Does adding scenarios slow Fintastic down?

No. Because each version is its own model, running twenty scenarios leaves the core model performing exactly as it did with one. This is straightforward to demonstrate on your own data rather than take on trust.

Fintastic vs Pigment

How many what-ifs does your team skip because they are not worth the wait?

Q: When is Pigment the better fit?

Pigment is a strong platform with genuine design and AI investment, and teams that value interface polish and run a contained number of scenarios are often very happy there. The teams that move to Fintastic tend to be the ones running many concurrent scenarios, planning across finance, workforce, and operations together, or carrying enough dimensionality that model size has become the constraint.

Q: How is Fintastic different from Pigment?

The core difference is how each platform holds a scenario. In Pigment a scenario is a dimension value inside the model, so model size grows as scenarios are added. In Fintastic every version is an independent model with its own data, dimensions, and formulas, so scenario count carries no performance cost. Fintastic also holds financial, operational, and workforce planning in one model rather than in separate applications joined by libraries.

In most planning tools every scenario you save makes the model itself heavier, so teams start rationing which questions are worth asking. In Fintastic each version is its own separate model. Saving twenty of them leaves the main model exactly as fast as it was with one, and nobody has to decide which questions make the cut.

Save as many versions as the question needs, not as many as the model can carry

Compare any two of them in one click, even when they are built differently

Built by the Fintastic team, alongside yours

See your model run in Fintastic

HubSpot V2 raw HTML form embed goes here. Form ID needed.

Trusted By

The cost of rationing

The scenarios you do not run are the ones nobody sees

When saving a version slows everything down, teams get careful about it. Only the questions worth the wait get modelled. The rest get answered from instinct, or from a side spreadsheet, or not at all.

That is not a modelling problem. It is a decision-making one. The board sees three scenarios because three was what the model could carry, not because three was the right number of ways the year could go.

What-ifs that get skipped because they are not worth the wait

Side spreadsheets holding the versions the model cannot

A board pack built around the scenarios that were cheap to produce

Implementation

Who builds your model, and what happens after go-live

Pigment deploys through a network of implementation partners. Fintastic builds in-house: the team that built the platform builds your model with you, at roughly three to five hours a week from your side, and support sits inside the subscription rather than in a change-request process.

Both approaches work. The difference shows up eighteen months in, when the business changes and the model has to change with it.

One team

From evaluation through build and every change after.

Support included

A change six months after go-live is not a separate engagement.

Architecture

What makes the difference

Four things about how Fintastic is built. Each one shows up in what your team can do in a forecast cycle.

Every version is its own model

One model, all of the business

Detail without the slowdown

Comments that carry their view

Every version is its own model

A version can be a plan, a forecast, or a what-if. It holds its own numbers, its own level of detail, and its own formulas. Saving more of them costs nothing in speed, and any two can be compared in one click even when they are built differently.

One model, all of the business

Finance, revenue, headcount, and operations sit in one model and are present in every version, so a hiring change reaches the P&L without anyone moving data between systems.

Detail without the slowdown

Big models with a lot of detail in them are where planning usually gets slow. Fintastic runs two calculation engines side by side on the same model, so nobody has to choose between planning at the level they want and getting an answer quickly.

Comments that carry their view

Every comment links to the exact cell, filter, view, version, and time period it was made in. Clicking it puts the board back into that state, so a question is never separated from the number it is about.

How Fintastic is built → Platform Guide

Customer evidence

Priceline's shortlist was Anaplan and Pigment. One thing decided it.

Priceline's FP&A team went into the search with two leading candidates, each already in use at a sister company inside Booking Holdings. Fintastic was introduced late in the process. What changed the evaluation was what happened when they saved a version. Their requirement was to be able to copy the whole environment, change a driver, see the impact, and compare it against the base, as many times as a forecast cycle needed. In both leading candidates, every version saved added weight to the model. In Fintastic, versions are separate models, which is what made the requirement possible at all.

“

We have Fintastic because it gives us real-time forecast decision making in ways that we couldn't have even dreamed of before.

