise planning by Gartner, appearing as a Leader in the Gartner Magic Quadrant for Cloud Financial Planning and Analysis Solutions. As of 2025, Anaplan reports over 2,000 customers worldwide, including many Fortune 500 companies.

What It Does

Anaplan provides a multidimensional modeling engine (called the Hyperblock) that allows organizations to build planning models that span multiple departments and functions. Users can create models for budgeting, revenue planning, workforce planning, supply chain planning, and sales performance management, all linked together so that changes in one model automatically cascade through to others.

For scenario planning, Anaplan supports multiple model versions, allowing users to create and compare different planning assumptions. Users can create what-if scenarios by adjusting specific inputs and comparing the resulting financial projections. Anaplan also includes predictive analytics capabilities through its PlanIQ feature, which uses machine learning to generate demand forecasts.

Ideal User

Anaplan is designed for large, complex organizations that need to connect planning processes across multiple departments. The typical Anaplan customer is a mid-market to large enterprise with a dedicated FP&A team and significant planning complexity - multiple business units, multiple geographies, complex revenue models, and the need to align financial, operational, and strategic plans. Anaplan implementations are typically led by the CFO's office and involve dedicated planning teams or external implementation partners.

Strengths

  • Connected planning: Anaplan's core value proposition is the ability to link planning models across departments, enabling end-to-end business planning rather than siloed departmental plans.
  • Flexible modeling: The Hyperblock engine supports highly customizable models that can accommodate complex business logic, multiple currencies, intercompany eliminations, and hierarchical data structures.
  • Scale: Anaplan can handle large volumes of data and complex models with many dimensions, making it suitable for the planning needs of large enterprises.
  • Ecosystem: Anaplan has a large partner ecosystem, including system integrators, consulting firms, and certified model builders, which facilitates implementation and ongoing support.
  • Enterprise features: Anaplan includes enterprise-grade security, role-based access control, audit trails, and workflow automation features that are essential for large organizations.

Limitations

  • Complexity and cost: Anaplan is one of the most expensive FP&A platforms and one of the most complex to implement. Implementation timelines of several months and total costs (including implementation services) of hundreds of thousands of dollars are common for large deployments.
  • Deterministic scenarios: While Anaplan supports multiple scenarios, each scenario is deterministic - a single set of assumptions producing a single set of outputs. Anaplan does not natively support Monte Carlo simulation or probabilistic output.
  • Steep learning curve: Building and maintaining Anaplan models requires specialized skills, and many organizations rely on certified Anaplan model builders or external consultants. The platform uses its own modeling language and paradigms that are different from both spreadsheets and traditional database tools.
  • Implementation dependency: The value of Anaplan depends heavily on the quality of the implementation. Poorly designed models can be difficult to maintain and may not deliver the expected benefits.

Pricing Model

Anaplan does not publish pricing on its website. Pricing is based on a subscription model, typically structured around the number of users, the volume of data, and the complexity of the deployment. Prospective customers should expect a significant investment, with annual subscription costs typically in the six-figure range for enterprise deployments. Contact Anaplan's sales team for a custom quote.

For a comparison of Anaplan's scenario planning approach and Incertive's probabilistic approach, see our Incertive vs. Anaplan comparison page.

4. Workday Adaptive Planning

Overview

Workday Adaptive Planning (formerly Adaptive Insights) is a cloud-based FP&A platform that has been on the market since 2003. The company was founded by Robert Hull in Palo Alto, California, and was acquired by Workday in 2018 for approximately $1.55 billion. Adaptive Planning is now part of the broader Workday platform, which includes Workday Financial Management, Workday HCM (Human Capital Management), and other enterprise applications.

Adaptive Planning has been recognized as a Leader in the Gartner Magic Quadrant for Cloud Financial Planning and Analysis Solutions alongside Anaplan. It positions itself as a solution that combines the power of enterprise planning with the simplicity that finance teams need to adopt the tool without heavy IT involvement.

