Analysis Sponsor Readout
copperwick-cost-3-readout.pdf
The baseline, the savings ranked, what change control and the freezes allow, the decisions made at the readout, and the next four weeks.
Download PDF of Analysis Sponsor ReadoutSample case study · AWS cost analysis & optimization
Six weeks with Copperwick Therapeutics, Inc., a fictional mRNA medicines company with 48 AWS accounts in scope, eleven of them validated. The Analysis found $4,310,044 a year, net of Copperwick’s private pricing discount. Copperwick’s engineers put $2,526,309 of it in place before week six, and their Cost and Usage Report measured $2,401,346.This is the case for a regulated, validated environment, where change control and two freezes decide which savings can land in six weeks and which wait. The gate is three times the fee, $105,000 a year; the measured savings were 13.1% of the bill. It shows the method, not a typical result.
Copperwick Therapeutics, Inc. is a fictional company: every account, figure, program, and person on this page is simulated. The AWS prices are real list prices, retrieved October 13 and 17, 2026.

Copperwick Therapeutics, Inc. does not exist. We built it to show what this engagement produces for a regulated company: an AWS organization of 212 accounts, 48 of them in scope and eleven of those validated, an mRNA research platform, a clinical data environment, and manufacturing systems under 21 CFR Part 11, simulated resource by resource and priced at AWS list prices, with eleven Copperwick people who make the decisions real owners make. Then we ran the six-week Optimization against it, week by week, and wrote the reports.
Copperwick Therapeutics is fictional. Its people, programs, products, accounts, and figures are invented for this sample, and any resemblance to a real company, person, program, or medicine is coincidental. The eight reports are the real deliverables, written the way we write them for a client, and they agree with each other to the dollar because every figure comes from one deterministic simulation. The engagement is dated February 23 to April 2, 2026, and priced at the AWS list prices retrieved October 13 and 17, 2026. Our clients’ bills stay confidential, so this is how we can show you every page.
Copperwick’s in-scope AWS bill went from $1,318,400 a month in February 2025 to $1,589,100 in January 2026, as the machine learning team took on p4d training instances and cryo-EM processing moved to AWS. The board asked for a cost review before the fiscal 2027 budget and before the private pricing agreement comes up for renewal in mid-2027. The CIO wanted an outside view of research computing.
The head of quality wanted something else: assurance that a cost project would not put a validated system out of its validated state. So the engagement started with her rules, and every finding carried a class that said what it takes to change it. Adaeze Whitfield signed the six-week Optimization, Grace Mbeki led it day to day, Rafael Quintero made the purchase decision, and Dr. Lorraine Osei decided what could change in a validated system, and when.
Each week ended with a report, and every report is below. The dates in each week are the engagement’s own, and two freezes, the clinical freeze and a manufacturing campaign, shaped weeks three to six.
The read-only role went into all 48 accounts on Tuesday, February 24, through Copperwick’s own StackSets pipeline. In the validated and qualified accounts, deploying it was itself a GxP standard change: Dr. Osei approved it, and a QA delegate in Computerized Systems Quality signed the notice to QA that day. The supplier assessment (Thursday, February 12) and the access approval (Thursday, February 19) had both been done before kickoff. Twelve months of the Cost and Usage Report came with it, tied to each month’s invoice. The bill had stepped up with the science: $1,318,400 to $1,589,100 a month, mostly from a p4d training fleet and cryo-EM processing moving to AWS.
Some of the estate was already well run, and the baseline said so: a fully used three-year Compute Savings Plan at $150 an hour, Direct Connect ports sized to the instrument uploads they carry, and an EKS research platform already on Karpenter, Spot, and Graviton. None of that became a finding. The week’s most important output was Dr. Osei’s four ground rules, agreed with Daniel Achterberg at kickoff, which are set out below and which every later finding carries.
The calendar. Kickoff on Monday, February 23; read-only access on Tuesday; the finance session with Rafael Quintero on the private pricing agreement on Wednesday; the freeze calendars from Ines Halvorsen and Daniel Achterberg on Thursday; the baseline report on Friday, February 27.
Every saving was priced in a fixed order, so nothing was counted twice: 36 findings, priced as 41 changes in 48 accounts, $4,310,044 a year net of the discount, 23.5% of the $18,315,196 in-scope bill ($4,585,154 at list). Fifteen of the 41 changes touch validated or qualified systems, and the Analysis said where each one stood before anyone asked.
