Home / Compare / Foresight vs nPlan
Foresight vs nPlan
Two AI-first platforms that sit on existing construction schedules to forecast delay risk and completion: Foresight leads with QSRA, completion forecasting and executive reporting; nPlan leads with activity-level uncertainty forecasts trained on a large historical schedule dataset, plus generative schedule editing. Vendor-published facts only; desk research, not tested, no winner.
In short: Foresight (Predictive schedule analytics & delay risk; no public prices (quote / sales)) vs nPlan (Scheduling & risk; no public prices (quote / sales)). Facts last checked Oct 17, 2026. No winner declared; not tested.
DESK RESEARCH, NOT TESTED. Compiled from vendors' public websites (accessed Oct 17, 2026). Vendor claims are not verified by Means & Methods Lab. No scores or rankings.
Side by side
| Sheet row | Foresight | nPlan |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Predictive schedule analytics & delay risk | Scheduling & risk |
| AI role (our label) | AI-first | AI-first |
| What it does | London-based "predictive project delivery" platform that turns existing construction schedules into executive reporting, schedule-quality and change tracking, risk assessment, completion forecasting and portfolio assurance. The risk page lists Quantitative Schedule Risk Analysis (QSRA), a Criticality Score and risk density, run-rate and resource analysis, and an always-updated risk register. The forecasting page says models are trained on over 1 million real-world construction activities, predicts best-case, worst-case and most-likely finish dates, generates Completion Plans (Blocking, Delaying, On Schedule, Completed), and supports what-if simulation of scope, sequencing or resource changes. Homepage claims 2x more accurate forecasts than bottom-up schedules, a 30% reduction in overruns and 40+ hours saved per month on reporting, and case studies cite Crossrail and a data-center portfolio (vendor claims, not verified). Its news lists 2026 awards for predictive AI, and a banner announces a $25M Series A led by Macquarie Capital Venture Capital (company statement). Re-read Oct 17, 2026 (evening pass): Schedule Builds & Optimization remains in the menu; homepage still says it is designed to work with your existing schedules; pricing unchanged (Talk to our team; /pricing not found). | AI for project controls trained on a dataset the vendor says contains 750,000+ historical schedules (over $2Tn of construction spend). Four use cases: Plan (generate schedules from scope documents, check schedule integrity), Assure (activity-level uncertainty forecasts), De-risk (flag risky activities and check them against your risk register), and Deliver (project and portfolio summaries). Products: Portfolio, Insights, Schedule Studio, and Schedule Integrity Checker; vendor says Schedule Studio connects to Claude and ChatGPT and exports XER. Works with existing schedules. Sectors listed include highways, rail, and heavy infrastructure. Re-read Oct 17, 2026: the homepage also points to a Model Performance 101 white paper that frames forecast accuracy as mean absolute error (MAE), which it says falls as more schedules become available, and offers user training courses with certifications. |
| Who it's for | Project directors, project controls teams, planners, owners, investors and contractors/EPCs on large projects; sectors highlighted include data centers and government (vendor menu). | Project owners and contractors' project controls teams. |
| Pricing (as publicly stated) | No public prices found (checked Oct 16, 2026; unchanged Oct 17, 2026): the vendor site has no pricing or plans link in its navigation or footer, and /pricing and /plans return a not-found page. The site's calls to action include "Talk to our team". Confirm current pricing with the vendor. Earlier note (Oct 15, 2026): site routes to "Talk to our team". | No public prices found (checked Oct 16, 2026; unchanged Oct 17, 2026 evening re-read): the vendor site has no pricing or plans link in its navigation or footer, and /pricing and /plans return a not-found page. The site's calls to action include "Get a demo" and "Talk to us". Confirm current pricing with the vendor. |
| Test status | Not tested. No scores. | Not tested. No scores. |
| Vendor links | ||
| Sources |
Facts last checked: Oct 17, 2026. Prices change; check the vendor page before relying on them.
Where the vendor descriptions differ
- Core job: Foresight describes predictive project delivery that turns schedules into risk assessment, completion forecasting and portfolio assurance. nPlan describes Plan, Assure, De-risk and Deliver: generate or edit schedules, forecast uncertainty on every activity, flag risky activities against a risk register, and summarize project and portfolio risk.
- Forecast basis: Foresight's completion-forecasting page says models are trained on over 1 million real-world construction activities and predict best-case, worst-case and most-likely finish dates for activities and milestones. nPlan says its AI is trained on 750,000+ historical schedules (over $2Tn of construction spend) and forecasts activity-level uncertainty.
- Risk methods: Foresight lists Quantitative Schedule Risk Analysis (QSRA), a Criticality Score and risk density, run-rate and resource analysis, and an always-updated risk register. nPlan lists De-risk (flag risky activities and check them against an uploaded risk register) and Insights products aimed at risk teams.
- Beyond forecasting: nPlan lists Schedule Studio (generate and edit schedules from scope documents; connects to Claude and ChatGPT; exports XER) and a Schedule Integrity Checker. Foresight lists Completion Plans (Blocking, Delaying, On Schedule, Completed), schedule simulation of scope, sequencing and resource changes, custom reports and Schedule Builds & Optimization.
- Audience and sectors: Foresight highlights project directors, project controls, planners, owners, investors and contractors/EPCs, with data centers and government among sectors. nPlan names owners and contractors' project controls teams, with highways, rail, heavy infrastructure, utilities and data centers among sectors listed.
- Claims (vendor statements, not verified): Foresight claims 2x more accurate forecasts than bottom-up schedules, a 30% reduction in overruns and 40+ hours saved per month on reporting. nPlan claims $500bn of projects under active management and frames forecast accuracy as mean absolute error (MAE) in a Model Performance 101 white paper. Neither publishes a measurement method on the pages we read.
- Pricing: neither publishes prices. Foresight routes to Talk to our team; nPlan routes to Get a demo / Talk to us (nplan.io/pricing returned not found).
Paraphrased from the sources listed above. Vendor claims are reported as claims.
What we can't tell you yet
Which tool is better for your work. That needs testing on the same package with a verified answer key. Planned measures for this comparison:
- Forecast error against actual completion on the same closed projects
- Agreement between QSRA confidence bands and nPlan activity uncertainty on the same XER
- How each treats calendars, constraints and out-of-sequence progress
See the methodology and leaderboard status.
Related
- Category hub: Preconstruction management & AI scheduling tools
- Compare: ALICE vs nPlan
- Compare: ALICE vs Karmen
- Compare: nPlan vs SmartPM
- Compare: Outbuild vs Planera
- Compare: Karmen vs Planera
- Compare: Outbuild vs SmartPM
- Compare: SmartPM vs Document Crunch
- Compare: Steelray Delay Analyzer vs SmartPM
- Compare: Nodes & Links vs Foresight
Means & Methods Lab has no commercial relationship with any vendor on this page. Rankings and placement are never for sale. See how we make money.