Because of the different amounts of one-step calls and template applications performed at each iteration, it is hard to benchmark the search methods based on the search time. However, when focusing on the time it takes to find a solution, DFPN is clearly outperformed by MCTS and Retro*. This can also be seen in the average time to find the first solution in Table , where one can observe that DFPN is approximately 6 times slower than MCTS and Retro* in finding the first solution. Analyzing the predictions on the set-n5 routes, we find that for these targets, the algorithms are generally slower finding the first solutions than searches on the set-n1, indicating that these compounds are more complex.