Back to Resources

read

Advisor Summary: MoneyGuidePro (now Envestnet
MoneyGuide) is a comprehensive financial planning platform built around
Monte Carlo probability. Income Lab is a specialist retirement income
tool built around guardrails-based spending. MoneyGuide tells clients
they have an 87% chance of success. Income Lab tells clients they can
spend $8,400/month, with specific rules for when and how that number
changes. If your practice centers on retirement distribution, Income Lab
provides deeper methodology and better client conversations. If you need
one platform for all life stages, MoneyGuide covers more ground. Many
advisors use both.

MoneyGuidePro (now Envestnet MoneyGuide) is one of the most
established financial planning platforms in the industry. According to
the T3/Inside Information 2026 Advisor Software Survey, MoneyGuidePro’s
market share has declined from 33% to 24.23%, while Income Lab holds ~9%
market share in the retirement distribution category and is the #1-rated
tool in that category. They overlap in retirement planning, but they
approach the problem from opposite directions.

MoneyGuide asks: “Will this client’s money last?” and gives you a
probability.

Income Lab asks: “How much can this client spend, and what should
they do when things change?” and gives you a dollar amount with
guardrails.

That difference sounds semantic. In practice, it changes how your
clients experience retirement. The 2025 Kitces AdvisorTech Report rates
Income Lab at 8.7/10 for advisor satisfaction. Only 18.49% of advisors
currently use any retirement distribution planning tool, according to
the T3 2026 survey, which means most practices still rely on
general-purpose planning software for this specialized problem.


The Fundamental
Methodology Difference

This is the most important section in this article. Everything else
flows from how each tool thinks about retirement risk.

MoneyGuidePro:
Probability-Based Planning

MoneyGuide’s retirement analysis centers on Monte Carlo simulation.
According to the 2024 Kitces Research on Retirement Planning Practices,
Monte Carlo simulation remains the dominant methodology across
comprehensive planning platforms, used by the majority of advisors for
retirement projections. You input the client’s assets, income sources,
spending goals, and assumptions. The engine runs thousands of random
market scenarios and tells you the probability that the plan succeeds
(doesn’t run out of money before the client dies).

The output: “You have an 87% probability of success.”

This is useful for assessing whether a plan is fundamentally sound.
It’s less useful for answering what to do next. If the market drops 25%
and the probability falls to 72%, what does the client actually change?
How much less should they spend? For how long? At what point do they go
back to their original spending level?

Monte Carlo gives you a confidence score. It doesn’t give you a plan
of action. Research published on Kitces.com found that clients
frequently misinterpret probability-of-success numbers, with many unable
to distinguish between 75% and 90% confidence in practical terms.

Income Lab:
Guardrails-Based Distribution Planning

Income Lab’s retirement analysis centers on risk-based guardrails.
Instead of a probability, clients get a spending amount with upper and
lower boundaries: “You can spend $8,400 per month. If the portfolio
drops to your lower guardrail, reduce to $7,600. If it rises to your
upper guardrail, increase to $9,100.”

The output is actionable. When markets move, the client knows exactly
what happens. There’s no ambiguity about when to adjust, how much to
adjust, or when the adjustment reverses.

In backtesting, Income Lab’s risk-based guardrails required only a 3%
income reduction during the 2008 financial crisis, compared to 28% with
traditional Guyton-Klinger guardrails. During 1970s stagflation, the gap
was 32% vs 54%. The methodology produces meaningfully more stable income
in the periods that test plans the hardest.

Why this matters in dollars

Consider a client with a $1.5M portfolio spending $7,500/month. In a
2008-style downturn:

  • MoneyGuide output: Probability drops from 87% to
    68%. The advisor says “we should watch this.” The client panics.
  • Income Lab output: Spending remains at $7,500
    because the lower guardrail hasn’t been triggered. If the market falls
    further, the guardrail calls for a reduction to $6,900/month for a
    temporary period. The advisor says “here’s exactly what happens and
    when.”

