It doesn't show on the P&L. It shows up as a team that can't ship. Aevon automates the maintenance work and returns that capacity to the roadmap — or the bottom line.
Two weeks. No commitment. We show you exactly what's recoverable.
Engineering teams don't spend most of their time building. They spend it on dependency upgrades, end-of-life migrations, framework deprecations, broken builds, CVE patching, and tech debt.
It's invisible on the P&L because it's buried in headcount — but it's the single largest hidden cost in any software business.
"For a portfolio company with a $10M engineering budget, that's $4–6M a year producing no revenue and nothing on the roadmap."
That gap between what your engineering team costs and what it ships is the maintenance tax. Aevon measures it, automates it, and turns it into EBITDA.
We don't write a report and leave. We embed a forward-deployed engineering pod, build the automation that clears the maintenance backlog, and run it ongoing — with every change reviewed, validated, and provable.
We show you exactly how much engineering capacity each company loses to maintenance — in hours, dollars, and EBITDA basis points.
We ingest the company's history of past pull requests and build systems that handle upgrades, patching, and migrations the way this specific team already does — not generic tooling dropped in from outside.
We operate the system under a clear SLA. Every automated change is gated, reviewed, and audit-ready — clean for diligence and exit. The tax stays down as the codebase evolves.
What we build at one company gets reused at the next. The savings compound across the book, year over year.
This is not a cost-reduction exercise. It is growth capacity, unlocked without raising the cost base.
Every engineer-hour reclaimed from maintenance is margin you can underwrite, or capacity redeployed to revenue-generating product work.
Build once, deploy across the book. For a firm with 6–8 software assets, savings compound year over year — and new companies plug into an existing playbook.
Every change reviewed and provable. No black-box automation. Clean for diligence and exit from day one.
Forward-deployed pods, not a 12-month consulting engagement. We build and own the outcome — and the baseline on the first company is free.
We run the 90-day assessment identically across each company, using the same methodology, taxonomy, and measurement protocol. Outputs are structured to be comparable — a consistent view of where the opportunity is real, where it is not, and what capturing it would cost.
No. We embed inside the existing team and work against their existing systems and maintenance history. The 24 months of history already in the repository is the primary input. There is nothing to stand up before we start.
A structured view across engagements: growth capacity released, cost recaptured, and an operating blueprint per company. Metrics designed to sit alongside your existing board reporting, not replace it.
No. The engagement is available to any enterprise engineering organisation. The portfolio programme is for operating partners who want a consistent methodology across multiple companies — but the assessment and its output are identical for a standalone enterprise engagement.
We say so. An assessment that can only conclude yes is not an assessment. If the evidence does not support the investment at a given company, the report says so — and you have avoided a bad decision, which is the second-best outcome we can deliver.
Pick one portfolio company. We'll baseline its maintenance tax in two weeks at no cost — and show you what's recoverable in 90 days. If the numbers don't justify it, we walk away.
Request a free baseline →No commitment. Results in two weeks.