What It Does

Adaptive Planning provides a spreadsheet-like interface for financial modeling, budgeting, forecasting, and reporting. The platform organizes models around "sheets" (similar to spreadsheet tabs) and "levels" (organizational dimensions like departments, cost centers, and business units). Users can create multiple scenarios by defining different sets of assumptions and comparing the resulting financial projections.

Key capabilities include drag-and-drop report building, automated data integration with ERP and CRM systems, multi-currency support, intercompany eliminations, rolling forecasts, workforce planning, capital expense planning, and dashboarding. The platform also includes OfficeConnect, a Microsoft Office add-in that allows users to pull Adaptive Planning data directly into Excel and PowerPoint for reporting.

Ideal User

Adaptive Planning is designed for finance teams at mid-market companies (typically 200-5,000 employees) that want to move off spreadsheets for their core planning processes without the complexity and cost of a platform like Anaplan. It is particularly well-suited for organizations that already use Workday for HCM or financials, as the integration between the products is deep. Finance professionals who are comfortable with spreadsheets typically find Adaptive Planning's interface intuitive.

Strengths

  • Ease of use: Adaptive Planning's spreadsheet-like interface makes it more accessible to finance professionals than some competing platforms. The learning curve is generally shorter than Anaplan's.
  • Workday integration: For organizations using Workday HCM and/or Workday Financial Management, the native integration eliminates the need for custom data connections and provides a unified planning experience.
  • Time to value: Adaptive Planning implementations are typically faster and less expensive than Anaplan implementations, making it accessible to organizations with smaller budgets and more limited implementation resources.
  • OfficeConnect: The ability to pull live Adaptive Planning data into Excel and PowerPoint is highly valued by finance teams that need to produce board presentations and management reports in familiar formats.
  • Pre-built content: Adaptive Planning includes pre-built planning templates for common use cases like revenue planning, workforce planning, and capital planning, which can accelerate implementation.

Limitations

  • Less flexible modeling: Adaptive Planning's model architecture is more structured and less flexible than Anaplan's, which can be a limitation for organizations with highly complex or non-standard planning needs.
  • Deterministic scenarios: Like Anaplan, Adaptive Planning supports discrete scenario comparison but does not include Monte Carlo simulation or probabilistic output.
  • Workday ecosystem tilt: While Adaptive Planning can be used independently, the product's deepest integration is with other Workday products. Organizations that use non-Workday ERP and HCM systems may find integrations less seamless.
  • Enterprise focus: While more accessible than Anaplan, Adaptive Planning is still designed for organizations with dedicated finance teams. Small businesses and startups may find it more platform than they need.

Pricing Model

Workday Adaptive Planning pricing is available through Workday's sales organization. Pricing is subscription-based and depends on the number of users, the modules selected, and the deployment size. Like most enterprise FP&A platforms, specific pricing requires a sales engagement.

5. Planful

Overview

Planful (formerly Host Analytics) is a cloud-based FP&A platform that was founded in 2001 and rebranded to Planful in 2020. The company is headquartered in San Francisco and serves mid-market and enterprise organizations. Planful positions itself as a platform that provides "continuous planning" - the ability to plan, consolidate, and report financial data in a unified environment with continuous processes rather than periodic cycles.

What It Does

Planful provides modules for financial planning (budgeting and forecasting), financial consolidation (multi-entity close and consolidation), and financial reporting (management and regulatory reporting). The planning module supports model-based planning with multi-dimensional analysis, scenario comparison, rolling forecasts, and what-if analysis. The platform includes workflow automation for budget review and approval, data integration with ERP systems, and collaboration features.

For scenario planning, Planful allows users to create multiple plan versions with different assumptions and compare them side by side. The platform also includes Planful Predict, a machine learning-based forecasting feature that uses historical data patterns to generate automated forecasts.

