Best Retirement Planning Software for Individuals (2026)

48% of workers have never estimated how much they'll need each month in retirement. That figure comes from the EBRI/Greenwald Retirement Confidence Survey 2025 (Fact Sheet 3). Almost half of people are guessing at the number their whole retirement rests on. The best retirement planning software for individuals turns that guess into a figure you can test. This guide covers the tools that keep showing up on shortlists, what each one does well, what each one reportedly costs, and the one question most roundups skip: what does a "success rate" actually tell you?

Before we start: we make Monte Climb, one of the tools on this list, so we aren't neutral. Many of the comparisons that rank for this search aren't neutral either. Quicken's own blog puts Quicken Simplifi first, and Boldin publishes several of the head-to-head pages. We'll say plainly where each tool fits, ours included.

The short answer

When can you actually retire? Software can't promise you a date. It can show you the odds. For people planning without an advisor, the same few names come up in roundups from Next Avenue, Benzinga, iTechGuides and others:

• Boldin: detailed do-it-yourself "what-if" planning.
• ProjectionLab: advanced scenario modeling.
• Empower: free, and it simulates scenarios.
• Fidelity and T. Rowe Price planners: free for people who are already their customers.
• Quicken Simplifi: a budgeting-first option.
• The Complete Retirement Planner: spreadsheet-based.
• Monte Climb: a fast probability answer from three numbers, plus an AI planner you can ask questions.

Which one is "best" depends on what you need right now. That might be depth, account syncing, a low price, or a clear first answer.

Best retirement planning software for individuals, compared

The Boldin figures come from Boldin's comparison page and Gerald's Boldin review. The ProjectionLab figures come from Boldin and Gerald's ProjectionLab review. Their numbers don't match. That's normal in this category. Before you pay for anything, check the price on the vendor's own site.

Syncing accounts vs. entering numbers yourself

Many comparisons treat this as the deciding feature. Some tools link to your financial accounts and update on their own. Others have you type the figures in. Syncing saves effort. Manual entry keeps your data with you and lets you test numbers you don't have yet, like "what if I'd saved another $100,000?"

Monte Climb takes the manual route on purpose. You enter three numbers: your age, what you've saved for retirement, and what you spend each month. It runs in your browser, and nothing is saved until you say so.

What a "success rate" actually tells you

This is where most roundups stop, and it's the part that matters most.

Many of these tools use Monte Carlo simulation. In plain terms, the software runs your plan through hundreds or thousands of possible market futures. Some are good, some are bad, some are ugly. Then it counts how many of those futures leave you with money at the end. If 850 of 1,000 stay funded, your success rate is 85%.

Why not just use an average return? Because nobody retires into an average. A bad run of markets early in retirement can do lasting damage, even if the long-run average looks fine.

Here's that idea in a real number. 3.9% is the starting withdrawal rate that held up in 90% of simulated futures over a 30-year retirement. Morningstar judged it by whether the money was still there in 90% of outcomes, not by an average return. Source: Morningstar, The State of Retirement Income 2025, Dec 2025.

So a success rate is useful. It's also a probability, not a promise. Keep two limits in mind.

It's a yes-or-no measure. The CFA Institute points out that success-rate metrics don't show how far short a plan falls. Running out at 94 and running out at 78 both count as one "failure." Look for a tool that shows you more than the headline percentage.

Different apps give different answers. A critique published on Nasdaq found that probabilities vary from app to app because each tool builds in its own assumptions. Put the same household into two tools and you can get two different numbers.

How the simulation is built matters too

Monte Carlo isn't one method. Kitces Research compared approaches and found that historical and regime-based models were more accurate than the traditional model. Yet most planning software uses the traditional one.

You don't need to become a modeling expert. Just ask any tool, ours included, what it assumes about returns, inflation and spending. A success rate is only as good as the assumptions behind it.

Five things to check before you pay

The best retirement planning software for individuals handles the risks that actually sink retirements. Use this list on any tool you're considering.

1. How long does the plan run?

About one in three 65-year-olds may live to at least 90. Source: Social Security Administration, Retirement Information for Medicare Beneficiaries, 2026. A plan that stops at 85 quietly bets against a third of retirees.

