# LiquidPlanner — Project Management & Collaboration

LiquidPlanner by LiquidPlanner, Inc. holds a panel rating of 2/5 from 6 AI judges (category median 3/5), as of 2026-10-21. Provenance: provenance unknown; sovereignty: not determined.

- Vendor: LiquidPlanner, Inc. (https://www.liquidplanner.com)
- Category: [Project Management & Collaboration](https://whats-best.ai/software/project-management.md)
- Provenance (editorial classification): provenance unknown
- Canonical page: https://whats-best.ai/software/project-management/liquidplanner
- Alternatives: https://whats-best.ai/software/project-management/liquidplanner/alternatives ([markdown](https://whats-best.ai/software/project-management/liquidplanner/alternatives.md))
- Data as of: 2026-10-21 · evaluated 2026-10-21 · oldest source captured 2026-10-20

**AI-generated.** Every score, rationale and verdict here is written by a panel of AI judges from public evidence — an analysis, not a hands-on test. Every fact quotes the vendor page it was read from. No score can be bought. How scores are made: https://whats-best.ai/methodology

## At a glance

- Vendor: LiquidPlanner, Inc.
- Headquarters: Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 20 Oct 2026
- Data hosting: Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 20 Oct 2026
- Free plan: Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 20 Oct 2026

## The panel's verdict

Portfolio Manager (formerly LiquidPlanner), from LiquidPlanner, Inc., is project management and collaboration software positioned for large organizations managing multiple projects and large teams. The bench is clearest on the strength: collaboration depth scores cluster at 6-7, built on automatic workload levelling across multiple projects and dependencies, real-time scenario modelling, workload views in 30-, 60-, 90- and 180-day increments, and Monte Carlo simulations forecasting start and finish dates at a stated 90% confidence without manual date entry. The weakness is equally clear: integrations sit at a flat 3, with Slack, Jira and single sign-on the entire visible catalogue and no public information on an API or webhooks. Reporting splits the bench, 3-5 — four judges hold at 4, crediting portfolio-wide forecasts and early risk detection while noting that no export path is in evidence; the skeptic drops to 3 on that same absence, the bootstrapper rises to 5 for the forecasting itself. Sovereignty and onboarding effort both span 2-3, with compliance badges but no sovereignty attributes on record. No price appears anywhere captured.

**Speaks for it:**
- Collaboration depth scores cluster at 6-7, on automatic workload levelling across multiple projects and dependencies.
- Monte Carlo simulations forecast start and finish dates at a stated 90% confidence level, without manual date entry.
- Task assignments, file sharing and real-time comments are documented, alongside real-time scenario modelling and early risk and capacity-overload detection.
- Workload distribution views cover 30-, 60-, 90- and 180-day increments across teams.
- Support docs hold at a flat 4 on named resources: detailed guides, video tutorials and customer support teams.

**Held against it:**
- Integrations sit at a flat 3, with Slack, Jira and single sign-on the entire visible catalogue and no public information on an API or webhooks.
- Sovereignty spans 2-3, with GDPR, ISO/IEC 27001 and SOC 2 Type II badges on a record carrying no sovereignty attributes, and no public information on data residency, DPA terms or subprocessors.
- Onboarding effort spans 2-3, with no public information on a self-serve signup, trial or templates and expert consultation offered as the escalation path.
- Reporting spans 3-5, and we found no public information on exports, budgets, time tracking or utilization reporting.

**Best for:**
- You manage multiple interdependent projects across large teams and want automatic workload levelling with portfolio-wide visibility.
- You want forecast start and finish dates from Monte Carlo simulation at a stated 90% confidence instead of manual date entry.
- You need early warning of risks and capacity overload, with real-time scenario modelling as plans change.
- Your connections beyond Slack, Jira and single sign-on are not a deciding factor.

**Avoid if:**
- You need an API, webhooks or automation-platform connections beyond Slack, Jira and single sign-on.
- You must document data residency, a DPA or subprocessors for a European tender.
- You need reports that leave the tool — exports, budgets or utilization figures.
- You want a self-serve signup and trial rather than a sales conversation and paid expert consultation.