Ideal User

Planful is designed for FP&A teams at mid-market companies that need a comprehensive planning, consolidation, and reporting platform. It is particularly well-suited for organizations that need financial consolidation capabilities (multi-entity close) alongside their planning capabilities, as Planful provides both in a single platform. The typical Planful customer has a finance team of 5-20 people and is looking for a solution that is more powerful than spreadsheets but less complex (and less expensive) than Anaplan.

Strengths

  • Planning and consolidation in one platform: Unlike some competitors that focus solely on planning, Planful includes financial consolidation and close management, reducing the number of systems the finance team needs to manage.
  • Structured planning: Planful's structured approach to planning, with pre-built templates and guided workflows, can accelerate implementation for standard planning use cases.
  • Financial reporting: Planful includes robust financial reporting capabilities, including formatted financial statements, management dashboards, and ad hoc analysis.
  • Mid-market positioning: Planful is designed for the mid-market, with pricing and implementation complexity that is more accessible than enterprise platforms like Anaplan.

Limitations

  • Less flexible modeling: Planful's model architecture is more structured than some competitors, which can be a limitation for complex or non-standard planning requirements.
  • Deterministic scenarios: Like other FP&A platforms, Planful does not support probabilistic scenario analysis or Monte Carlo simulation.
  • Implementation effort: While less complex than Anaplan, Planful implementations still require significant effort, particularly for the consolidation and reporting modules.

Pricing Model

Planful pricing is subscription-based and available through the company's sales team. Pricing depends on the modules selected, the number of users, and the scope of the deployment.

6. Pigment

Overview

Pigment is a business planning platform founded in 2019 in Paris, France, by Eléonore Crespo and Romain Niccoli. The company has raised significant venture capital funding and has grown rapidly, positioning itself as a modern alternative to legacy FP&A platforms. Pigment's pitch is that it combines the flexibility of a spreadsheet with the power of an enterprise planning platform, targeting finance, revenue operations, and HR teams.

What It Does

Pigment provides a collaborative business planning environment that allows teams to build models, create scenarios, and share results. The platform is organized around "Boards" (visual interfaces for interacting with data), "Metrics" (calculated values that form the model logic), and "Dimensions" (the organizational hierarchies and categories that structure the data). Users can create scenarios by defining different sets of assumptions and comparing the resulting projections.

Key capabilities include real-time collaboration (multiple users can work in the same model simultaneously), data integration with common business systems (ERP, CRM, HRIS), flexible modeling with a formula language, scenario comparison, variance analysis, and dashboard-based reporting. Pigment also emphasizes its ability to handle large datasets quickly, claiming performance advantages over older platforms.

Ideal User

Pigment is designed for finance and operations teams at fast-growing companies, particularly in the technology sector. The typical Pigment customer is a series B through pre-IPO technology company that has outgrown spreadsheets but does not want the complexity and cost of a legacy enterprise platform. Pigment also targets larger companies that are looking for a more modern and collaborative alternative to their existing planning tools.

Strengths

  • Modern interface: Pigment's user interface is noticeably more modern and responsive than older FP&A platforms, which appeals to teams accustomed to contemporary SaaS design patterns.
  • Real-time collaboration: The ability for multiple users to work in the same model simultaneously, with changes visible in real time, is a significant advantage for distributed teams.
  • Performance: Pigment claims to handle large datasets and complex calculations more efficiently than some legacy platforms, which matters for models with millions of data points.
  • Cross-functional use: Pigment is designed to be used by teams beyond finance, including revenue operations, HR, and supply chain, which can reduce the number of planning tools an organization needs.

Limitations

  • Newer platform: As a company founded in 2019, Pigment is newer than competitors like Anaplan and Adaptive Planning. Some enterprises may prefer the maturity and track record of more established platforms.
  • Deterministic scenarios: Like other FP&A platforms, Pigment supports discrete scenario comparison but does not include Monte Carlo simulation or probabilistic output.
  • Ecosystem maturity: Pigment's partner ecosystem, integration library, and community of certified practitioners are still maturing compared to more established platforms.

