Comparing scenarios across plans

A single plan answers "what happens if I do this?" Two plans side by side answer the much more useful question: "what happens differently if I do this instead?" That's what the Compare tab is for.

How many plans you can save

Saved-plan limits are tier-gated:

• Free — 1 saved plan. You can edit it and watch the projection update, but you can't keep an older version around for comparison.
• Family — 4 saved plans. The pricing page frames this as "1 personal + 3 shared," but the database enforces a single total of four.
• Pro — unlimited saved plans.

If you hit your tier's cap, the Save button surfaces an upgrade prompt explaining where you are and what the next tier unlocks.

Cloning instead of starting over

The fastest way to make a second plan is to clone an existing one. Open the plan you want to branch from, hit Save As, and Haven duplicates every assumption — accounts, income events, expense phases, tax settings, asset mix, the whole input set — into a new plan. You then edit only the dimension you want to test.

Cloning matters because most useful comparisons are one-variable comparisons. If you change the FIRE date and the asset mix and the savings rate all at once, the resulting difference between two plans tells you nothing about which lever moved the needle. Clone, change one thing, save, repeat.

What the Compare tab overlays

Pick two or more saved plans in the Compare tab and Haven overlays them on a single chart. The projection lines, Monte Carlo bands, and headline metrics (Chance of Success, FIRE date, Net Legacy if you're on the Pro display tier) all line up across plans so you can see the gap.

The scenario list also surfaces the diff in inputs — which assumption changed between Plan A and Plan B — so you don't have to remember which version was "the aggressive one." If two plans differ by retirement age and target spending and asset mix, the diff list shows all three.

Useful scenario pairs

Some comparisons that tend to teach you something:

• Retire at 50 vs. retire at 55. The five extra years of contributions plus growth usually moves Chance of Success more than people expect. This is the comparison that quantifies the cost of leaving early.
• Aggressive vs. moderate asset mix. Same retirement age, same spending, just a different equity / fixed-income split. The median run barely moves; the lower band moves a lot. Useful for seeing what you're actually buying with that extra equity.
• With vs. without Roth conversions. Clone your base plan, layer in conversion years during your low-income early-retirement window, and watch what happens to lifetime tax and Net Legacy. The Compare tab makes the whole-life arithmetic visible in one chart.
• Conservative spending vs. lifestyle spending. Your "I could survive on this" floor versus your "this is the life I actually want" target. Seeing both projections side by side often reframes how much of a buffer you really need.

When NOT to add another scenario

The Compare tab is powerful enough to invite analysis paralysis. A few signs you've gone too deep:

• You're saving plans that differ by less than your model's noise floor. A 0.5% shift in asset allocation is below what Monte Carlo can resolve cleanly.
• You're running comparisons to confirm a decision you've already emotionally made. The chart isn't going to talk you out of it; you're collecting reassurance, not information.
• You have more than four or five active scenarios and you're losing track of what each one tests. If you can't summarise a plan's premise in one sentence, it's noise.

Where Compare fits

Compare is for picking between paths you might actually walk. The single-plan view is for tuning the path you're on. Most people spend most of their time in the single-plan view and pop over to Compare a few times a year — when a major life decision is up, when markets have moved enough to change the question, or when you want to revisit "should I push the date by one more year?" That's the right cadence.