How comparison logic is framed.
This page explains, at a high level, how Savings Planner compares savings products, why results can differ by context, and where the boundaries of that logic sit.
What Savings Planner compares
Savings Planner compares products using current product data, product rules, and scenario assumptions such as balance, age, and time frame.
The aim is not to ask which account has the best headline rate in the abstract. The aim is to ask which products still look strong once the actual product rules and your actual setup are taken into account.
Why different pages can lead to different shortlists
A no-fuss guide, a larger-balance scenario, and a broad market view are not trying to answer the same question. Different pages intentionally emphasise different trade-offs, such as simplicity, effective rate over time, balance caps, withdrawals, or qualifying conditions.
That is why a product can look strong in one context and less useful in another. The page type changes the question being asked.
What the methodology is trying to avoid
The site tries to avoid treating advertised rates as if they were the full story. Intro periods, linked-account requirements, card-spend hoops, balance-growth rules, and caps can all change what a product is really worth for a given saver.
It also tries to avoid pretending that one answer fits every saver. A stronger setup for a house deposit may not be the right setup for emergency cash.
Methodology boundaries
No public methodology page can fully model every real-world personal factor. Savings Planner does not know your full financial position, tax situation, risk tolerance, or account behaviour outside the inputs and page context it is using.
It remains general information only, not a substitute for official disclosures or personal advice.