Pricing Model

Pigment pricing is available through the company's sales team. The platform is sold on a subscription basis with pricing based on the number of users and the scope of the deployment.

For a comparison of Pigment's approach to scenario planning and Incertive's probabilistic approach, see our Incertive vs. Pigment comparison page.

7. Board

Overview

Board is an enterprise planning and business intelligence platform founded in 1994 in Chiasso, Switzerland, by Giovanni Grossi and Marco Solforetti. Board positions itself as an "Intelligent Planning Platform" that combines planning, business intelligence, and analytics in a single environment. The company has been in the market for three decades, making it one of the more established players in the planning software space.

What It Does

Board provides a unified platform for planning, simulation, analytics, and reporting. The platform includes a multidimensional data model, a planning and budgeting engine, business intelligence dashboards, and predictive analytics capabilities. Board's modeling engine allows users to build planning models with multiple dimensions, create scenarios, run what-if analyses, and produce financial and operational reports.

A key differentiator of Board is its combination of planning and BI in a single platform. While most FP&A platforms focus primarily on planning and rely on separate BI tools for analytics and reporting, Board provides both capabilities in one product, allowing users to move seamlessly between analysis and planning.

Ideal User

Board is designed for organizations that want to consolidate their planning and business intelligence tools onto a single platform. It is particularly well-suited for mid-market and enterprise companies that currently use separate tools for planning, reporting, and analytics and want to reduce the complexity and cost of maintaining multiple systems. Board's customer base spans a range of industries including manufacturing, retail, financial services, and healthcare.

Strengths

  • Unified planning and BI: The combination of planning and business intelligence in a single platform eliminates the need for separate BI tools and ensures that planning models and reports draw from the same data.
  • Flexibility: Board's platform is highly flexible, capable of supporting a wide range of use cases from financial planning to supply chain planning to sales performance management.
  • European presence: Board has a particularly strong presence in Europe, with deep expertise in European regulatory and reporting requirements.
  • Maturity: With three decades on the market, Board is a well-proven platform with a substantial customer base and established partner network.

Limitations

  • Less well-known: Board is less widely known than Anaplan or Workday Adaptive Planning, particularly in North America, which can make it harder to find experienced consultants and implementation partners.
  • Deterministic scenarios: Like other FP&A platforms, Board supports discrete scenario comparison but does not include Monte Carlo simulation or probabilistic output.
  • Implementation complexity: The breadth of Board's capabilities means that implementations can be complex, and the platform requires significant configuration to match an organization's specific needs.

Pricing Model

Board pricing is available through the company's sales team. Pricing is subscription-based and depends on the number of users, the modules selected, and the deployment size.

8. Vena

Overview

Vena Solutions is a cloud-based FP&A platform founded in 2011 in Toronto, Canada. Vena's distinctive approach is to use Microsoft Excel as the front-end interface for its planning platform. Rather than asking users to learn an entirely new tool, Vena extends Excel with a centralized database, workflow automation, version control, and audit trails. This "Excel as the interface" approach is designed to minimize the learning curve and maximize user adoption by leveraging the tool that most finance professionals already know.

What It Does

Vena provides a complete FP&A platform that uses Excel as its primary modeling interface. Users build their models in Excel using familiar formulas and functions, and Vena adds a centralized data layer, workflow automation, and reporting capabilities on top. The platform supports budgeting, forecasting, financial consolidation, reporting, and scenario analysis.

For scenario planning, Vena allows users to create multiple versions of their plans with different assumptions and compare them. Because the models are built in Excel, users have the full flexibility of the spreadsheet environment for defining scenarios and custom calculations.