## Scores by judge and criterion

Scores out of 5, each judge scoring independently against the published rubric (v1). "n/r" = not rated: the vendor publishes no price.

| Criterion | The Data Protection Officer | The Bootstrapper | The Enterprise Architect | The UX Purist | The Integrator | The Skeptic |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Collaboration depth | 3.5/5 | 3.5/5 | 3.5/5 | 3.5/5 | 3.5/5 | 3/5 |
| Reporting | 2/5 | 2.5/5 | 2/5 | 2/5 | 2/5 | 1.5/5 |
| Integrations | 1.5/5 | 1.5/5 | 1.5/5 | 1.5/5 | 1.5/5 | 1.5/5 |
| Onboarding effort | 1/5 | 1/5 | 1/5 | 1.5/5 | 1.5/5 | 1.5/5 |
| European sovereignty | 1/5 | 1/5 | 1/5 | 1.5/5 | 1.5/5 | 1.5/5 |
| Support & documentation | 2/5 | 2/5 | 2/5 | 2/5 | 2/5 | 2/5 |
| Pricing transparency | n/r | n/r | n/r | n/r | n/r | n/r |
| **Weighted verdict** | **1.5/5** | **2/5** | **2/5** | **2/5** | **2/5** | **2/5** |

### The judges

- **The Data Protection Officer** (v1.0): Reads the DPA before the feature list. Optimizes for GDPR posture: EU hosting, subprocessor exposure, deletion guarantees. Rejects anything that cannot answer where the data lives.
- **The Bootstrapper** (v1.2): Pays with their own card. Optimizes for price/value at 3 seats and at 30, a usable free tier, and a price page that answers instead of qualifying. Rejects hidden seat minimums and "contact sales".
- **The Enterprise Architect** (v1.0): Buys for two hundred seats and answers for it later. Optimizes for SSO/SCIM, permissions, audit trails, certifications and a clean exit. Rejects anything that cannot survive procurement.
- **The UX Purist** (v1.0): Measures time-to-first-value with a stopwatch. Optimizes for clarity, density and software that teaches itself. Rejects fourteen-step setups and empty screens that offer no way forward.
- **The Integrator** (v1.0): Lives in the API docs before the product tour. Optimizes for webhooks, import/export and a tool that plays well in a stack. Rejects closed ecosystems and CSV-only exits.
- **The Skeptic** (v1.2): Assumes the marketing is lying until the evidence says otherwise. Hunts lock-in, dark patterns, hidden cost and dead changelogs. Exists to keep the rest of the panel honest.

## European sovereignty — proven facts

No sovereignty finding yet.

## Key facts

Each fact is the vendor's own statement, cited to the source page it was read from ([S*n*] → Sources).

**Compliance**
- GDPR: yes [S1]
- ISO 27001: ISO/IEC 27001 [S1]
- SOC 2: SOC 2 Type II [S1]
- Trust center: yes [S1]

**Integrations**
- Slack jira: Slack · Jira [S1]
- SSO: yes · Jira · Slack [S1]

**Product**
- Collaboration features: task assignments · file sharing · real-time comments [S1]
- Former name: LiquidPlanner [S1]
- Monte carlo confidence: Monte Carlo simulations · 90 [S1]
- Predictive scheduling: market's only predictive scheduling solution [S1]
- Ranged estimates: project priorities · team capacities · ranged estimates · no · 90 [S1]
- Resource leveling: automatic workload leveling across multiple projects and dependencies [S1]
- Risk prevention: early risk and capacity overload detection [S1]
- Scenario modeling: real-time scenario modeling updating plans with every change [S1]
- Target segment: large organizations [S1]
- Workload views: 30 · 60 · 90 · 180 [S1]

**Support**
- New user options: guides · video tutorials · customer support teams · expert consultation services [S1]

## Questions

### Is LiquidPlanner European?

Not determined: the vendor’s pages as captured do not say where LiquidPlanner is based.

### Where does LiquidPlanner store data?

Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 20 Oct 2026.

### Does LiquidPlanner have a free plan?

Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 20 Oct 2026.

### What are the best alternatives to LiquidPlanner?

As of 21 Oct 2026, the panel rates [awork (4/5)](https://whats-best.ai/software/project-management/awork), [Kantree (4/5)](https://whats-best.ai/software/project-management/kantree) and [Teamwork.com (4/5)](https://whats-best.ai/software/project-management/teamwork) highest among the other 60 Project Management & Collaboration products evaluated. Ratings that look equal are rounded to half stars; the order uses the unrounded rating, then the name. The highest-rated European alternative is [awork](https://whats-best.ai/software/project-management/awork) (EU-Made). Ratings are the AI panel’s opinion, formed from public evidence: [how scores are made](https://whats-best.ai/methodology#ordering). The full list, with European products first: [LiquidPlanner alternatives](https://whats-best.ai/software/project-management/liquidplanner/alternatives).

## What this page leaves out

- We found no public information on pricing on the pages we read (liquidplanner.com). If the vendor publishes it somewhere else, send us the page.

## Sources

- [S1] Vendor page: https://www.liquidplanner.com (checked 2026-10-20)

---

Cite as: whats-best.ai, "LiquidPlanner — Project Management & Collaboration", AI panel analysis, as of 2026-10-21. https://whats-best.ai/software/project-management/liquidplanner

Corrections: https://whats-best.ai/correct/936?target=page