The difference is not theoretical. It’s $600/month of spending
clarity that determines whether your client cancels the trip or books
it.

Sources: Kitces.com
analysis
, Income
Lab guardrails research


Feature Comparison

Capability Income Lab MoneyGuidePro
Primary methodology Risk-based guardrails Monte Carlo probability
Retirement income focus Core product (deepest in market) Module within broader platform
Output to client Dollar amount + guardrail boundaries Probability of success percentage
Ongoing monitoring Retirement GPS (continuous, automated alerts) Point-in-time analysis
Stress testing Historical periods (2000, 2008, stagflation, 1970s) Monte Carlo (randomized scenarios)
Tax planning Tax Lab: Roth conversion modeling, bracket management, tax-efficient
withdrawals, IRMAA optimization
Basic tax projections
Social Security optimization Dedicated tool (rated 8.60 by T3) Built-in claiming analysis
Annuity modeling Dedicated module with income riders, FIA/VA comparison, stress
testing
Basic annuity support
AI tools AI Plan Builder, Interviewer, Scribe, Assistant Limited AI features
Accumulation planning Decumulation focus; includes Life Hub, Insights Dashboard,
Preretirement Planner (Decision Lab)
Yes (full lifecycle)
Estate planning Limited (retirement-focused) Estate module
Insurance needs analysis No Yes
Goals-based planning Retirement-specific Multi-goal
Client portal Life Hub (interactive one-page plan) MoneyGuide client portal

Income Lab is also launching Penny, a purpose-built AI paraplanner designed for retirement income planning. MoneyGuidePro’s AI capabilities remain limited by comparison. For a look at how AI paraplanner tools are changing advisor workflows, see our AI paraplanner guide for financial advisors.


Where Income Lab Wins

1. The Client
Conversation Is Fundamentally Better

This is where the rubber meets the road. When a client asks “Am I
okay?” during a market downturn:

With MoneyGuide: “Your probability dropped from 87%
to 72%. You’re still in a reasonable range, but we should watch it.” The
client hears: “I might not be okay.” Anxiety increases.

With Income Lab: “Your spending hasn’t hit the lower
guardrail yet. You’re still in the safe zone at $8,400/month. If the
market drops another 12%, we’d reduce to $7,600, which is still above
your essential expenses. And historically, guardrail adjustments like
this reverse within 2-3 years.” The client hears: “I know exactly what
happens, and we have a plan.” Anxiety decreases.

The advisor who uses Income Lab has a better answer to the most
important question in retirement planning.

2. Dynamic Monitoring
vs. Static Snapshots

Income Lab’s Retirement GPS watches every plan, every day. When a
guardrail is approaching, the advisor gets notified before the client
meeting, not during it. This transforms retirement planning from an
annual review exercise into an ongoing service. Thousands of advisors
rely on this continuous monitoring capability.

MoneyGuide plans are typically updated at annual reviews or when the
client calls worried. The plan sits static between meetings.

For a practice with 80 retirement clients, the difference is
significant. Retirement GPS flags the five clients who need attention
this month. Without it, you’re updating all 80 plans manually or waiting
for clients to call. According to NAPFA research, proactive monitoring
is one of the top service differentiators cited by clients when choosing
to stay with their advisor.

3. Tax-Integrated
Distribution Planning

Income Lab’s Tax Lab computes the tax impact of distribution
decisions: which account to pull from, how much Roth to convert, and how
bracket management affects the overall plan. It’s built specifically for
the decumulation phase, where tax-efficient withdrawal sequencing can
save clients thousands annually.

The Tax Lab runs multiple strategies simultaneously: non-Roth
withdrawal ordering, Roth conversions filling to specific marginal
brackets, and IRMAA-optimized conversion strategies. You can compare
lifetime tax savings, net income impact, and break-even timelines side
by side.

For a married couple with $2M across traditional IRA, Roth IRA, and
taxable accounts, the difference between a naive withdrawal order and an
optimized Roth conversion strategy can exceed $150,000 in lifetime tax
savings. MoneyGuide shows you a probability number. Income Lab shows you
which dollars to move, when, and why.

