CASE STUDY · SAAS PLATFORM · MID-MARKET EU

We audited 10 repositories and catalogued 368 technical debt stories.

In 4 weeks, a facility-management SaaS went from intuition to a roadmap backed by 19,000 estimated hours.

How Raiport helped the technical team of a real-estate SaaS platform make roadmap decisions they could defend in front of their investment committee.

10
repositories
368
debt stories
~19k
estimated hours
4 wk
duration

The client

Real-estate asset management & facility management SaaS platform, European mid-market. In-house technical team after several years of scaling features and services.

Industry
SaaS · Facility management / Real estate
Size
Mid-market EU
Primary stack
.NET Core · React · TypeScript · Azure (AKS)
Volume
10 repositories (6 APIs + 4 web apps)

Why they called us

They needed an objective map of technical debt before making roadmap and investment decisions.

After several years of scaling features and services, the team had accumulated inherited technical decisions: modules without refactor, lagging dependencies, uneven coverage and an architectural pattern that no longer matched the pace of the business.

The committee was asking for a credible plan for the next technical investment cycle. The CTO didn't want to defend it with intuition. He needed numbers, priorities and an estimate that would hold up to scrutiny.

Agreed goals

  • Quantify technical debt objectively.
  • Prioritize what to fix first by impact and risk.
  • Estimate remediation effort with realistic factors, not optimistic ones.
  • Bring a defendable, data-backed roadmap to the committee.

How we audited it

We applied automated static analysis and our proprietary Software Reports framework over the 10 repositories.

Analysis tools

NDepend
SonarQube
ESLint
Madge

Frameworks applied

DORA Metrics
SQALE
Clean Code
ISO/IEC 25010

The process, week by week

  1. Week 1

    Discovery & inventory

    Mapping of all 10 repositories, dependencies, pipelines and environments. Scope agreement per service.

  2. Week 2

    Mass static analysis

    We ran NDepend, SonarQube, ESLint and Madge against the entire codebase. Collected cyclomatic complexity, coupling, coverage and pattern metrics.

  3. Week 3

    Cataloguing & prioritization

    We turned findings into 368 actionable stories. Categorized by complexity (simple · medium · complex) and prioritized by business impact and technical risk.

  4. Week 4

    Estimation & roadmap

    We applied documented adjustment factors to each story and built the quarterly roadmap. Final delivery of the interactive report and walkthrough with the committee.

What we found

368 technical debt stories catalogued, prioritized and estimated.

110
Simple stories

Localized changes, isolated refactors, blocked dependency upgrades. Low risk, measurable impact.

184
Medium stories

Structural refactors per module, coverage improvements, elimination of inherited patterns.

74
Complex stories

Cross-cutting architectural changes: separation of concerns, data migrations, redesign of critical subsystems.

~19,000 estimated remediation hours with documented adjustment factors (+81% accumulated technical debt, plus testing, documentation, coordination and contingency).

What the client got

01

Interactive HTML report

Each story with its evidence, source metric, estimated complexity and priority. Filterable by service and type.

02

Prioritized catalogue of 368 stories

Exportable to your tracker (Jira, Azure DevOps). Sprint-ready.

03

Estimate with adjustment factors

~19,000 hours, broken down by category. Defendable in committee.

04

Quarterly recommended roadmap

Prioritized sequence with dependencies and milestones. Aligned with business goals.

05

Team walkthrough session

Report walkthrough with CTO, tech leads and committee.

The outcome

Roadmap decisions backed by data, not by intuition.

  • Technical roadmap approved by committee with concrete effort and expected return figures.
  • Clear security and maintainability priorities from sprint one.
  • Quantitative baseline to measure progress on every release.
  • Clear justification to the investment committee for the next technical cycle.

We asked for a second opinion on the real state of our platform. We left with a 19,000-hour prioritized plan and a map we now use every sprint.

Platform CTO

Why Raiport and not just any audit

We audit with Software Reports, our proprietary framework. No generic templates, no 1,000-page PDFs nobody reads.

Proprietary framework

Software Reports is the analysis and reporting engine Appgile applies today to every Raiport assessment (code, modernization, risk). Same rigor, different scope.

Actionable stories, not dead PDFs

Every finding is delivered as a prioritized story ready for your backlog. Your team starts executing the week after closeout.

Estimates with real factors

We don't multiply by two at the end. We apply documented factors (debt, testing, coordination, contingency) so the figure holds up to a committee.

Same team can execute

If you decide to execute the roadmap, Appgile (the company behind Raiport) can take it on with continuity and AI-powered development.

FAQ

Does your platform need a map like this?

If your software has been in production for years, has more than a handful of repos, or you're about to raise — probably yes. Start with a free 30-minute session.

See Other Assessments