nPlan

Name: nPlan
Brand: nPlan

AI for project controls and delivery teams: plan, assure, de-risk, deliver.

Est 2017|Valuation $97.2M|Raised $37.8M|8 Ref Customers

LinkedIn 11K|Web traffic 3K|FTEs 51|HQ London, England, GB

01Competitive Landscape

Narrative analysis

Where nPlan appears to offer differentiation (based on vendor materials and publicly available descriptions): - Faster iteration for risk analysis through model-driven processes rather than workshop dependence - Activity-level probabilistic forecasting intended to surface non-obvious delay drivers - Generative AI workflow automation for drafting reports and assisting analysts Where competitors may be stronger: - Market maturity and procurement familiarity (Deltek/Oracle) — many enterprises have existing vendor relationships and governance around those toolsets - Traditional QSRA approaches can be easier to explain/audit to stakeholders accustomed to Monte Carlo-style methods and workshop-derived inputs Customer choice dynamics (hypotheses to validate): - Organizations experiencing recurring QSRA pain (time, cost, lack of granularity, bias concerns) may evaluate nPlan for dataset-driven forecasting at scale. - Organizations prioritizing established vendor relationships, integrated cost-risk modeling, or minimal process change may prefer incumbent tools such as Deltek or Oracle. Market adoption signals: - The vendor cites usage across major programmes and references large organisations in press materials; these references are vendor-reported and should be validated independently.

	nPlan	Deltek Acumen (Risk/360/Fuse/Touchstone)	Oracle Primavera Risk Analysis / Primavera ecosystem
Starting Price	Not public (enterprise quote-based); some free tools available (Schedule Integrity Checker; Schedule Studio free tier/beta)	Not public (quote-based)	Not public (often licensed; varies by reseller/enterprise agreement)
Primary Use Case	Large capital projects needing dataset-driven, activity-level probabilistic forecasting and rapid iteration vs traditional QSRA	Organizations wanting schedule quality and risk analysis with an established enterprise footprint	Organizations invested in the Primavera ecosystem and using traditional QSRA (Monte Carlo-style) methods
Key Strength	Dataset-driven forecasting, integrated generative AI assistant (Barry), and workflow tools (AutoReport, Schedule Studio)	Broad suite for schedule assurance and risk modeling; mature enterprise vendor footprint	Integrates with existing Primavera P6 workflows; familiar to many project controls teams
Key Weakness	Limited public third-party product reviews; opaque pricing; potential explainability/acceptance risk; certification claims not easily verifiable publicly	May require heavy configuration and training; "AI-enabled" claims vary by module	Traditional QSRA approaches can be workshop-heavy and slower to iterate

01Competitive Landscape

Narrative analysis

Where nPlan appears to offer differentiation (based on vendor materials and publicly available descriptions):

Faster iteration for risk analysis through model-driven processes rather than workshop dependence
Activity-level probabilistic forecasting intended to surface non-obvious delay drivers
Generative AI workflow automation for drafting reports and assisting analysts

Where competitors may be stronger:

Market maturity and procurement familiarity (Deltek/Oracle) — many enterprises have existing vendor relationships and governance around those toolsets
Traditional QSRA approaches can be easier to explain/audit to stakeholders accustomed to Monte Carlo-style methods and workshop-derived inputs

Customer choice dynamics (hypotheses to validate):

Organizations experiencing recurring QSRA pain (time, cost, lack of granularity, bias concerns) may evaluate nPlan for dataset-driven forecasting at scale.
Organizations prioritizing established vendor relationships, integrated cost-risk modeling, or minimal process change may prefer incumbent tools such as Deltek or Oracle.

Market adoption signals:

The vendor cites usage across major programmes and references large organisations in press materials; these references are vendor-reported and should be validated independently.

	nPlan	Deltek Acumen (Risk/360/Fuse/Touchstone)	Oracle Primavera Risk Analysis / Primavera ecosystem
Starting Price	Not public (enterprise quote-based); some free tools available (Schedule Integrity Checker; Schedule Studio free tier/beta)	Not public (quote-based)	Not public (often licensed; varies by reseller/enterprise agreement)
Primary Use Case	Large capital projects needing dataset-driven, activity-level probabilistic forecasting and rapid iteration vs traditional QSRA	Organizations wanting schedule quality and risk analysis with an established enterprise footprint	Organizations invested in the Primavera ecosystem and using traditional QSRA (Monte Carlo-style) methods
Key Strength	Dataset-driven forecasting, integrated generative AI assistant (Barry), and workflow tools (AutoReport, Schedule Studio)	Broad suite for schedule assurance and risk modeling; mature enterprise vendor footprint	Integrates with existing Primavera P6 workflows; familiar to many project controls teams
Key Weakness	Limited public third-party product reviews; opaque pricing; potential explainability/acceptance risk; certification claims not easily verifiable publicly	May require heavy configuration and training; "AI-enabled" claims vary by module	Traditional QSRA approaches can be workshop-heavy and slower to iterate

nPlan

01Competitive Landscape

Narrative analysis

02Market Map

01Competitive Landscape

Narrative analysis

02Market Map