MoneyGuide has basic tax projections but doesn’t model the
multi-dimensional interactions between federal tax, state tax, IRMAA,
ACA subsidies, and Social Security taxation simultaneously. According to
the Journal of Financial Planning, the interaction between Roth
conversions, IRMAA surcharges, and Social Security taxation is one of
the most under-optimized areas in retirement distribution, with the
average advisor leaving significant tax savings on the table by not
modeling these variables together.

4. Historical Stress Testing

“What would have happened if you retired in October 2007?” is a
question Income Lab answers with real historical data. Clients can see
how their specific plan would have navigated the financial crisis,
including the guardrail adjustments that would have happened along the
way.

The stress test shows two paths: what the plan originally called for,
and what actually would have happened through the downturn. Clients see
the specific income reduction (often much smaller than they feared), the
duration of the adjustment, and the recovery. In the 2008 scenario,
clients typically see an adjustment of around $870/month that reverses
once the upper guardrail is hit during the recovery.

Monte Carlo can produce a “bad scenario,” but it’s a random bad
scenario. It doesn’t have the narrative power of “here’s what happened
during the Great Recession, and here’s what your plan would have
done.”

Advisor takeaway: The tools you use shape the
conversations you can have. MoneyGuide equips you to say “you’re
probably fine.” Income Lab equips you to say “here’s exactly what
happens, in dollars, under every scenario we can model.” If the
retirement income conversation is where you differentiate your practice,
the tool matters.


Where MoneyGuidePro Wins

1. Full Financial Planning
Scope

MoneyGuide covers the entire financial planning lifecycle: early
career savings optimization, education funding, insurance needs
analysis, estate planning, debt management, and retirement. Income Lab
covers retirement income distribution only.

For practices serving clients across all life stages, MoneyGuide
provides one platform. Income Lab requires a complementary planning tool
for non-retirement needs.

2. Industry Adoption and
Familiarity

MoneyGuide (now part of Envestnet) has been one of the most widely
used planning platforms, though the T3 2026 survey shows its market
share declining from 33% to 24.23% as advisors diversify their
technology stacks. Most advisors have used it at some point in their
career. Training resources, study groups, and peer support are abundant.
New hires are more likely to already know MoneyGuide than any specialist
tool.

3. Enterprise and
Broker-Dealer Support

MoneyGuide has deep relationships with wirehouses, broker-dealers,
and large RIA platforms. If your firm mandates a planning platform, it’s
often MoneyGuide or eMoney (which holds 28.2% market share according to
T3 2026). Income Lab is used primarily by independent RIAs and fee-only
advisors.

For advisors at firms with compliance requirements around which tools
can be used for client-facing reports, MoneyGuide’s enterprise approval
process is well-established. Income Lab’s enterprise adoption is growing
but less widespread in the wirehouse channel.

4. Goals-Based Visualization

MoneyGuide excels at showing clients whether they’re on track for
multiple goals simultaneously: retirement, college, vacation home,
charitable giving. The visual interface makes it easy for clients to
prioritize and trade off between goals.

Income Lab focuses on one goal (sustainable retirement income) and
goes deeper on that single question.

Advisor takeaway: MoneyGuide’s strength is breadth.
If you’re building plans for a 42-year-old saving for college,
retirement, and a vacation home simultaneously, MoneyGuide handles that
in one platform. Income Lab doesn’t try to. The question is whether your
retirement distribution clients need more depth than a generalist tool
provides.


Pricing

Plan Income Lab MoneyGuidePro
Entry level ~$154/month (annual billing at $1,850/yr) Varies by firm/channel
Standard monthly $189/month Contact for pricing
Introductory $20 first month Varies (often included in firm platform fees)
Enterprise Custom Enterprise pricing through Envestnet
Social Security only Separate product available Included

Pricing as of March 2026. Check incomelaboratory.com/pricing
for current Income Lab rates. MoneyGuidePro pricing varies significantly
by channel; contact Envestnet
directly.

