Retirement Planning Software: Mezzi, ProjectionLab, and Boldin

Updated September 26, 2026.

Preparing for retirement requires both a long-term plan and a clear picture of your finances today. ProjectionLab is a strong candidate for visual scenario modeling. Boldin combines a structured retirement planner with AI assistance. Mezzi supports ongoing financial guidance informed by connected accounts and the goals and constraints you provide.

Choose around the decision you need to make. Comparing retirement dates is different from deciding how much cash to keep this year. A product can help with both conversations without offering the same underlying model or implementing either decision for you.

Method: Mezzi publishes this comparison. We reviewed official product, pricing, and release documentation on September 26, 2026, alongside our Mezzi application review. We did not conduct a controlled test of model accuracy or retirement outcomes. Examples are hypothetical. A projection is not a guarantee that a plan will succeed.

Three workflows compared

Sources: Mezzi pricing, ProjectionLab pricing, and Boldin pricing. Coaching or professional advice may be separately priced. These are different services, so the cheapest subscription is not automatically the right one.

1. Mezzi: connect retirement questions to the accounts you have now

Mezzi can include investments, banking, credit cards and other liabilities, and assets such as real estate. AI Personalization lets you save relevant circumstances, preferences, and goals. That combination is useful when retirement preparation involves several decisions happening at once.

You might be considering an earlier retirement date while still carrying a mortgage, supporting a family member, or planning a large purchase. Looking only at an investment balance can miss the constraints that make the decision personal. A broader financial discussion can help identify the inputs that deserve attention before you trust a long-term projection.

What to evaluate in the application

Begin with the accounts relevant to your retirement question and verify the data. Include manual assets carefully and keep their valuation dates current. Then explain the decision, the alternatives you want to compare, and any preferences that should guide the discussion.

A useful evaluation prompt might be: “I want to understand the years between leaving work and receiving another income source. List the inputs we need, distinguish confirmed balances from estimates, and help me compare the choices without assuming a single return path.” This is a suggested workflow, not a claim that an AI conversation is equivalent to a specialist retirement model.

Exposure X-Ray can contribute to questions about underlying investment concentration. The account-group update explains the available financial views and connection-dependent tax-lot information. If a decision relies on data the application does not receive, supply or verify it before proceeding.

Cost, support, and limits

Advisory is $399 annually and Concierge is $999 annually, with a Free entry point. Paid plans include unlimited advice and active Delegations; Concierge adds setup assistance and quarterly coaching. See current details.

Mezzi does not place trades, move funds, or file returns. A saved preference does not automatically enforce a withdrawal rule. Do not infer a specific Monte Carlo engine, Social Security optimizer, or Roth-conversion model merely from the ability to discuss those topics. If a particular model output is essential, evaluate that output directly or use a specialist planning tool.

Choose Mezzi when you want ongoing help thinking through current financial decisions in retirement context and intend to remain involved in implementation.

2. ProjectionLab: make alternative futures visible

ProjectionLab is designed for financial and retirement modeling. Its visual approach can help you understand how assumptions interact across time instead of reducing the decision to a single ending balance.

The Premium feature list includes cash-flow projections, withdrawal strategies, tax estimation, Roth conversions, what-if scenarios, multiple plans, and comparison tools. Its modeling also includes Monte Carlo simulation and historical testing. These are reasons to evaluate the product for explicit scenario work rather than treating it as another account dashboard.

Where the workflow is valuable

Suppose you want to compare retiring at two different dates. A useful model should let you inspect the extra years of contributions, the timing of withdrawals, and the spending assumptions in each case. It should also make clear whether the difference comes from the retirement date itself or another assumption that changed at the same time.

ProjectionLab's emphasis on scenarios suits a person who is willing to maintain the inputs and examine the output. That involvement is part of the value: you can learn which assumptions drive the result instead of accepting a single yes-or-no answer.

What to inspect before trusting a plan

Check how the model treats taxes, inflation, asset growth, expenses, and major life events. Separate a known pension or current balance from an estimate about future returns. When comparing scenarios, change one important variable at a time before combining changes.

A simulated success rate is conditional on the model and inputs. It is not the probability of success known with certainty. A visually reassuring chart can still be built on an unrealistic spending estimate. These are general modeling considerations, not findings from a head-to-head accuracy test.

Cost and tradeoff

Basic is free and Premium is $129 annually; a separate Pro product is aimed at advisors and coaches. Verify the features and saving options appropriate to the plan you intend to use. Choose ProjectionLab when structured modeling is the central job. If your main need is a continuing conversation that moves among current investments, cash, debt, and preferences, you may want a different or complementary workflow.

3. Boldin: a detailed retirement plan with AI support

Boldin provides structured financial and retirement planning, including scenarios, tax projections, and Roth-conversion exploration. PlannerPlus combines those planning tools with account linking and AI assistance.

Its appeal is a maintained plan that can be revisited as circumstances change. Retirement preparation often requires comparing an income start date, a conversion decision, spending, and taxes in the same framework. A detailed model can make the interactions easier to inspect, provided the inputs are accurate.

