Cost modeling
Vendor consolidation savings calculator
Replace N point tools with one platform. Enter what you spend on the point tools plus the platform's price, and see annual savings, consolidation ratio, and per-tool savings.
When this calculator helps
- Evaluating a platform play (e.g. Monday vs Asana + Toggl + Loom + Calendly).
- Building a budget reduction case for finance.
- Annual stack audit and cleanup.
When to look elsewhere
- When point tools serve different teams with different workflows, feature overlap doesn't equal substitution.
- When the consolidated tool requires expensive migration or retraining that erodes year-1 savings.
Worked example
A 75-person marketing team is using four point tools: a $250 per month survey tool, a $300 per month email platform, a $200 per month landing page builder, and a $350 per month event tool. Total: $1,100 per month, or $13,200 per year. They are evaluating a single $850-per-month all-in-one platform that covers all four functions.
Calculator inputs: 4 tools, $275 average per tool, $850 replacement. Annual savings: $13,200 minus $10,200, which is $3,000, or about 23 percent. Per-tool savings averages $750 per year. Before signing, model the consolidation-minus-favorite scenario: keep the event tool ($4,200 per year) and consolidate only three for a more realistic $1,800 year-one saving.
How this calculator works
The formula multiplies the count of tools being replaced by the average monthly cost across them, times twelve, to get current annual spend. Subtract the new platform's annual cost (replacement monthly times twelve) to get the headline savings. Per-tool savings is just total savings divided by the number of tools, useful when finance wants a per-line-item view in the contract redlines.
The model does not account for migration cost, integration rebuilds, retraining, or productivity dips during the cutover. Industry benchmarks put the year-one realized saving at 60 to 70 percent of the modeled saving because of these factors; by year two the modeled saving typically holds. The "20 percent audit trim" output is a quick triage figure: if the stack is bloated enough that 20 percent is plausible, the deeper audit is worth the effort.
Frequently asked questions
How accurate are consolidation savings on paper?
Year-1 savings tend to be 60-70% of the modeled number once you account for migration, integration rebuilds, and the inevitable point-tool that survives the cut. By year 2 the model usually holds.
What about the team's preferred tool that 'must stay'?
Always model two scenarios, full consolidation and consolidation-minus-favorite. The second one is what actually ships.