Retirement Goal-Tracking Tools: Compare Progress, Scenarios, and Advice

Updated September 26, 2026.

A useful retirement tracker shows what changed, why it changed, and what you can do next. A larger account balance is not the same as a stronger retirement plan. Contributions, market returns, spending expectations, retirement timing, and the assumptions behind a projection all affect the answer.

Empower offers free financial and retirement tools. Betterment and Vanguard Digital Advisor combine planning with managed investing. Boldin, formerly NewRetirement, provides detailed scenario modeling. Mezzi supports financial guidance using available accounts and your personal goals and constraints. Start with the responsibility you want the product to handle.

How we compared: Mezzi publishes this article. We reviewed current official documentation and prices on September 26, 2026, alongside our Mezzi application review. We did not run a controlled retirement simulation across every provider or measure improved readiness scores. We distinguish documented features from suggested evaluation exercises and do not promise a particular savings or retirement outcome.

Five tools and the progress they help you review

Use the current product and plan terms, not a company's entire brand, as the unit of comparison. Different services within the same company can have different fees, responsibilities, and eligibility requirements.

1. Empower: a free starting point for the household retirement picture

Empower's consumer financial tools include a retirement planner alongside net-worth, investment, and fee-analysis views. This is the relevant starting point for someone comparing personal retirement-tracking tools. It should not be confused with an employer's Empower retirement-plan portal or assumed to include a paid advisory engagement.

The benefit is seeing the retirement question alongside the accounts that support it. A household may have an old workplace plan, current contributions, taxable investments, and anticipated spending changes. Bringing the relevant facts into a planning view helps reveal what still needs to be checked before making a decision.

For an evaluation, begin with your current situation and a clear retirement date. Then change one meaningful input, such as planned spending or the date work ends. Review how the result changes and whether the tool explains the assumptions well enough for you to understand the difference. This is a suggested test, not a comparative accuracy result we have measured.

Keep the free-tool decision separate from the advice decision. A dashboard may help you organize information even if you do not want someone to manage your investments. Conversely, someone who wants an ongoing professional relationship should evaluate its actual scope and fee, rather than assume a free planner supplies the same service.

Empower's broad account view is a genuine strength. It would be unfair to describe it as incapable of consolidation or dismiss its planning simply because it is free. The more useful limitation is that every projection still depends on the information and assumptions supplied.

Best fit: You want a no-subscription starting point for retirement and investment review. Check before relying on it: Included accounts, spending assumptions, future income events, and what the displayed outcome represents. The tool should support a decision you can explain, not only a number you hope is correct.

2. Betterment: connect retirement progress with managed investing

Betterment's retirement-goal documentation describes a goal that can include Betterment accounts and outside accounts synced or added manually. This matters because retirement funding is often spread across providers. It would be inaccurate to assume its retirement view is confined to one Betterment IRA.

Its Retirement Planning Advice Disclosure distinguishes a personalized retirement plan from an ordinary investing goal. Personalized plans incorporate retirement spending and other assumptions; different goal types can use different projection methods. The model's definition of “on track” should be read within that context, rather than interpreted as a guarantee or compared mechanically with another provider's percentage.

The same disclosure explains that linked-account assumptions may differ from what those accounts actually hold and how they are managed. Review the treatment of external accounts, taxes, inflation, and the plan-to age. A connected account provides information; it does not automatically give Betterment authority over that outside account's trades.

For its managed investing service, current pricing is $5 monthly until the qualifying $24,000 balance or $200 recurring monthly-deposit condition moves pricing to 0.25% annually. Fund expenses are additional. Premium has separate eligibility and a different fee schedule. Compare the managed service you intend to use, not an outdated headline price for a different plan.

Best fit: You want planning linked with portfolio implementation in an automated investing service. Check closely: Which retirement-goal framework you are using and which assumptions it applies. A single reassuring progress label is less informative than knowing the spending target, contribution path, and conditions that produced it.

A practical test is to change one contribution assumption, then inspect the result without changing the investment strategy or retirement date at the same time. That makes the effect easier to interpret. If you change everything simultaneously, you may not know which decision improved or weakened the projection.

3. Boldin: explore the tradeoffs inside a detailed retirement model

Boldin, formerly NewRetirement, is a dedicated planning platform. Its current pricing and feature comparison lists a free Basic plan and PlannerPlus at $144 annually. PlannerPlus includes detailed inputs, multiple scenarios, side-by-side comparisons, tax projections, Monte Carlo analysis, and AI guidance. Treat it as a current competitor with substantial planning capabilities, not a static calculator using an old brand and price.

The particular strength is comparing choices. Retiring at different ages, changing spending, or considering a conversion strategy can affect several years of cash flow and taxes. A model with explicit assumptions gives those questions a structured home. The goal is to see the consequences of a proposed change, not to obtain a forecast that removes uncertainty.

Start by documenting the baseline before creating alternatives. Record what is assumed about income, expenses, account types, timing, and inflation. Then make one scenario answer one question. If the alternative simultaneously changes retirement age, returns, and spending, the comparison may be difficult to use even if the software calculates it correctly.

Monte Carlo analysis models a range of possible paths using stated assumptions. A displayed success percentage is conditional on that model. It is not a measured personal probability independent of inputs, nor a promise about a particular market sequence. Compare a tool's explanations and assumptions before comparing percentages across tools.

Boldin also offers a separate advisor service; the planning subscription should not be described as identical to a professional engagement. A modeled conversion, withdrawal, or investment change is not an executed transaction. Keep implementation and any needed tax review explicit.