Ideal User

Vena is ideal for finance teams that are deeply invested in Excel and want to retain their existing spreadsheet expertise and models while gaining the governance, collaboration, and scalability benefits of a dedicated platform. The typical Vena customer is a mid-market company whose finance team is proficient in Excel and resistant to adopting a completely new tool.

Strengths

  • Excel as interface: By using Excel as the front end, Vena eliminates most of the learning curve associated with adopting a new planning platform. Users continue to work in their familiar spreadsheet environment.
  • Leverage existing models: Organizations can migrate their existing Excel models to the Vena platform without completely rebuilding them, which can significantly reduce implementation time.
  • Governance and control: Vena adds the version control, audit trails, and workflow automation that are missing from standalone Excel, addressing many of the governance concerns that drive organizations away from spreadsheet-based planning.
  • Adoption rates: Because users work in Excel, adoption rates tend to be higher than for platforms that require learning an entirely new interface.

Limitations

  • Excel dependency: Vena's greatest strength is also its limitation. Because models are built in Excel, they inherit Excel's limitations, including the potential for formula errors, the difficulty of auditing complex spreadsheets, and the performance constraints of very large models.
  • Deterministic scenarios: Like other FP&A platforms, Vena does not include Monte Carlo simulation or probabilistic analysis capabilities.
  • Scalability ceiling: For very large and complex planning models, the Excel-based approach may hit performance limitations that native planning platforms can handle more gracefully.

Pricing Model

Vena pricing is available through the company's sales team. The platform is sold on a subscription basis with pricing based on the number of users and the modules selected.

9. Cube

Overview

Cube is a cloud-based FP&A platform founded in 2018 in New York City by Christina Ross, a former CFO who experienced the limitations of spreadsheet-based planning firsthand. Cube positions itself as a spreadsheet-native FP&A platform that works alongside Excel and Google Sheets, providing a centralized data layer and automation capabilities while preserving the spreadsheet experience that finance teams prefer. The company has raised significant venture capital and has been growing rapidly in the mid-market FP&A space.

What It Does

Cube integrates with Excel and Google Sheets to provide centralized data management, automated data consolidation, version control, and reporting. Users build their models in their preferred spreadsheet application and use Cube's add-in or sidebar to pull in data, publish results, and manage scenarios. The platform also includes a web-based interface for dashboards, approvals, and data management.

For scenario planning, Cube allows users to create multiple plan versions and compare them. The spreadsheet integration means that users can leverage their existing models and Excel skills for scenario definition and analysis.

Ideal User

Cube is designed for finance teams at small to mid-market companies (typically 50-1,000 employees) that want the benefits of an FP&A platform without abandoning their spreadsheets. It is particularly well-suited for lean finance teams that need to automate manual data consolidation and reporting processes. The typical Cube customer is a finance leader who has outgrown manual spreadsheet processes but does not need (or cannot afford) an enterprise platform like Anaplan.

Strengths

  • Spreadsheet compatibility: Cube works with both Excel and Google Sheets, giving users the flexibility to use their preferred spreadsheet application.
  • Quick time to value: Cube implementations are typically fast - often weeks rather than months - because users continue to work in their existing spreadsheets.
  • Accessible pricing: Cube is positioned at a more accessible price point than enterprise FP&A platforms, making it attractive to smaller organizations and startups.
  • Data consolidation: Cube automates the process of pulling data from multiple sources (ERP, CRM, HRIS, spreadsheets) into a centralized model, which is often the biggest pain point for small finance teams.

Limitations

  • Modeling depth: Because Cube relies on the spreadsheet for modeling, it does not provide the multi-dimensional modeling capabilities of platforms like Anaplan or Board.
  • Deterministic scenarios: Like other FP&A platforms, Cube does not include Monte Carlo simulation or probabilistic analysis.
  • Newer platform: Founded in 2018, Cube is a newer entrant with less market maturity than established platforms.
  • Scale limitations: For large, complex enterprises with hundreds of users and sophisticated planning needs, Cube may not provide the depth and scale required.