The savings review on Thursday, March 5, put every change in front of its owner and QA, and the owners decided at the table. They approved 37 of the 41 changes, $3,873,926 a year net, and declined four, $436,118. Copperwick’s team had also watched the GxP change advisory board meet on March 3, to learn the evidence the board asks for.
Decisions at the readout. The roadmap, finding by finding; the four declined changes and their reasons; the thirteen approved changes that wait on an event their owners named; and the commitment decision, set for Thursday, March 19. The sponsor readout was Friday, March 6.
19 changes went in, 18 of them counted at $1,796,936 a year net, 9.8% of the bill: waste removed under a register the owners signed, an idle p4d.24xlarge released and SageMaker GPU notebooks stopped when idle, non-production schedules, gp2 volumes moved to gp3 in the research accounts, S3 gateway endpoints, and lifecycle rules on the data lake. The tar job for the oldest sequencer runs ran March 9 to 12. On Thursday, March 12, gp2 to gp3 went onto the GMP systems before their freeze began, as a GxP standard change with an executed installation checklist and notice to QA; the log-retention and Config changes, L-2 and L-3, went into qualified accounts the same way.
S3-4 went in too, but objects move tiers only after 30 days without access, so nothing can be measured before week six. It counts nothing toward the gate, and its first measurement window opens May 11. One change came out: L-4 would have limited CloudTrail data events on research buckets to writes, and Rosalind Tran, the Chief Information Security Officer, reversed it on Wednesday, March 11, before it was applied, because the read events feed the insider-risk detection for sequence designs. The statement of work counts a change approved at the readout and reversed later at its estimate, $35,194 a year, so the guarantee cannot be met by approving a change and never making it.
The calendar. Program Basalt’s database lock was Friday, March 13, and the clinical freeze had been in force since March 2: no change touched a system inside it.
Four changes worth $729,373 a year net, which brought the total in place to 22 changes and $2,526,309 a year at their estimates, 13.8% of the bill, before anything was measured. The genomics Batch pipelines moved to Spot on Monday, March 16, but only after the price table showed that the On-Demand instance type they had been using saved too little on Spot to justify the interruptions: the new environments draw from a cheaper instance type, with the type they run on today as a second pool, and the estimate prices every Spot hour at the cheaper type’s mean and adds an allowance for retried work. The genomics Lustre file system had been provisioned at 64 TiB and 1,000 MB/s per TiB for a peak that never came: its 90-day peak was 14.8 GB/s, and the replacement is 48 TiB at 500 MB/s per TiB (24 GB/s), above the peak. The next step down would have sat below it, so it was rejected.
On Tuesday, March 17, the GxP change advisory board approved a weekday schedule on the GMP validation environments, which hold no GxP records, and it ran in the release window on Thursday, March 19. On Thursday, March 19, Rafael Quintero, with Adaeze Whitfield, approved a one-year No Upfront Compute Savings Plan at $50 an hour, bought that afternoon in cw-cicd, a member of the sharing group Copperwick limited to the 48 in-scope accounts. It saves $148,682 a year. The existing three-year plan stays fully used after every change, deferred ones included, which is what sized the new one; a three-year plan waits for the 2027 renewal, and the p4d plan was declined at the readout.
The calendar. The GMP campaign freeze began Monday, March 16, for three clinical-supply batches, and none of the week’s changes touches a system inside it. The board met Tuesday, March 17; the commitment was decided Thursday, March 19.
No savings were counted this week, by design, because every counted change was already in place. What went in was the nine guardrails, GR-1 to GR-9, each with one owner and built as code: a VPC template with S3 gateway endpoints, a service control policy that refuses new gp2 volumes, Spot-by-default Batch environments, log retention in the account baseline, a throughput review before any new Lustre file system, idle-GPU alarms, notebook auto-stop as an account default, and budgets and anomaly monitors for each account family. One more document set the rule for data: the data-class lifecycle standard says where each kind of data may be stored and who may change it, co-signed by Dr. Osei for its GxP class. No guardrail shortens the retention of a GxP record.
The guardrails could not go everywhere on day one, and the week shows why. They went into 32 accounts first, six of them qualified, where each went in as a GxP standard change with notice to QA. The GMP freeze ran until Friday, March 27, so the nine GMP and quality accounts get theirs on Monday, March 30, as a standard change with notice to QA; the seven clinical accounts wait for topline and get theirs on Monday, April 27. The deferred validated-system changes went to the board on Tuesday, March 24, each with its validation impact assessment.