Give the current product full credit

Boldin should not be described as a static calculator without AI. Its release notes document AI-assisted plan updates, an Investments: Today view, and the September 2026 Document Vault release. The Document Vault guide explains document storage and AI-supported interaction with records and proposed plan updates.

Those additions matter when evaluating how a plan stays current. They do not make all outputs automatic or remove the need to review changes. They do mean that an older comparison limited to retirement calculations would understate the product.

What to evaluate in a trial

Build one real scenario, then duplicate it before changing an assumption. Compare the timing of cash flows and taxes, not only the ending balance. Ask the assistant to explain why the result changes and inspect the underlying plan fields.

If you are considering Roth conversions, evaluate the modeled tax years and assumptions rather than accepting the largest conversion as the best one. If you are comparing retirement dates, inspect the additional spending years and income timing. These are examples of useful questions to bring to a model, not individualized recommendations.

Cost and tradeoff

PlannerPlus is $144 annually, with Basic available free. Separate coaching and advisory services have different deliverables and costs. A software subscription is not equivalent to a formal professional plan review. Compare those offers separately.

Choose Boldin when a structured retirement plan and detailed scenario exploration are central to the work. For a deeper look at how its approach differs from Mezzi, see Mezzi vs. Boldin.

A worked example: the gap before another income source begins

Consider a hypothetical household expecting $80,000 of annual spending after leaving work and $30,000 of annual income during a five-year interval. The initial gap is $50,000 a year. At an unchanged level, five years of that gap total $250,000 before taxes, inflation, investment returns, and other changes.

That arithmetic does not determine whether retirement is affordable. It identifies a question a model must address: where does the spending come from, at what time, and under which assumptions?

ProjectionLab or Boldin can help examine a structured set of paths. Mezzi can help connect the question to current accounts, constraints, and decisions. If you use more than one tool, keep the starting data consistent; otherwise, differences between results may simply reflect different inputs.

Compare the same retirement decision in each tool

Use a small scenario packet rather than rebuilding the plan from memory. For the example above, record the $80,000 spending target, $30,000 income, five-year interval, current account balances, tax treatment, and whether the amounts are expressed in today's dollars. Keep the same inputs in each product before interpreting different answers.

Then run three separate changes: delay retirement by one year, increase annual spending by $5,000, and delay the income start by one year. The spending change adds $25,000 over the original five-year interval before other effects. Delaying the $30,000 income by one year adds a different $30,000 gap in that year. These are diagnostic calculations, not complete retirement projections.

Compare how each product explains the changed cash need, the accounts supplying it, and the taxes or growth assumptions. A clearer explanation can be more useful than a higher success percentage generated from different inputs. Save the baseline and label each change so that the comparison remains reproducible.

What every retirement model should make visible

Spending: include recurring living costs and major irregular expenses. A monthly average can conceal repairs, healthcare changes, travel, or support for others.

Income timing: separate amounts from start and end dates. A plan with the correct annual income but the wrong start year can misrepresent the years when cash is needed most.

Inflation and returns: specify whether amounts are expressed in today's dollars or future dollars. A nominal balance can rise while purchasing power falls. Use more than one plausible path rather than relying on a single smooth return assumption.

Taxes and account types: an after-tax spending need is not necessarily the same as the gross withdrawal required to fund it. Make clear which account supplies a withdrawal and which tax assumptions apply.

Liquidity: a home or private holding can add to net worth without supplying spendable cash. Do not count sale proceeds without also modeling the sale, costs, timing, and subsequent housing or investment needs.

A useful trial takes one decision through the full process

Start with a question you would actually act on, such as changing a retirement date or planning a major expense. Prepare the same facts for each service. Record what the tool knows, what you estimated, and what remains missing.

Next, change an important assumption and inspect the explanation. If a modest spending change completely alters the conclusion, that sensitivity deserves attention. A reliable planning process should help you understand fragility rather than hide it behind one optimistic answer.

Finally, identify implementation. Updating a model does not submit a retirement-account withdrawal, change a beneficiary, execute a conversion, or file a return. Decide which tasks you will handle and where professional review is needed for your circumstances.

Frequently asked questions

Which tool is best for comparing retirement dates?

ProjectionLab and Boldin are strong candidates because structured scenario comparison is central to their documented planning workflows. The better choice depends on which interface and assumptions you can understand and maintain.

Is AI necessary for a retirement plan?

No. Sound inputs, transparent assumptions, and useful scenario analysis are more important than the label. AI may help explain a plan or update information, but it does not guarantee accurate forecasts.

Can Mezzi replace a specialist retirement model?

Mezzi can support retirement questions with connected financial context. Do not assume it provides every specialist model or output. Evaluate the particular calculation you need and use a dedicated planner when that is the right tool.

Should I use more than one service?

Only if each has a distinct job. A planning model and ongoing financial guidance can complement each other, but duplicated subscriptions are unnecessary if you do not maintain or use both.