Pricing Model

Cube offers tiered pricing based on the features and scale needed. Pricing is available on the Cube website and through the company's sales team.

10. Incertive

Overview

Incertive represents a fundamentally different approach to scenario planning compared to the FP&A platforms described above. While FP&A platforms focus on building and maintaining comprehensive financial models with discrete scenarios, Incertive is a decision intelligence platform that uses Monte Carlo simulation and AI-assisted analysis to generate thousands of scenarios automatically and calculate the probability distribution of outcomes.

What It Does

Incertive allows users to describe their business decisions in natural language and then guides them through identifying key uncertainties, assigning probability distributions to uncertain variables, and running Monte Carlo simulations that generate thousands of scenarios. The output is a probability distribution showing the full range of possible outcomes and their likelihoods, along with sensitivity analysis identifying which uncertainties matter most.

Unlike FP&A platforms where scenario planning means creating and comparing 3-5 discrete scenarios, Incertive's approach generates thousands of internally consistent scenarios automatically, each representing a different combination of the uncertain variables. This provides a much richer picture of the uncertainty landscape than discrete scenario comparison.

Ideal User

Incertive is designed for business professionals who need to make specific decisions under uncertainty. This includes project managers evaluating project feasibility, consultants advising clients on strategic decisions, startup founders evaluating market opportunities, and business leaders making go/no-go decisions on investments. Unlike FP&A platforms, Incertive does not require a dedicated finance team or extensive implementation effort. See our solutions for consultants and solutions for startups for specific use cases.

Strengths

  • Probabilistic output: Incertive produces probability distributions rather than point estimates, giving users a much richer understanding of uncertainty than discrete scenario comparison.
  • Accessibility: The natural language interface and guided workflows make quantitative risk analysis accessible to business professionals without specialized statistical training.
  • Speed: Users can go from describing a decision to viewing probabilistic results in minutes, without the weeks or months of implementation required by FP&A platforms.
  • Decision-centric: Incertive is designed around the decision, not around the financial model. It can be used for any type of decision under uncertainty, not just financial planning.
  • Calibration tracking: Incertive helps users improve their estimation accuracy over time through calibration tracking, which is not available in any of the FP&A platforms.

Limitations

  • Not an FP&A platform: Incertive is not designed for enterprise financial planning, budgeting, consolidation, or reporting. Organizations that need these capabilities still need an FP&A platform (or Excel) for those processes.
  • No ERP integration: Incertive does not integrate with ERP systems or pull in actuals data for variance analysis. It is designed for forward-looking decision analysis, not backward-looking financial reporting.
  • Different mental model: The probabilistic approach requires users to think in terms of probability distributions rather than deterministic scenarios, which may require a mindset shift for teams accustomed to traditional scenario planning.

Pricing Model

Incertive offers cloud-based pricing designed to be accessible to organizations of all sizes. Visit the pricing page for current plans.

11. Comparison Matrix

The following comparison covers the key dimensions that differentiate these tools. Remember that FP&A platforms and decision intelligence platforms serve different primary purposes, so a direct feature-for-feature comparison is not entirely apples-to-apples.

ToolCategoryPrimary Use CaseTarget Company SizePricing Tier
AnaplanEnterprise FP&AConnected enterprise planningLarge enterprise (1,000+)Enterprise ($$$)
Workday AdaptiveEnterprise FP&AFinancial planning & reportingMid-market to enterpriseEnterprise ($$)
PlanfulEnterprise FP&APlanning, consolidation, reportingMid-marketMid-range ($$)
PigmentModern FP&ACollaborative business planningGrowth-stage to enterpriseMid-range ($$)
BoardEnterprise FP&A + BIPlanning and analyticsMid-market to enterpriseMid-range to enterprise
VenaExcel-native FP&AExcel-based planning with governanceMid-marketMid-range ($$)
CubeSpreadsheet-native FP&ASpreadsheet-based planningSmall to mid-marketAccessible ($)
IncertiveDecision IntelligenceProbabilistic decision analysisAny sizeAccessible ($)