The calendar. The GMP freeze ended Friday, March 27; the clinical freeze ran to Friday, April 24, topline. The board voted on the last two change requests on Tuesday, March 31.
Every change was measured on the Cost and Usage Report the same way: the cost of the changed resources over the seven days before the change against the seven days after it, annualized, at public On-Demand prices, so the Savings Plans are never counted twice, and then net of the private pricing discount, applied once. Spot is measured at the Spot price paid, and the two volume-driven changes are measured per genome processed, so a slow lab week cannot read as a saving. 22 changes measured $2,401,346 a year net, 95.1% of the $2,526,309 estimated for them, and every miss is published at its measured value. Six measured at their estimate, ten came within 91% to 100% of it, and four came in below 90%: S-1, S-3a, W-4, and EF-1. Scientists overrode workstation auto-stop during a structure campaign (S-1), an executed qualification protocol held a validation environment on for several nights (S-3a), snapshots share blocks so deleting one freed less than the estimate used (W-4), and less data moved to Infrequent Access than estimated (EF-1). Two beat their estimates, C-1 and W-1: the Savings Plan covered more usage than its estimate priced, and the snapshots owners kept bill written blocks only.
The handover gave every remaining change an owner and a date, and set the first monthly cost review for Thursday, May 14. The second invoice, $17,500, was issued with the measurement report, so Copperwick paid $35,000 in total.
The calendar. Measurement on Wednesday, April 1, from the Cost and Usage Report through March 30; the closing readout on Thursday, April 2, because Good Friday, April 3, is a company holiday.
Half the fee rode on one number: annualized savings in place at week six, measured on Copperwick’s own Cost and Usage Report, of at least three times the fee. Every figure here is net of the private pricing discount, the basis the next section explains. Each step from estimate to measurement is in the reports.
a year net across 36 findings priced as 41 changes, 23.5% of the in-scope bill, priced in week two.
a year at estimate, in 22 changes their owners approved and Copperwick’s engineers applied: 13.8% of the bill.
a year across those 22 changes: 13.1% of the bill and 95.1% of their estimate, every miss included.
Counted toward the gate: $2,436,540 a year, the measured $2,401,346 plus $35,194 for the one change approved at the readout and reversed later. That clears the $105,000 gate by $2,331,540, and it still clears it without the reversed change. Counted, it is 69.6 times the $35,000 fee. Copperwick paid $35,000 in total, because the Analysis is the Optimization’s first two weeks. The measured savings repay it in about 5 days and net $2,366,346 in the first year. The counted figure decides the gate only.
Still to come: $1,192,737 a year across thirteen changes that are approved and scheduled, each with an owner and a date, and $436,118 a year across four that were declined and can be reopened. S3-4 is in place and worth $119,686 a year, but it cannot be measured yet. Once the deferred changes land, the savings run at $3,713,769 a year, 20.3% of the week-one bill. The Analysis identified 23.5% of the bill and the engagement measured 13.1%. The difference is what validation and the calendar kept out of six weeks, and the next two sections say where each dollar of it went.
Want this gate on your own organization?
Book a call about the OptimizationCopperwick has a three-year private pricing agreement with AWS, from July 1, 2024 to June 30, 2027: a flat 6% discount on eligible usage and a $27.0 million a year commitment, net of the discount. At this scale an agreement almost certainly exists, so the engagement prices around it instead of pretending it is not there.
Findings are priced at AWS list prices, as the other sample clients’ are, and then stated net of the discount, because the discount is part of what the bill falls by: a saving at list is smaller on Copperwick’s invoice by exactly that percentage. The gate is measured the same way. For each change, the Cost and Usage Report gives the public On-Demand cost of the changed resources before and after, the result is multiplied once by one minus the discount, and the Savings Plans are measured separately by their own identifiers, so none of the three is counted twice. The result at list prices is shown only as context, and it is always labeled as list.
The agreement also had to survive the roadmap. Copperwick’s whole organization spends about $3.1 million a month at list across 212 accounts, 48 of them in scope for this engagement, and the full roadmap would still leave it about $30.7 million a year net against the $27.0 million commitment, $3.7 million above it. The roadmap does not strand the agreement, and the existing three-year Compute Savings Plan at $150 an hour stays fully used after every change.
What Copperwick’s bill actually falls by, a year: 13.1% of the in-scope bill.
Context only. The share of the bill is the same on either basis.
