What can Planning Optimization actually not do in 2026?

Three things, if you read the one page everyone reads. Microsoft's Planning Optimization fit analysis table currently marks exactly three rows Future wave: sales line reservation using explosion, intercompany planning execution across legal entities, and requirement types for skills, courses, certificates and titles (source, fetched 2026-07-31).

State the evidence class immediately, because it decides what that answer is worth: that page is one page, about one engine's coverage of one thing — your configuration. It is not a capability catalogue, Microsoft says so itself, and four other Microsoft pages carry hard limits it never lists. On three features, Microsoft's pages disagree outright.

What the fit analysis actually is

It compares two engines against your data. Microsoft: "Planning Optimization fit analysis helps you identify where the result might differ between the deprecated master planning engine and Planning Optimization. The system runs this analysis based on your current setup and data." And: "The scope of Planning Optimization isn't equal to the deprecated master planning engine functionality."

You run it per legal entity — select a company, "Go to Master planning > Setup > Planning Optimization fit analysis", then "On the Action Pane, select Run analysis", then "Repeat this procedure for each company in your organization." A clean company returns a blank list and a "No issues found" message.

Two caveats sit in a Note box on that page, and they are the reason this article exists:

- "The Planning Optimization fit analysis can't identify some inconsistencies."

- "If the analysis finds inconsistencies, you can still use Planning Optimization. The results of

the fit analysis just show places where the planning service doesn't honor your current setup. In

other words, they show places where some processes might be ignored or aren't supported."

Read the second twice. Findings do not block you — the corollary is sharper: a blank result is a statement about your configuration, not about the engine.

A third caveat governs the availability column: "For features that aren't yet supported, the following table provides an availability estimate based on the current roadmap. These estimates are subject to change without notice."

The three rows that still say Future wave

**Sales line reservation using explosion (Production)** — "This scenario isn't yet supported. Sales line reservations aren't automatically made during explosion."
**Setup Intercompany planning execution with planning optimization (Intercompany Planning)** — "It is not yet possible to setup Planning Optimization to execute automatically across legal entities according to the Intercompany planning group setup and using the run menu item to invoke the actual planning execution."
**Requirement types skills, courses, certificates, and titles (Production)** — "This scenario isn't yet supported."

That is the whole list, on that page. Everything else reads Supported. Many of those rows carry a version number: capable-to-promise from 10.0.28; formula measurement, co-products, by-products and yield from 10.0.33; explosion scheduling from 10.0.32; item substitution and the coverage-group freeze time fence on by default from 10.0.43; kanban order types generally available from 10.0.46. If your objection is on that list, check it against the next two sections before you rely on it.

The limits the fit analysis never lists

The honest answer is here. Microsoft's Differences article introduces its Expected differences table: "The following table lists specific differences between Planning Optimization and the deprecated master planning engine that aren't listed on the Planning Optimization fit analysis page" (source).

**Planning Optimization fit analysis* — Which of your* configured settings the service will not honour, per legal entity
**Differences between Planning Optimization and the deprecated master planning engine — Behavioural differences that, in Microsoft's words, "aren't listed on the Planning Optimization fit analysis** page"
**Parameters not used by Planning Optimization** — Which named fields, on which pages, the service ignores
**Scheduling with infinite capacity** — What the infinite-capacity scheduler cannot do
**Get started with master planning** — Which Azure geographies the service runs in at all

A selection of what those pages carry, verbatim, none of it in the fit analysis:

"Planning Optimization doesn't consider forecasts for today's date, though the deprecated master planning engine considered them."
"Planning Optimization doesn't consider return orders."
"The value in the Transport calendar column on the Modes of delivery page is ignored."
"Planning Optimization doesn't consider closed days from the vendor's calendar when calculating lead times for delivery dates."
On Fulfill minimum, the parameters article states it "doesn't support the Today's date, First issue, and Coverage time fence options. It always uses the Today's date + procurement time option."
Min/max coverage with no values set: "With Planning Optimization, the system creates one order per day to cover the full amount for that day" — where the old engine "treats the coverage code as a requirement and creates one order for each requirement."
Infinite-capacity scheduling, all four stated limitations: "The feature supports only infinite capacity." · "The feature doesn't support resource load functionality." · "The feature doesn't consider route scrap." · "The feature supports Duration only as the primary resource selection."

And one nobody counts as a limit until it bites: geography. The Get started page names where the service exists — "United States, United States government cloud, Canada, Brazil, Europe, France, United Kingdom, Norway, Switzerland, Australia, Asia Pacific, Japan, United Arab Emirates, South Africa, and India" — and adds that installing from outside those regions produces a Lifecycle Services message "that this geographic isn't supported." China is not on that list; a separate release-plan row records Run Planning Optimization on Azure operated by 21Vianet as generally available on 9 June 2026 (2026 wave 1). If you have a China entity, read both.

