Two enterprise planning giants with very different architectures. We've worked with both for years - here's what actually matters.
The short version
Anaplan is cloud-native, built for connected planning across the enterprise. The Hyperblock engine handles multi-dimensional models with real-time calculation. Modern interface, API-first architecture, strong in sales and supply chain planning as well as finance.
IBM Planning Analytics (powered by the TM1 engine) has decades of enterprise pedigree. Exceptional calculation speed, deep Excel integration, and flexibility to handle complex scenarios that push other platforms to their limits. Available on-premise, cloud, or hybrid.
This is often a choice between modern architecture and proven depth. Both platforms can achieve similar outcomes - the path to get there differs significantly.
Feature comparison
| Anaplan | IBM Planning Analytics | |
|---|---|---|
| Calculation engine | Hyperblock (cloud) | TM1 (in-memory OLAP) |
| Deployment options | Cloud only | Cloud, on-premise, hybrid |
| Excel integration | Add-in available | Deep, native PAx |
| Complex allocations | Strong | Exceptional |
| Pre-built applications | App Hub available | Accelerators available |
| User interface | Modern web UI | PAW or Excel |
| Market position | Cloud EPM leader | Enterprise incumbent |
| AI capabilities | Anaplan Intelligence | IBM watsonx integration |
AI capabilities
Both platforms have AI capabilities, but the integration and focus differ.
Native AI across the platform. Role-based agents for Finance, Sales, Supply Chain, and Workforce. CoModeler generates model structures from requirements. PlanIQ provides time-series forecasting and what-if simulations.
AI-powered forecasting and scenario modelling built into the TM1 engine. Integration with IBM's watsonx for enterprise AI capabilities. Natural language querying and predictive insights surfaced within Planning Analytics Workspace.
Anaplan's AI feels more tightly integrated into the planning workflow. IBM's approach leverages their broader AI portfolio. Both are improving rapidly - base your decision on core planning needs rather than AI features alone.
When to choose
No infrastructure to manage, automatic updates, global access without VPN. If your IT strategy is cloud-first with no exceptions, Anaplan fits cleanly.
Territory planning, quota management, demand forecasting. Anaplan has strong pre-built applications and a large customer base in these areas.
Anaplan's web interface is more contemporary than Planning Analytics Workspace. If broad user adoption across non-finance functions matters, this helps.
No legacy TM1 to migrate, no embedded Excel workbooks to preserve. Anaplan's architecture is simpler to learn when you're not carrying technical debt.
When to choose
On-premise for data sovereignty, cloud for convenience, or hybrid. Some industries and geographies require this flexibility. Anaplan simply doesn't offer it.
Migrating from TM1 to Anaplan means rebuilding everything. Upgrading TM1 to Planning Analytics Workspace preserves your models and logic. Sometimes evolution beats revolution.
Planning Analytics for Excel (PAx) provides deep, native Excel integration. Users work in familiar spreadsheets with live TM1 data. This isn't an add-in bolted on - it's how the platform was designed to be used.
Transfer pricing, multi-step allocations, complex profitability models. TM1's rules engine handles scenarios that would require workarounds in other platforms. Decades of enterprise refinement show in edge cases.
The honest truth
The same architecture that makes Anaplan easier to learn can feel constraining for complex scenarios. Some TM1 power users find the modelling less flexible.
The TM1 talent pool is smaller than Anaplan's. Deep TM1 skills take years to develop. Plan for how you'll resource ongoing maintenance and enhancements.
Planning Analytics is available on cloud, but the platform's heritage is on-premise. Some organisations find the cloud experience less polished than cloud-native alternatives.
Neither platform is simple or cheap to implement well. Budget for proper design, training, and ongoing support regardless of which you choose.
On pricing
Both are enterprise platforms with enterprise pricing. Neither publishes rates, and both negotiate based on scope, user counts, and competitive pressure.
IBM's licensing model can be more flexible - particularly for organisations with existing IBM relationships or enterprise license agreements. Anaplan's model is more straightforward but less negotiable.
Total cost of ownership often favours existing TM1 customers staying with IBM (upgrade vs. migration). For greenfield implementations, the gap narrows and sometimes favours Anaplan depending on use cases.
Alternative paths
These are both powerful, complex platforms. Sometimes simpler solutions fit better.
You want faster implementation. Pigment or Planful can deliver working solutions in weeks rather than months. If time-to-value matters more than depth, consider them.
Your needs are primarily consolidation. If financial close and statutory reporting are the main requirements, purpose-built consolidation tools may be more efficient than general EPM platforms.
You have limited internal resources. Both Anaplan and IBM Planning Analytics benefit from dedicated internal expertise. If you can't staff that capability, simpler platforms require less ongoing investment.
How to decide
Cloud-only acceptable? Data sovereignty requirements? On-premise mandates? This single question often determines the shortlist.
Current TM1 customer? IBM enterprise agreement? These factors significantly impact the business case. Don't ignore sunk costs and switching costs.
Bring your hardest modelling problem to proof of concept. Both platforms handle simple budgeting easily. Edge cases reveal real differences.
How will you resource ongoing maintenance? Internal team, managed service, or implementation partner? This affects both platforms but in different ways.
Questions
We've worked with both platforms for years and can give you objective guidance. Whether you're considering a new implementation or evaluating a migration, let's talk through your options.