Sheet: check of your plan

All the research sheets

Translated from the Spanish original. Where they differ, the Spanish one holds.

• App: Horalis Growth · Reviewed: 9 October 2026 (phase A2)
• Code (in projects/wealth-lens/): src/lib/plan-check.ts (when each observation appears and its figures), src/i18n/check-text.ts (its words), src/components/money/plan-check.tsx (the section), src/hooks/use-calculation.ts (calculated with the plan as it is, without "What if…?")

The question it answers

"What stands out in my plan?" It is the result's "Check your plan" section: from 0 to 2 observations, only those that apply, each with its figure in euros. It informs, it does not advise: it says what there is and its consequences in euros, never what to buy, what to sell or which weights to set (see inform, do not advise).

They come out in that order (what concerns the next years first) and at most one of each kind. If none applies, the section does not appear.

Horizon against risk

In words: with few years ahead, a fall may not have time to recover. The app counts, of the 1,000 possible futures of the simulated futures, how many end below what has been put in by then.

When:

• the plan's years are fewer than 5; or, if not, there is a goal in My goals that the plan reaches later, but in less than 5 years (the nearest one): then it looks at the whole years until it (rounding up);
• the money goes up and down (a swing above zero: not Savings, nor an own growth without ups and downs);
• at least 100 of the 1,000 futures end below what was put in: the same "1 in 10" as "If it goes badly". Below that, the bad case is already above what was put in and nothing is said.

Exact: with C today's capital, A the monthly contribution and N the years, what is put in is C + 12·A·N; the futures are the 1,000 paths of samplesFor (the same as the chart's band); the ones that end year N below what was put in are counted, and that year's 10th percentile (bad) is given.

Example (calculated with the app): €10,000 and €200 a month in the S&P 500 for 3 years: "In 3 years you put in €17,200. 20 in 100 possible futures end below. In the worst 1 in 10, €1,951 or more below." With bonds, too: 23 in 100 (euro bonds had bad years, such as 2022).

Concentration (withdrawn)

Until phase A2 (9 October 2026) there was a third observation: a share with more than 20 % of the mix or of My portfolio. It was removed with single shares and My portfolio (they depended on daily prices from unofficial sources). The method is in the future piece of mixes.

Long-term savings

In words: a savings account does not go up or down, but over the years prices rise more than its interest. The app says what the savings are worth in today's euros, against what was put in and against what US shares would have given with the same amounts. Both sides go in the same sentence (phase B2: every comparison between assets): what savings miss out on, and the worst fall of shares in the data on that money. Then its bad case.

When: the plan invests in Savings and looks 10 years or more ahead.

Exact: what it is worth is the plan's big number (interest of 1.5 % minus the inflation of "Rising prices in", see inflation); the reference is US shares (S&P 500, 1988–2022) with their usual figures and the same inflation, with the same calculation as the big number (typical) and their 10th percentile of the simulated futures (bad). The worst fall is the largest of the crises of Test my plan in their data: 1929–1931, −53 % after the rise in prices. It is applied to what they typically give at the end, when there is most money: the most a fall like that can take away. As in the whole check, the euros come from the percentage and the figure as they are seen (53 % of €347,353). The data are yearly (from year end to year end): within each year the fall may have been larger, and that is why the sentence says "at least".

Example: €10,000 and €200 a month for 30 years: "In 30 years, the savings are worth €75,587 of today. That is €6,413 less than you put in. US shares (1988–2022) usually give €347,353. With Savings you would end with €271,766 less than with US shares. But shares can fall: between 1929 and 1931 they fell at least 53 % (−€184,097). They go up and down: 1 in 10 futures ends below €153,841."

How it is written

The rules of the legal sheet, with a test:

• Always a fact of the plan and its figure in euros; each percentage with its euros.
• Never "you should", "we recommend", or "buy", "sell", "hold", "switch to", "reduce", "increase" (src/lib/plan-check.test.ts).
• Frequencies as counts ("20 in 100"), never as a percentage.
• The section starts by saying the decision is the person's: "What stands out in your plan, with its amounts. What to do is up to you."
• No product: the reference for savings is an asset type ("US shares"), not a fund.

Assumptions

• The 1,000 simulated futures (see simulated futures) represent what can happen in a few years.
• US shares of 1988–2022 are a reasonable reference to compare long-term savings with. Their worst fall in the data (1929–1931) is a reference, not a limit.

Sources

Those of the models it uses: growth, simulated futures, inflation and mixes.

Validation (tests)

• src/lib/plan-check.test.ts: when each observation appears and when it does not (fewer than 5 years against 5; no swing; fewer than 1 in 10 below; a near goal; Savings at 9 years against 10); that the count matches the chart's futures; the order; and the wording, in English and in Spanish: euros in what stands out, no percentage without euros, no words of advice or of buying or selling, short sentences.
• src/components/money/entry.test.ts: the section does not come out if nothing stands out, comes out after "What if…?" and before My goals, with its link to How it works.
• src/components/plain-language.test.ts: the result of a 3-year plan, of a mix and of savings passes the euros rule.

Limits

• One observation per kind and only two kinds: it is not a full review of the plan (it does not look at fees, taxes or currencies).
• The horizon of a goal is looked at in whole years.

What is debatable

1. "1 in 10" as a threshold. With 8 in 100 futures below, nothing is said, although it is not little. Cost: decide another threshold or always say it when there are few years.
2. The reference for savings. It is compared with US shares of 1988–2022 (7.54 % a year after inflation), not with the calculator's starting 5 %, and with their worst fall (1929–1931), which is from before those years. Comparing with shares can read as a suggestion; that is why it comes with its bad case and its worst fall. Cost: review it with the legal sheet's professional.
3. The plan as it is. The check does not look at the applied "What if…?", so as to speak of the person's plan and not of a scenario. Cost: none; note it.

History

• 2026-10-07: first sheet. The new check, with three observations; the concentration finding of My portfolio (40 %) leaves Good to know and a single threshold, 20 %, holds for the mix and for My portfolio.
• 2026-10-07 (2): at Marek's request, the Savings observation says both its sides in a single sentence: what savings miss out on against world shares, and the worst fall of these (2000–2002) on that money. Then, at Marek's request, in two short sentences, with "at least" because the data are yearly.
• 2026-10-09 (phase A2): without the concentration observation (single shares and My portfolio were removed). The reference for savings moves from world shares (MSCI World, its data are not open) to US ones: they usually give more (7.54 % against 4.45 %) and their worst fall in the data is larger (1929–1931, −53 %, against 2000–2002, −46 %).
• 2026-10-14 (phase B2): both sides go in a single sentence ("US shares (1988–2022) usually give X, Y more than savings, but between 1929 and 1931 they fell at least 53 % (−Z)"), by B2's rule for every comparison between assets; if savings give more, the sentence still says what shares usually give and their worst fall. That sentence allows up to 22 words (plain language test). The figures do not change.