Scenario Planning Capabilities

CapabilityFP&A PlatformsIncertive
Discrete scenario comparisonYes (3-5 hand-crafted scenarios)Yes (as a subset of probabilistic output)
Monte Carlo simulationNoYes (thousands of auto-generated scenarios)
Probability distributionsNo (point estimates only)Yes (full output distributions)
Sensitivity analysisLimited (manual what-if)Yes (automated tornado charts)
ERP integrationYesNo
Financial consolidationYes (some platforms)No
Implementation timeWeeks to monthsMinutes
Calibration trackingNoYes

12. How to Choose the Right Tool

Start with Your Primary Need

The most important step in choosing scenario planning software is clarifying what problem you are trying to solve.

If you need to replace your spreadsheet-based budgeting and forecasting process:

You need an FP&A platform. Start with Anaplan if you are a large enterprise with complex, cross-functional planning needs. Consider Workday Adaptive Planning if you are already in the Workday ecosystem or want a balance of capability and ease of use. Look at Planful if you also need financial consolidation. Evaluate Pigment if you are a fast-growing tech company that values modern UX and collaboration. Consider Vena or Cube if your team is deeply invested in Excel and wants to preserve their spreadsheet workflows.

If you need to make better decisions under uncertainty:

You need a decision intelligence platform. Incertive is designed specifically for this purpose, providing Monte Carlo simulation-based scenario analysis that generates thousands of scenarios automatically and produces probability distributions of outcomes. This is the right tool when you need to answer questions like "What is the probability that this investment pays off?" or "What is the range of possible outcomes for this initiative?"

If you need both:

Many organizations benefit from having both an FP&A platform for recurring financial planning and a decision intelligence platform for evaluating specific strategic decisions. These are complementary tools that serve different purposes, and the total investment in both may be less than the investment in a single enterprise platform.

Consider Your Team Size and Budget

The tools in this guide span a wide range of price points. Enterprise FP&A platforms like Anaplan can cost hundreds of thousands of dollars per year for large deployments. Mid-market platforms like Planful and Pigment are less expensive but still represent a significant investment. Spreadsheet-native tools like Vena and Cube are more accessible. Cloud-based decision intelligence tools like Incertive are designed to be accessible to organizations of any size.

Be honest about your team's capacity to implement and maintain a new tool. Enterprise FP&A platforms require dedicated resources for implementation, model building, and ongoing maintenance. If you do not have those resources, a simpler tool that your team will actually use is more valuable than a powerful tool that sits unused.

Evaluate Against Your Specific Use Case

The best way to choose is to test the top candidates against a real use case from your organization. Build the same analysis in two or three tools and evaluate: Which was faster? Which produced more useful output? Which would be easiest for your team to adopt? Most vendors offer free trials or guided demos that allow you to evaluate the tool before committing.

For guidance on how to structure your scenario analysis regardless of which tool you choose, see our scenario planning framework guide and our overview of probabilistic forecasting methods.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is scenario planning software?

Scenario planning software helps organizations model multiple possible futures and evaluate how different assumptions affect business outcomes. This ranges from enterprise FP&A platforms that let finance teams build budget scenarios, to decision intelligence tools that use Monte Carlo simulation to generate thousands of scenarios automatically and calculate the probability of different outcomes.

What is the difference between FP&A software and decision intelligence software?

FP&A (Financial Planning and Analysis) software like Anaplan, Workday Adaptive Planning, and Planful is designed for budgeting, forecasting, and financial reporting. It excels at building financial models with multiple scenarios but typically treats scenarios as discrete, hand-crafted alternatives (best case, base case, worst case). Decision intelligence software like Incertive uses probabilistic methods such as Monte Carlo simulation to generate thousands of scenarios automatically, producing probability distributions that show the full range and likelihood of possible outcomes.

