AI adoption
How often developers use AI-assisted workflows across commits, pull requests, and changed code.
AI coding ROI
AI coding ROI is not the same as adoption. The real question is whether AI-assisted work becomes shipped product value with better quality, faster flow, and stronger developer impact.
Practical formula
A team can show high AI usage and still have negative ROI if the output creates rework, review queues, regressions, or low-value code. Good ROI appears when AI-assisted work improves shipped output and quality at the same time.
How often developers use AI-assisted workflows across commits, pull requests, and changed code.
Whether AI-assisted work becomes merged product logic, useful fixes, and completed features.
Whether generated or assisted code increases maintainability, review confidence, and defect resilience.
Whether AI reduces cycle time, review rounds, and rework instead of creating bottlenecks.
False positives
AI coding ROI measures whether spend on tools like Cursor, Claude Code, and Copilot converts into better shipped output, code quality, cycle time, and developer impact.
Usage only proves adoption. ROI requires downstream evidence that AI-assisted work improved delivery, quality, and efficiency after review and merge.
Useful AI coding ROI metrics include shipped output, first-pass merge rate, cycle time, review friction, code quality signals, and Developer Impact Index movement.
Deveval compares AI usage patterns with GitHub delivery and quality signals, then summarizes the result through reports and the Developer Impact Index.
Deveval connects AI usage, delivery, quality, and DII into a board-ready answer your team can act on.
Start free