Faster is half the answer. Quality is the other half.

Velocity charts show speed. None show whether it cost you quality. Tetriz measures both, against your own baseline.

Cycle time · days to merge
Sample data
Non-AI
3.9d
AI
1.8d
71%
First-pass merge
9%
Rework rate
38% lower
Cost per PR
What changes

From it feels faster, to speed with the quality proof beside it.

Without Tetriz
  • Velocity dashboards with no quality check beside them
  • It feels faster, with nothing to compare it against
  • AI spend with no cost per outcome
✓ With Tetriz
  • Cycle time and review turnaround, benchmarked against the non-AI baseline
  • First-pass merge, rework and defects on AI-authored code
  • Dollar cost per merged PR, and the spend lost to rework loops
The frame

Only one quadrant is worth being in.

Fast and fragile is the trap. Two axes are the honest read, and Impact reports both.

QUALITYVELOCITY
Fast & sound

Where compounding happens.

Careful but slow

Safe, but leaves value on the table.

Fast & fragile

Looks good, breaks down later.

Slow & risky

Hard to improve from here.

Speed is not the part leaders doubt
0%

of engineering leaders report net-positive speed from AI

Tetriz research
0%

cite code review as the single biggest burden AI creates

Tetriz research
0%

are unsure they’re capturing the full impact of AI

Tetriz research
0×

growth in duplicated code

GitClear 2025
What it shows

Velocity, quality and cost, on the same page.

Velocity
Cycle time
2.1days
Down from 3.2, AI vs your non-AI baseline
Review turnaround
6.4h
Down from 11.2h
Agent-hours / merged PR
1.8
Outcome efficiency
One engineer to the whole org

From a single PR to company throughput.

How each engineer's AI-assisted work compares to their own baseline, rolled up to velocity and quality across every team, with the places quality slips surfaced early.

Contributor
Bruce Wayne
wayne-repo · 206 merged PRs
Hrs / PR
1.6
Revert
0%
Rework
8.1%
Shipping
206
merged PRs
1.6
hrs / PR
92%traced to a session
Quality
Defect
40.8%
Rework
8.1%
Revert
0%
Lower is better
Work-mix
Feature42%
Bug fix33%
Docs12%
Test5%
Other8%
Efficiency leaders
1
Bruce Wayne
hrs / PR · 206 PRs
1.2h
2
Selina Kyle
hrs / PR · 180 PRs
1.5h
3
Diana Prince
hrs / PR · 150 PRs
1.7h
FAQ

Questions leaders ask.

Your own pre-AI historical window, plus non-AI PRs shipped in the same period. Every impact number is relative to how your org actually worked, not an industry average.

DORA stops at deploy frequency and lead time. Impact adds first-pass merge rate, rework rate, and defects traced to specific AI sessions: the quality half DORA never captured.

OES is active agent-hours per merged PR, with rework cycles included, so a session that finished fast but needed three rewrites doesn’t read as efficient.

From outcomes, not source: first-pass merge rate, rework windows, defect linkage, and review turnaround. Tetriz stays read-only and never inspects your code.

Yes. Session-to-PR attribution links merged code back to the AI sessions that produced it, so AI and non-AI work are compared cleanly.

Impact includes per-unit economics: dollar cost per PR and token waste. The aggregate return lives on the AI ROI page.