The measured savings plus the reversed change at its estimate: the figure that decides the gate.
A year of spend left above the $27.0 million commitment with every change landed.
Copperwick validates its GxP computerized systems under 21 CFR Part 11 and GAMP 5, using risk-based computer software assurance for testing, and the cloud platform underneath is qualified infrastructure. A cost project has no business making a validated system less validated, so Dr. Osei set four rules at kickoff, and every one of the 41 changes carries the class they give it.
Accounts that are neither validated nor qualified change through the platform team’s normal process. Most of the savings, and nearly all of the first four weeks, are here.
A pre-approved change type in the qualified infrastructure catalog: like-for-like, reversible, with no effect on a GxP function. It needs a ticket, an executed installation checklist, and notice to QA, not a new validation. gp2 to gp3 on a validated server is one, and so is a log or Config change in a qualified account.
A validation impact assessment, risk-based testing, QA approval, a vote of the GxP change advisory board, which meets on Tuesdays, and a release window. A database resize, a storage-class change on GxP records, or a new network path is one.
A freeze stops every change in its scope, with no exception for cost: the clinical freeze from March 2 through topline on April 24, around Program Basalt’s database lock on March 13, and the GMP campaign freeze from March 16 to 27.
$709,873 a year net. The validated systems are 8.7% of the bill, so a small share of the savings lives here, and the reports say so instead of inflating it.
$190,678 a year: three standard changes and one change request the board approved on March 17. The readout approved five to proceed, $225,872 a year; the fifth, L-4, was reversed.
$349,550 a year, each on a freeze, a change request, or a release window, with an owner and a date.
$134,451 a year, and the owners gave their reasons. L-4, approved and then reversed, is a further $35,194.
All counted toward the gate, and each took the route its class requires.
The validation environments hold no GxP records, and no freeze covers them. The board approved the change on Tuesday, March 17, and it ran in the next release window.
In place. Thursday, March 19.
An online volume change with the same or better performance, reversible, with no effect on a GxP function: an executed installation checklist and notice to QA, and no new validation. It went in before the GMP freeze began.
In place. Thursday, March 12.
A positive list names the research log groups that move to a shorter retention, so every GxP audit log keeps its SOP retention. A standard change in a qualified account, with notice to QA.
In place. Tuesday, March 10.
A standard change in a qualified account, with notice to QA: Config tracks the resources that churn all day once a day instead of on every change, in the research accounts only.
In place. Wednesday, March 11.
None was in place by April 2, so none counts toward the gate. Each waits for something Copperwick’s quality system requires, and none is a decision to skip it.
The clinical freeze runs through Program Basalt’s database lock and topline on April 24. After topline it goes to the board as a change request, voted Tuesday, April 7.
Target. April 27.
The post-topline analyses for the clinical study report are the grid’s busiest weeks, so the cut waits for them. Then it goes to the board as a change request, after a scripted operational qualification regression in the SCE validation environment.
Target. June 22.
The clinical systems follow topline, as a GxP standard change with no board vote.
Target. April 27.
An instance-type change is a revalidation under the biomarker pipelines’ validation plan, so it waits for their revalidation.
Target. May 11.
It rides on the next release of the system, with a regression of its operational qualification and a month-end performance test.
Target. May 18.
It waits for the system’s maintenance window after the GMP campaign and the annual periodic review.
Target. June 15.
A new network path is a change request. The board approved it on Tuesday, March 31, for execution on April 14.
Target. April 14.
A storage-class change on GxP records, so it carries a documented retrieval test. The board approved it on Tuesday, March 31, for execution on April 14, and the records keep their retention and their lock.
Target. April 14.
Each is a fact about a validated system that the Analysis did not have. We did not push.
“The CDR feeds unblinding. Nobody touches it until topline, and after topline it grows for the integrated summaries.”
Revisit. In the fall, after the integrated summaries.
Dr. Osei declined it. The val environments’ performance qualification includes failover tests, and val must match production’s configuration.
Revisit. Not revisited: the val configuration must match production.
The statement of work counts a change approved at the readout and reversed later at its estimate, so this one is in the gate math and was never made.
Rosalind Tran, the Chief Information Security Officer, reversed the change on Wednesday, March 11, before it was applied. The read events on research buckets feed the insider-risk detection for sequence designs, and she weighed that detection above the saving. Read and write events stay on for every research and GxP bucket.
Revisit. Not revisited: the detection it feeds stays.