MoneyGuide’s pricing is less transparent than Income Lab’s because
it’s often bundled into enterprise platform agreements or broker-dealer
technology packages. Many advisors at larger firms get MoneyGuide access
through their firm’s platform fee rather than paying per-seat.
Independent advisors purchasing MoneyGuide directly should expect
pricing in a similar range to other comprehensive planning tools
($100-200/month depending on tier).

Income Lab’s pricing is straightforward: $189/month or $154/month
with annual billing, with a $20 first month to test the platform with
real client data.


Client
Scenarios: Which Tool Fits Your Practice?

Scenario
1: Independent advisor specializing in retirement transitions

Mark is a fee-only CFP with 60 client households, nearly all aged
55-75. His typical new client is someone within three years of
retirement with $1M-3M in assets across multiple account types. They
want to know exactly how much they can spend, which accounts to draw
from, and what happens if markets crash in their first year.

Best fit: Income Lab. Income Lab reports a 60% close
rate on demos, meaning most advisors who see the platform in action
adopt it. Mark’s entire practice is built around the retirement
distribution conversation. Guardrails give his clients a specific
monthly number. Tax Lab optimizes their withdrawal sequencing and Roth
conversion strategy. The stress test turns “what if 2008 happens again?”
from a scary question into a concrete, manageable scenario. He uses
RightCapital for the occasional client who needs a comprehensive plan,
but 90% of his planning time is in Income Lab.

Scenario 2:
Wirehouse advisor with a diverse book

Jennifer is a wealth advisor at a national wirehouse with 200 client
households ranging from young professionals to retirees. Her firm
mandates MoneyGuide for compliance-approved client reporting. About 60
of her clients are in or near retirement.

Best fit: MoneyGuide as the primary platform.
Jennifer needs one tool that her compliance department approves, that
covers all client types, and that integrates with her firm’s reporting
infrastructure. For her 60 retirement clients, she may find that
MoneyGuide’s retirement module handles the conversation adequately. If
she wants to elevate the retirement income discussion for her high-value
decumulation clients, she could add Income Lab for those clients, but
the firm mandate makes MoneyGuide the foundation.


Switching Considerations

If you’re currently on MoneyGuide and considering Income Lab (or vice
versa), here’s what the transition looks like.

Moving from MoneyGuide to
Income Lab

  • What you gain: Guardrails-based spending, dynamic
    monitoring, deeper tax planning, historical stress testing, AI-powered
    plan building
  • What you lose: Comprehensive planning scope
    (accumulation, estate, education, insurance). You’ll need a second tool
    for non-retirement clients.
  • Data migration: Income Lab doesn’t import
    MoneyGuide plans directly. You’ll rebuild plans, but Income Lab’s AI
    Plan Builder and custodial integrations (Schwab, Fidelity, BridgeFT)
    make initial setup faster than manual entry. Income Lab’s AI Plan
    Builder can import data from PDFs and transcripts from other platforms,
    reducing migration friction significantly.
  • Learning curve: Most advisors report being
    productive within 1-2 weeks. The $20 first month lets you test with real
    clients before committing. Income Lab maintains a 60% demo-to-adoption
    close rate, suggesting most advisors who evaluate the platform find
    immediate value.
  • Client impact: Minimal. Clients care about the
    output (their spending number and plan), not which software generated
    it. Most advisors report that the guardrails conversation is immediately
    better received than probability.

Moving from Income Lab to
MoneyGuide

  • What you gain: Full lifecycle planning, goals-based
    visualization, broader firm compatibility, enterprise compliance
    features
  • What you lose: Guardrails methodology, dynamic
    monitoring, depth in retirement distribution, Tax Lab, historical stress
    testing
  • Typical reason: Firm mandate or practice shift
    toward serving younger clients across more planning domains

Keeping both

This is increasingly common. The T3 2026 survey data shows that
multi-tool adoption is growing across advisor technology stacks, with
advisors increasingly pairing specialist tools with their primary
comprehensive platform. The typical setup costs roughly $340-400/month
total ($189 for Income Lab + $150ish for MoneyGuide, depending on your
channel). For a practice where retirement income is a major revenue
driver, the additional $189/month pays for itself if it retains even one
client per year who would have otherwise been anxious enough to consider
switching advisors.