Three places Microsoft's own pages disagree

We are not going to tell you which behaviour is real. We are going to show you that two Microsoft pages say different things — because that is the fact, and because finding it out during hypercare (the weeks of intensive support straight after go-live) is expensive.

**Step consumption* — What one Microsoft page says: Fit analysis, BOM/formula lines with step consumption row: "This feature is pending. Currently, step consumption is ignored on BOM and formula lines when Planning Optimization is enabled." Its own Expected availability column on the same row reads Supported · What another says: The release plan item Implement lean manufacturing, catch weight, and step consumption records public preview 28 July 2025 and general availability 26 December 2025*, both marked released (source)
**Item-coverage freeze time fence* — What one Microsoft page says: Fit analysis, Item coverage records with freeze time fence set row: "This feature is pending. Currently, the freeze time fence setup is ignored when Planning Optimization is enabled, regardless of this setting." Expected availability: Supported · What another says: Parameters article, Item coverage page: "Freeze time fence is supported in Supply Chain Management version 10.0.40 and later. To use it, turn on the feature named Freezing time fence for Planning optimization*"
**Kanban** — What one Microsoft page says: Migration article: "Planning Optimization doesn't yet support kanban, so if you need to use kanban, you can go live by using the deprecated planning engine for now." (source) · What another says: Fit analysis: kanban "is a preview feature in Supply Chain Management version 10.0.45 and is generally available as of version 10.0.46." Parameters article: "Planning Optimization supports all order types, including kanban."

Both kanban pages carried the same documentation date when fetched, and they say opposite things.

One mechanism would let several of these be true at once. Each capability is gated behind a named feature-management switch — the Planning Optimization release history records that the 13 January 2025 service release added "Support for step consumption" and that it "requires the Support for material step consumption for Planning Optimization feature to be enabled in feature management." So "ignored" and "supported" can both be accurate about one environment, on either side of a switch. That reconciliation is ours. Microsoft does not state it and we have not confirmed it in a sandbox. Check feature management in your own environment first.

What the release plan adds

The 2026 release wave 1 page lists its window as April 2026 through September 2026. Three planning rows:

**Run Planning Optimization on Azure operated by 21Vianet** — [GA] — general availability 9 June 2026
**Protect confirmed CTP dates with Planning Optimization** — [PP] — public preview 1 June 2026, general availability listed for September 2026
**Enhance demand forecasts with multiple data inputs** — [PLAN] — general availability listed for August 2026

The second matters most: a capable-to-promise date could always be quietly moved by the next planning run, and "protect confirmed CTP dates" targets exactly that. It is [PP] — pilot it, do not promise it. We found no published 2026 release wave 2 plan, so nothing beyond September 2026 is cited here.

Where we would draw the line

We would not treat a blank fit analysis as a migration sign-off. Microsoft's own note says it "can't identify some inconsistencies," and the four pages above are where the rest lives.

We would not build a planning design on any of the three contested features before checking feature management in the target environment and observing the behaviour. A documentation conflict is not an opinion to pick a side in.

And we would not scope cross-entity planning as configuration. Microsoft's stated route is manual runs or "sequentially scheduled batch jobs for each legal entity" — a batch-orchestration design with an owner, and the Future wave item most likely to surface in week one of hypercare.

What to do this week

Run Master planning > Setup > Planning Optimization fit analysis and select Run analysis in every production legal entity, not in the demo company.
Read the Differences, Parameters not used and Scheduling with infinite capacity pages alongside it. Between them they carry more behavioural change than the fit analysis does.
Record the feature-management state of Support for material step consumption for Planning Optimization, Freezing time fence for Planning optimization and Lean manufacturing for Planning Optimization. Three switch states, written down, retire most of this article's ambiguity.
Check whether cross-entity planning is in scope. If it is, put the batch-chain design on the plan now.

About Cognilium Cognilium builds AI optimization apps for Microsoft Dynamics 365 — companion apps that optimize the pricing, inventory, warehouse and planning decisions your ERP manages but can't optimize. Dynamics is your system of record. Cognilium is your system of intelligence. https://cognilium.ai · https://www.linkedin.com/company/37180269/

The engine's scope is Microsoft's question. Which coverage policy, safety-stock level and netting rule you feed it is ours. Book a fifteen-minute call and we will walk your planning policy with you on your own data — no deck. https://cognilium.ai

What can Planning Optimization actually not do in 2026?