Seasonal malaria chemoprevention (SMC) has proven highly efficacious in reducing malaria incidence. However, the continued success of SMC is threatened by the spread of resistance against one of its main preventive ingredients, Sulfadoxine-Pyrimethamine (SP), operational challenges in delivery, and incomplete adherence to the regimens. Via a simulation study with an individual-based model of malaria dynamics, we provide quantitative evidence to assess long-acting injectables (LAIs) as potential alternatives to SMC. We explored the predicted impact of a range of novel preventive LAIs as a seasonal prevention tool in children aged three months to five years old during late-stage clinical trials and at implementation. LAIs were co-administered with a blood-stage clearing drug once at the beginning of the transmission season. We found the establishment of non-inferiority of LAIs to standard 3 or 4 rounds of SMC with SP-amodiaquine was challenging in clinical trial stages due to high intervention deployment coverage. However, our analysis of implementation settings where the achievable SMC coverage was much lower, show LAIs with fewer visits per season are potential suitable replacements to SMC. Suitability as a replacement with higher impact is possible if the duration of protection of LAIs covered the duration of the transmission season. Furthermore, optimising LAIs coverage and protective efficacy half-life via simulation analysis in settings with an SMC coverage of 60% revealed important trade-offs between protective efficacy decay and deployment coverage. Our analysis additionally highlights that for seasonal deployment for LAIs, it will be necessary to investigate the protective efficacy decay as early as possible during clinical development to ensure a well-informed candidate selection process.