Best fit: You want to maintain and compare a detailed retirement model yourself. Less suitable: You want a provider to implement the entire portfolio without your maintaining planning inputs. Its depth can be useful, but only if you are willing to keep the model aligned with your real circumstances.

4. Vanguard Digital Advisor: planning with automated implementation

Vanguard Digital Advisor combines goal planning with automated investment management. Its current retail enrollment minimum is $100 per eligible brokerage account, replacing older descriptions of a $3,000 minimum. It uses a risk assessment and goal information to guide the portfolio approach and offers planning tools beyond a single retirement balance.

The published gross annual advisory fee is 0.20% for index portfolio options or 0.25% for an active option. Credits for certain retained investment revenue reduce that to a variable net advisory fee; the site illustrates approximately $15–$16 yearly per $10,000 for an all-index portfolio. Investment expenses are separate. Do not present the gross rate, estimated net rate, and all-in cost as interchangeable.

This can suit an investor who wants the provider to manage eligible investments within its program. The comparison with a standalone planner is therefore partly about implementation responsibility. A lower software subscription does not include the same job, and a managed-service fee should not be judged solely by whether the interface has an AI chat box.

Review the proposed portfolio and enrollment consequences before moving assets. Existing holdings may require changes, and those changes can matter for taxes, restrictions, and your desired exposure. Ask which preferences the service can accommodate and which are incompatible with its approach. A clear answer is more useful than assuming either complete customization or none at all.

For goal tracking, examine whether the service helps you identify a useful next action: adjusting contributions, reviewing timing, or understanding a projected shortfall. Do not rely on an unsupported claim that users improve retirement readiness by a fixed percentage. This guide has not measured such an effect.

Best fit: You want retirement-oriented planning and automated management under Vanguard's program. Consider another route: Your priority is an independent scenario model or guidance on investments you intend to keep managing outside the service.

5. Mezzi: review retirement alongside the rest of your financial life

Mezzi provides a broader context for retirement questions through investments, banking, other assets such as real estate, and liabilities. AI Personalization lets you describe goals and constraints, including cash-flow priorities, investing rules, and planned life changes. The account-category overview explains this organization.

That can be useful when a retirement decision competes with another obligation. You may want to increase contributions while preserving a cash reserve, understand exposure across several investment accounts, or discuss how a mortgage affects the financial picture. The conversation can connect the question to information you supply and the account data available.

A useful prompt is: “Help me review what changed in my retirement preparation since the last review. Separate contributions, market changes, missing information, and changes to my goals. Identify the next questions I should resolve.” This gives the discussion a practical purpose without asking the system to manufacture a precise readiness probability.

Mezzi should not be assigned unverified features from dedicated planning tools. This comparison does not establish a proprietary Monte Carlo retirement engine, automatic Social Security optimization, an RMD compliance system, or execution of investment and withdrawal decisions. Guidance can still be valuable without being all of those products at once.

Current pricing includes free access, Advisory at $399 annually, and Concierge at $999 annually. Compare the scope of guidance and service with your needs. The subscription is not proof that you can eliminate a professional relationship or achieve a particular lifetime fee saving. Some investors need specialized tax, legal, or implementation support in addition.

Best fit: You want help connecting retirement questions to current financial information and personal priorities. Use another tool alongside it when needed: You want a detailed scenario model with specific assumptions, formal transaction accounting, or delegated portfolio implementation. Giving each product a defined job can be more useful than asking one dashboard to do everything.

Track the changes you can explain

A retirement review can begin with four items: contributions, spending expectations, timing, and the information behind the projection. Keep a record of changes to each. This helps distinguish progress you actively made from a favorable market move or a revised assumption.

For example, increasing contributions by $200 per month adds $2,400 over a year before investment returns. That is an observable action. A model may estimate a larger future effect, but that projection requires assumptions about time, returns, fees, and taxes. Keep the contribution fact separate from the forecast.

Similarly, if your portfolio rises while your expected retirement spending rises more, the plan may not have improved as much as the balance suggests. Conversely, a market decline does not automatically invalidate every part of the plan. Inspect the inputs and decisions that changed rather than treating every dashboard movement as an instruction to trade.

Compare model outputs on the same basis

Review these questions before switching tools because one displays a higher score. You may be seeing a methodological difference rather than a better investment strategy. If you cannot explain why the outputs differ, the next useful step is to reconcile assumptions.

Turn the review into a specific next action

A useful review ends with something concrete: correct an account record, verify an expense estimate, adjust a contribution you can afford, compare a scenario, or obtain advice on an unresolved issue. Record who will do it and when to revisit the result. A chart that changes without prompting a comprehensible decision is an incomplete workflow.

For stage-specific questions, see retirement planning by age. For a broader planning-software comparison, see AI software for preparing for retirement. This guide focuses on maintaining and interpreting progress after the initial plan exists.

Frequently asked questions

Is retirement tracking the same as portfolio performance tracking?

No. Retirement progress also depends on contributions, expected spending, timing, taxes, and planning assumptions. A higher portfolio balance alone does not establish that the retirement goal is better funded.

Is NewRetirement still the product name?

The platform is now Boldin. Its current plans and capabilities should be evaluated under that name, rather than relying on older NewRetirement pricing or feature descriptions.

Does a higher retirement success score mean one app is better?

Not necessarily. Different assumptions, time horizons, tax treatment, and definitions can produce different results. Reconcile the inputs and methodology before treating two scores as comparable.

Can Mezzi replace a dedicated retirement simulator?

That depends on the task. Mezzi supports financial guidance using available accounts and personal context. This comparison does not verify a dedicated Monte Carlo or comprehensive retirement-simulation engine. A detailed scenario-planning tool can serve a different role alongside guidance.