Records keep their retention. No finding deletes, shortens, or weakens a GxP record, an audit trail, or a backup of a validated system. GxP buckets keep Object Lock and versioning, their CloudTrail data events and log groups keep the retention their procedures set, and snapshots in validated accounts stay out of the waste work. Research data carries retention obligations too, so the lifecycle findings move it to colder storage and never out of retention.
A guarantee that counted only the changes owners agreed to would be easy to meet, so the reports show every call, with the owner who made it and the reason. The validated-system changes are in the section above; these are the rest. In all, thirteen approved changes wait and four were declined, one more was reversed after the readout (in the section above), and one purchase was made.
Copperwick already held a three-year Compute Savings Plan. Finance decided on March 19, and Copperwick’s finance team made the purchase in cw-cicd, a member of the sharing group limited to the in-scope accounts. Vantalect buys nothing.
Sized on the compute floor that remains after every deferred change, inside the sharing group, so the existing three-year plan and this one both stay fully used. A three-year plan waits for the renewal: “I’m not locking three years a year before I renegotiate the agreement.”
Decided. Thursday, March 19, by Rafael Quintero with Adaeze Whitfield.
An owner said no, with a reason, and the decision is on the record. Each can be reopened. The other two declined changes, $134,451 a year together, are in the validated-systems section.
The training fleet moves to a newer accelerator within the year, and a family-locked plan would strand.
Revisit. When the new accelerator is chosen.
“One zone means a third of the Spot pools. I’d rather pay the cross-AZ toll than eat interruptions.”
Revisit. If Spot interruptions in the zone fall.
Each is approved, owned, and dated. None was in place by April 2, so none counts toward the gate. All five wait on research work, not on change control: a campaign calendar, a benchmark, a disaster-recovery test, and a job’s second pass.
A workflow change for the cryo-EM team that cannot happen in the middle of a collection campaign. It waits for the next one.
Target. April 6.
It is scheduled with B-3, for the same reason.
Target. April 6.
Throughput per vCPU on Copperwick’s own systems is unproven, so the move waits for the benchmark.
Target. April 20.
The tar job’s second pass sets the pace: its capacity, not a decision.
Target. April 20.
The change alters the research data’s recovery time in the disaster-recovery plan, so it waits for the disaster-recovery test. The GxP replicas are unchanged.
Target. April 21.
Distinct from deferred: the change is made, and nothing can be measured yet.
Objects move tiers only after 30 days without access, so nothing can be measured before week six. It counts nothing toward the gate and is reported on its own.
First measurable. The seven days from May 11.
Copperwick’s 2026 plan adds about $260,000 a month to the in-scope bill by March 2027: a long-read sequencing core in June, a second cryo-EM microscope in August, Feldspar’s Phase 2 biomarker work, and ML growth. The patterns that produced this engagement’s savings are the ones that would recur in that growth, in new Batch environments, instrument buckets, file systems, GPUs, and logs.
The nine guardrails built in week five are what keep them from recurring, so the range is what they are worth against the planned growth: 8% to 13% of it.
It is a model, not a measurement. Nothing in it has happened, none of it is on the bill, and none of it counts toward the gate or was used to clear it. There is no “before” on the Cost and Usage Report for a workload that does not exist yet.
At the planned run rate, $20,800 to $33,800 a month. A planning range on growth still to come: not measured, not counted toward the gate, and not a saving on the bill.
Cost avoidance is a forecast of a bill that has not happened, so it sits apart from the gate on purpose. The gate counts savings on the bill, measured on Copperwick’s own Cost and Usage Report, and nothing else: $2,436,540 a year, with none of this in it.
The engagement ran in a Pavilion workspace, created from the Optimization’s template with every week, session, deliverable, and obligation already in place, on Copperwick’s calendar and in its time zone. The sponsor, finance, quality, the platform lead, and the workload owners joined it, and Charles.
After each session the transcript came into the workspace, and an agent drafted the summary, the decisions taken, the action items, and a digest for the people who were not in the room, each claim citing the part of the transcript it came from. Charles reviewed every draft before Copperwick saw it. Every report was published there as an immutable, hashed version, and Adaeze Whitfield accepted each one against that version.
Copperwick’s demonstration workspace is still being written, so this page describes the workspace in words and counts nothing in it.

When the clinical freeze held the statistical computing and clinical data systems until topline, each deferred change kept its condition, its owner, and a task dated April 27, so anyone reading the roadmap later finds the reason beside the line.