Check the default end age. The plan you build with Monte Climb runs to 95 by default, and you can push it further.

2. How does it handle health care?

Fidelity's 2025 estimate for a 65-year-old retiring this year is $172,500 in Medicare premiums, deductibles and prescriptions over retirement. That figure doesn't include long-term care. Source: Fidelity Investments, 2025 Retiree Health Care Cost Estimate, Jul 2025.

That's a real line item, and most people haven't planned for it. EBRI's 2026 survey found that fewer than half of workers and retirees have calculated what they'll need for health care in retirement. See whether a tool models Medicare premiums and IRMAA (the extra Medicare charges for higher-income retirees) year by year, or just adds one flat guess. Monte Climb's engine charges Medicare premiums and income-based surcharges year by year.

3. What does the headline number hide?

If a tool gives you a success rate, find out what model produced it and whether it shows how bad the failures are. If it doesn't use probabilities at all and relies on one average-return line, be careful.

4. Does it reflect how people really spend?

Real retirees adjust. They cut back in a bad year and loosen up in a good one. Many success rates assume your spending stays fixed no matter what markets do. If you'd be flexible, check whether the tool can model that, because it can change the picture a lot.

5. Is the price verified and dated?

As the ProjectionLab example shows, published prices disagree. Check the vendor's page, note the date, and use any trial to make sure the tool answers your question before you commit.

Where Monte Climb fits

We built Monte Climb for one situation: you're getting close to retirement, you'd rather use software than an advisor, and you want a clear, evidence-based answer without filling in 100 fields first.

Three numbers. We run your savings through 1,000 simulated futures and return one figure: the share of those futures where your money lasts. Then you can keep going with William, our AI planner. Ask him "Am I on track?", "Can I retire at 62?" or "What's a sustainable spend?" and talk to him the way you'd talk to a friend.

Where another tool might suit you better: if you want automatic account syncing, or a very detailed model you can tune line by line, the tools above that focus on syncing or deep scenario modeling may be a closer match. The good news is that many of them offer free tiers or trials, so trying two side by side costs little. That's also the best way to see for yourself how much the assumptions move the answer.

One last thing, plainly stated: Monte Climb is planning software, not advice. It shows you the odds. The decisions are yours.

Run your own numbers

Confidence about retirement is low right now. EBRI's 2026 survey found it at its lowest point in nearly a decade. Worry is easier to manage once you have a number.

Enter your age, savings and monthly spending, and see how many of 1,000 futures stay funded. It runs in your browser, and nothing is saved until you say so. You can try the full app for $1 for 7 days.

Show my answer →

Frequently asked questions

What is the best retirement planning software for individuals?

It depends on what you need. The tools that come up again and again are Boldin for detailed do-it-yourself planning, ProjectionLab for advanced scenario modeling, Empower for free scenario simulation, the Fidelity and T. Rowe Price planners for their existing customers, Quicken Simplifi for budget-first users, and The Complete Retirement Planner for spreadsheet fans. Monte Climb suits people who want a quick probability answer from three numbers and an AI planner they can ask questions.

Is there free retirement planning software?

Yes. Empower is reported to be free and simulates scenarios. Fidelity and T. Rowe Price offer free planners to their own customers. Boldin has a free tier with more than 100 inputs, but its Monte Carlo simulation is in the paid PlannerPlus tier, reported at $144 a year.

What does a Monte Carlo success rate mean?

It's the share of simulated market futures in which your money lasts. For example, 850 funded futures out of 1,000 is an 85% success rate. It's a probability, not a promise. It also doesn't show how far short a plan falls when it fails, and different apps can give different results for the same household because their assumptions differ.

How long should a retirement plan run?

Longer than many people expect. The Social Security Administration says about one in three 65-year-olds may live to at least 90. A plan that ends at 85 bets against a third of retirees. Monte Climb runs plans to age 95 by default, and you can extend them further.

Do I need a financial advisor or is software enough?

Many people use planning software to understand their odds before deciding whether they need an advisor. Software can show you probabilities and test scenarios, but it isn't personalized advice. Monte Climb, for example, is planning software, not advice.