How many scenarios should I plan for?

Traditional scenario planning typically uses 3-5 hand-crafted scenarios that represent distinctly different futures. This is useful for strategic thinking but misses the continuous spectrum of possibilities. Monte Carlo simulation-based tools generate thousands of scenarios automatically, which gives a much more complete picture of the uncertainty. The right approach depends on your purpose: use a few narrative scenarios for strategic exploration and communication, and use computational methods for quantitative analysis and decision support.

Can scenario planning software replace Excel?

It depends on what you use Excel for. Enterprise FP&A platforms can replace Excel for budgeting, forecasting, and financial reporting, with significant benefits in data integrity, collaboration, and workflow automation. However, Excel remains useful for ad hoc analysis and quick calculations. Decision intelligence tools like Incertive complement rather than replace Excel: they provide probabilistic capabilities that Excel lacks while allowing you to continue using spreadsheets for other purposes.

What size company needs scenario planning software?

Any organization making significant decisions under uncertainty can benefit from scenario planning. Enterprise FP&A platforms like Anaplan and Workday Adaptive Planning are typically adopted by mid-market and enterprise companies with dedicated finance teams. Cloud-based decision intelligence tools like Incertive are accessible to organizations of any size, from solo consultants to large enterprises. The question is not your company size but the size and complexity of the decisions you face.

How is scenario planning different from forecasting?

Forecasting attempts to predict what will happen, typically producing a single expected outcome. Scenario planning explores what could happen across a range of possible futures. Traditional scenario planning uses qualitative narratives to describe a small number of distinctly different futures. Computational scenario planning uses Monte Carlo simulation to generate thousands of quantitative scenarios that span the full range of uncertainty, producing probability distributions of outcomes.

What is Monte Carlo simulation and how does it relate to scenario planning?

Monte Carlo simulation is a computational technique that generates thousands of possible outcomes by repeatedly sampling from probability distributions assigned to uncertain variables. Each simulation iteration represents one possible scenario. By running thousands of iterations, you get a probability distribution that shows the full range of possible outcomes and how likely each is. This is essentially automated, quantitative scenario planning at a scale that would be impossible to do manually.

How do I choose between Anaplan and simpler tools?

Anaplan is an enterprise-grade connected planning platform designed for large organizations with complex planning needs across finance, supply chain, sales, and HR. If your primary need is enterprise-wide financial planning and consolidation with hundreds of users, Anaplan may be the right choice. If your primary need is making better individual decisions under uncertainty - evaluating a market entry, assessing a product launch, or planning a project - a focused decision intelligence tool like Incertive will be simpler, faster to implement, and less expensive.

Do scenario planning tools integrate with ERP systems?

Enterprise FP&A platforms like Anaplan, Workday Adaptive Planning, and Planful are designed to integrate with ERP systems such as SAP, Oracle, NetSuite, and others, pulling in actuals data for variance analysis and forecasting. Decision intelligence tools like Incertive operate more independently, focusing on the decision analysis itself rather than integrating with operational systems. The right level of integration depends on whether you need your scenario planning connected to your financial reporting or whether you need it for standalone decision analysis.

What is connected planning?

Connected planning is a concept popularized by Anaplan that refers to linking planning processes across different departments and functions - finance, sales, supply chain, HR - so that changes in one plan automatically flow through to related plans. For example, if the sales plan changes, the revenue forecast, hiring plan, and supply chain plan all update accordingly. This is primarily an enterprise FP&A concept and is different from the scenario-based decision analysis provided by tools like Incertive.

Ready for Probabilistic Scenario Planning?

Incertive generates thousands of scenarios automatically using Monte Carlo simulation, showing you the full probability distribution of outcomes. No spreadsheets. No manual scenario building. Just describe your decision and get answers.

Get Started FreeBack to Blog