A validated-system change is not a ticket. The workspace keeps its class, the board date it was taken to, the impact assessment, and QA’s decision together, so the record shows the route as well as the result.
The Savings Plan was approved by Rafael Quintero and bought by Copperwick’s finance team. Vantalect holds no write access and buys nothing, and the record shows which side did what.
Rosalind Tran’s reversal of the CloudTrail change is recorded as approved and then reversed, with her reason, so when the sponsor accepted the measurement, the reason for the $35,194 line was a click away.
The engagement’s last tasks hand the roadmap to Copperwick: every remaining change with an owner and a date, and the first monthly cost review on Thursday, May 14. Then the workspace closed.
Nine PDFs and 237 pages. Start with the readout; the reading guide shows how the rest fit together. Then read the weeks in order and you have the engagement the way Copperwick’s sponsor did. Each one is tagged for screen readers, and each says on its cover that Copperwick is fictional.
Written for the sponsor, and the one to read if you read nothing else: the baseline, the savings ranked, what change control and the two freezes allow, the decisions made at the readout, and the plan for the next four weeks.
copperwick-cost-3-readout.pdf
The baseline, the savings ranked, what change control and the freezes allow, the decisions made at the readout, and the next four weeks.
Download PDF of Analysis Sponsor ReadoutThe full analysis behind the readout: the waste register, the rightsizing plan, the commitment plan, and the ranked savings roadmap, with each change’s GxP class and the prescriptive change for it.
copperwick-cost-2-analysis.pdf
Thirty-six findings priced as 41 changes from the AWS price list, each classed by its GxP change path, ranked, and given a prescriptive change.
Download PDF of Cost Analysis and Savings RoadmapThe reading guide first, then what each week delivered, in order.
copperwick-0-guide.pdf
Who Copperwick Therapeutics is, what each of the eight sample cost reports delivers, what the engagement found and fixed in a research estate with GxP-validated systems, and what is real and what is simulated.
Download PDF of Sample Engagement Reportscopperwick-cost-1-baseline.pdf
Twelve months of Copperwick’s in-scope AWS spend, the February run rate by service, account family, and owner, the GxP ground rules, the freeze calendar, and the private pricing agreement.
Download PDF of Spend Baseline and Inventorycopperwick-cost-4-quick-wins.pdf
Waste removed, idle GPUs stopped, schedules, gp3, gateway endpoints, logging, and the data lake, change by change, and the one change the CISO reversed.
Download PDF of Quick Wins Appliedcopperwick-cost-5-rightsizing-commitments.pdf
Spot for genomics, the Lustre cutover, the GxP val schedule, and the commitment decision finance approved, sized around the private pricing agreement.
Download PDF of Rightsizing and Commitmentscopperwick-cost-6-architecture-guardrails.pdf
Nine guardrails, the data-class lifecycle standard, the deferred GxP change requests, and the cost-avoidance model for planned growth.
Download PDF of Architecture Changes and Guardrailscopperwick-cost-7-measurement.pdf
Every change measured on Copperwick’s Cost and Usage Report, net of the private pricing discount, annualized, and the guarantee’s gate.
Download PDF of Week-Six Savings Measurementcopperwick-cost-8-handover.pdf
The remaining roadmap with owners and dates, the GxP change-request calendar, the commitment plan for the 2027 renewal, the monthly cost review, and the guardrail register.
Download PDF of Handover Playbook and Monthly Cost ReviewThe same six weeks and the same gate, on your own Cost and Usage Report, validated systems or not.

The Analysis and the Optimization: the baseline, the waste register, and the roadmap in two weeks, then the savings put in place and measured, with half the fee riding on the result.
Read the engagement
A fictional robot maker with 48 accounts and a $55.7 million bill: $23.5 million a year identified, and $9.4 million measured on its own Cost and Usage Report.
Read the case study
A fictional ticket exchange in the middle of a migration, with a bill of about $50,000 a month: $246,839 a year identified, and $148,967 measured on its own Cost and Usage Report.
Read the case studyTell us roughly what the bill is, which of your systems are validated, and what prompted the question. You will hear back from Charles within one business day, and the first call is fifteen minutes.
AWS, Amazon Web Services, AWS Graviton, and the AWS service names are trademarks of Amazon.com, Inc. or its affiliates. Vantalect is not affiliated with or endorsed by Amazon. Copperwick Therapeutics, Inc. and every person named on this page are fictional.