When to Choose Income Lab

  • Your practice specializes in retirement income planning
  • You want to move beyond probability-of-success to actionable
    spending recommendations
  • Tax-aware distribution planning is central to your value
    proposition
  • You need to answer “what do we do when markets drop?” with specific
    dollar amounts
  • You want ongoing, automated plan monitoring between meetings
  • You’re willing to use a second tool for comprehensive planning
    needs

The typical Income Lab
advisor

Fee-only RIA or independent advisor whose clients are primarily in or
approaching retirement. According to the T3 2026 survey, advisor
sentiment toward AI in back-office functions rates 7.72 out of 10,
suggesting strong appetite for AI-powered planning tools like Income
Lab’s suite. Practice differentiator is the quality of the retirement
income conversation, not the breadth of the financial plan. Often uses
RightCapital or eMoney for comprehensive planning and Income Lab for
retirement distribution.


When to Choose MoneyGuidePro

  • You need a single platform for clients across all life stages
  • Your firm requires or supports MoneyGuide
  • Goals-based planning across multiple objectives is your primary
    framework
  • You’re comfortable with probability-of-success as the primary
    retirement metric
  • Enterprise-level compliance and reporting features matter

When to Use Both

Many advisors use MoneyGuide for the comprehensive financial plan and
Income Lab for the retirement income deep dive. This is especially
common when:

  • A client transitions from accumulation to distribution (MoneyGuide
    for the overall plan, Income Lab for the distribution strategy)
  • The retirement income conversation needs more depth than Monte Carlo
    provides
  • Tax planning requires multi-year Roth conversion modeling with IRMAA
    constraints
  • The advisor wants to offer ongoing monitoring as a service (Income
    Lab’s Retirement GPS) alongside annual comprehensive reviews
    (MoneyGuide)

The Bottom Line

MoneyGuidePro and Income Lab serve different moments in the planning
relationship. MoneyGuide answers “are we on track?” across the full
financial picture. Income Lab answers “how much can we spend, and what
do we do when things change?” for the retirement phase.

If retirement income distribution is where your practice delivers its
deepest value, Income Lab gives you tools and language that
probability-based planning can’t match. If you need a single platform
for everything, MoneyGuide covers more ground.

The best retirement planning practices increasingly use both: breadth
from a comprehensive tool, depth from a specialist.


Sources


Continue Reading


See It in Action

Watch: Adjustment-Based
Retirement Planning: Why Guidance Beats Scores
. This video
demonstrates the core methodology difference between guardrails-based
planning and probability-of-success, including the GPS analogy that
makes the distinction immediately clear.


See the Difference

Try Income Lab for 30 days. Start at $20 for the
first month. Build a plan for one retirement client and compare the
conversation to what you’d have with Monte Carlo alone.

Start Your Trial

Watch a live demo. See how guardrails-based
distribution planning changes the way clients experience retirement.

Schedule a Demo

Justin Fitzpatrick, PhD, CFA, CFP - President and Co-Founder of Income Lab

Justin Fitzpatrick is President and Co-Founder of Income Lab, retirement income planning software used by thousands of financial advisors. He developed the guardrails-based approach to retirement income distribution after a decade in financial services at Jackson and seven years in academia at MIT, Harvard, and UCLA. His research on adjustment-based planning has been published on Kitces.com, ThinkAdvisor, AdvisorPerspectives, and FinancialPlanning Magazine.

Ready to see this in action?

Watch how Income Lab helps advisors answer clients' toughest retirement income questions with guardrails-based planning.

Book a Walkthrough Start Free Trial