Assessing and comparing national recovery and resilience plans is a particularly difficult exercise. Despite the Commission guidelines on how to draft the plans, these remain largely heterogeneous, hardly comparable and not easily accessible. This study proposes a methodological approach to compare and assess reforms and investments, based on their relevance, effectiveness and coherence, and applies it to six EU member states. The country profiles produced do not replicate the European Commission’s own evaluation exercise of each plan and they do not (only) describe the plans’ content. Rather they focus on the rationale behind interventions, thus enabling the reader to assess (at least in part) each plan with the information provided. This paper is a continuation of the CEPS series of assessments of national plans’ structural reforms and forms part of the CEPS Recovery and Resilience Reflection Project.