David Hutchison

Director, FP&A

Priceline

Read the full Priceline story

5 to 1

separate models to one model

30 to 40

what-ifs saved in the 2026 budget cycle, up from one a day

40 to 50

people using it, 20 working in it at once during peak forecasting

15 sec

driver change to finished P&L

Fintastic and Pigment, compared

Two modern platforms built on different choices. Which set fits depends on how many what-ifs you run, how many parts of the business you plan across, and how much detail your data carries.

Fintastic

Pigment

Saving what-ifs and versions

Every version is a separate model holding its own numbers, level of detail, and formulas. Saving more of them costs nothing in speed.

Scenarios sit inside a single model, so the number of them and the size of the model are linked. Comparison is built around figures that line up across versions.

Planning across the business

Finance, revenue, headcount, and operations in one model, present in every version.

Headcount, financial, and operational planning are delivered as separate applications, connected to each other through libraries.

Getting it live

Built in-house with your team at three to five hours a week. Support included.

Delivered through a network of third-party implementation partners.

Big, detailed models

Two calculation engines run side by side on the same model, handling lightly and heavily populated data together.

Handles empty areas of a model efficiently. Teams planning at a very fine level of detail may group data together to keep the model manageable.

Reporting and drill-down

Summary and detail in the same report. Up to three versions side by side, including versions built differently from each other.

Drill-down and version comparison available, structured around figures that line up across the versions being compared.

Comments and collaboration

Comments carry their full view. Clicking one puts the board back into the state it was in when the comment was made.

Commenting on cells and boards, without the comment carrying the view it was made in.

Permissions

Control by person or group across categories, values, and entities, including hiding sensitive columns like comp.

Access set by user, role, group, and rule. Detail-level data access is configured per person rather than per group.

Show all seven capabilities

Based on publicly available product documentation and customer accounts as of 2026. Pigment's roadmap may introduce changes to what is described above.

Enterprise security built in: SOC 2 Type II · ISO 27001 · AWS infrastructure · Encryption in transit and at rest · SSO with group-level controls

Questions worth asking before you shortlist

How is Fintastic different from Pigment?

The short version: saving a what-if costs nothing. In Pigment scenarios sit inside a single model, so the model grows as you add them. In Fintastic each version is its own separate model, so saving twenty of them leaves the main model exactly as fast as it was with one.

Fintastic also holds finance, headcount, and operations in one model rather than in separate applications joined together.

When is Pigment the better fit?

Pigment is a strong platform with real design and AI investment, and teams that value interface polish and run a contained number of scenarios are often very happy there.

The teams that move to Fintastic tend to be the ones running a lot of what-ifs at once, planning across finance, headcount, and operations together, or carrying enough detail that model size has become the thing holding them up.

Does saving more versions slow Fintastic down?

No. Because each version is its own model, saving twenty of them leaves the main model performing exactly as it did with one.

This is straightforward to show on your own data rather than take on trust.

Pigment is a larger company. Why choose Fintastic?

It is a fair question and worth asking directly. Priceline asked it too, and evaluated both. They chose Fintastic on the ability to save unlimited versions without slowing the model down.

Company size is a reasonable proxy for risk. Testing both on your own model is a better one.

What Happens When Your Planning Platform Finally Keeps Up

Teams using Fintastic report faster cycles, fewer firefights, and more time spent on the decisions that actually matter.

In my finance career, it’s rare to see an interconnected platform of this scale support iterative scenario planning without sacrificing speed or reliability. Fintastic has been a meaningful addition for Priceline.

Marc Culver

VP of Finance at Priceline

Before implementing Fintastic, business stakeholders couldn't easily create or maintain scenarios. Now there are multiple scenarios that are easily managed and compared, allowing us to plan ahead and make more data-driven decisions.

Emmanuel Blum

Director of FP&A at Claroty

Artlist reduced time spent on their BVA (budget vs. actual) reporting cycle by 70% - with analysis available at PO-level granularity, always live, with no manual consolidation required.

Evyatar Talev

FP&A Manager at Artlist

Fintastic has been a game changer for our FP&A team! What used to take us days can now be done in mere minutes.

Tom Nguyen

VP Finance at Aviatrix