In my limited astrological experience
I think for one's *personal* natal chart, one can try different house systems and see which one resonates with lived *experience*. especially with the planets that change houses.
If a planet is in the 11th vs 12th house when using different houses systems, the significance of that planet and the manifestation in your life obviously leans one way or another,since these houses are quite different. (to assert the alternative is to say that house significances are interchangeable). The key, in my opinion, is to abandon the psychological interpretations - where interpretations for any planet in any house can be 'bent' trivially to fit anything and focus instead on actual observed life events and concrete predictions
In my case, when I use Whole Signs (I use a sidereal zodiac see below), Saturn is in the 12th in Taurus, ruling the 8th and 9th. And using Placidus he is in the 11th , in Taurus and ruling the (same as Whole Signs) 8th and 9th. so the only difference is the house location.
So I examined the events in my life when Saturn was prominent (return, angular transits, prominence in Solar Returns etc) and found that the Placidus houses fit best.
One *could* work with the Whole Sign system and get a valid explanation, but it was just a tiny bit more work. So I happily use Placidus to this day, for prediction, event analysis (as an impactful event actually manifests in life) and for horary.
. For horary, prediction etc, my approach is - when learning, use whatever house system the teacher uses, and for personal work, use whatever house system you are more comfortable with.
I have the same policy with zodiacs, which is another can of worms. While learning from a book or person, I use whatever the book or teacher is using,
most books, including Lilly and Morin which I'm studying now use the Tropical Zodiac, and for personal work, I use the system I'm comfortable with (in my case Fagan-Allen Sidereal Zodiac, and Placidus Houses)
To judge which zodiac system to use, I cast my chart and a dozen or so of friends-and-family charts, and examined the ascendant and its ruler and which signs they occupied and their dignities. Without exception, the Sidereal signs fit their body types and 'core self' descriptons better than the Tropical equivalents(I don't use 'ascendant as mask' and other new age notions).
Don't get me wrong, you *could* use the Tropical and do some extra analysis to explain all this tropically, but the Sidereal signs were a more obvious and easy fit.
Also when predicting events etc, (using Solar and Lunar returns) the Sidereal zodiac worked better with respect to timing *for me*.
Given these, I use the Sidereal Zodiac.
But on the other hand, Minderwiz uses Whole Sign houses and Tropical Zodiac and penetrates much better into the heart of a horary chart I am thoroughly confused by.
I have also seen expert astrologers here in India using Vedic techniques to make absolutely incredible predictions, to the point where it seemed more magic than astrology, and which would get me called crazy if I were to try explaining those in public, and all this leads me to conclude --
In the end, it is the astrologer and her skill and not so much the system in use.
So if were you, I wouldn't worry too much. Use what works for you and judge by the results only. Occasionally try explaining a particularly interesting charts in multiple house systems.
my 2 cents, and from my personal experience, I am *not* an astrology expert, and am still learning the basics, just saying what worked/works for me.