Total Economic Impact

The Total Economic Impact™ Of Azul Platform Prime

Cost Savings And Business Benefits Enabled By Platform Prime

A FORRESTER TOTAL ECONOMIC IMPACT STUDY COMMISSIONED BY Azul, February 2026

[CONTENT]
 

Total Economic Impact

The Total Economic Impact™ Of Azul Platform Prime

A FORRESTER TOTAL ECONOMIC IMPACT STUDY COMMISSIONED BY Azul, February 2026

Cost Savings And Business Benefits Enabled By Platform Prime

Forrester Print Hero Background
M
K
[CONTENT]
[CONTENT]

Executive Summary

As cloud spend has exploded over the past several years, FinOps is now mainstream.1 In 2024, roughly 74% of cloud decision-makers said that their organization has either adopted or plans to adopt a FinOps practice in the next 12 months.2 These organizations are actively scrutinizing their public and private cloud spend and seeking ways to optimize or reduce it. While many organizations focus on standard FinOps practices such as waste elimination, commitment purchases, compute rightsizing, and storage tiering, few consider more performant Java infrastructure, including the Java virtual machine (JVM), as a lever for cost savings. Azul’s Platform Prime addresses this less obvious lever of improving Java performance and reducing costs.

Platform Prime is Azul’s high-performance Java platform that includes an enhanced build of Open Java Development Kit (OpenJDK). One of the key reasons high-volume Java applications have performance issues is that application processing is often paused to perform garbage collection and reclaim available heap memory by the JVM. Platform Prime replaces components inside the JVM, including the just-in-time (JIT) compiler and garbage collector with more optimized versions. It also addresses Java’s warm-up problem by reusing profiling and optimization data. By replacing these components, Platform Prime makes Java code warm up quickly to run faster, more consistently, and with lower latency. This improved Java application performance reduces the number of compute instances required, directly impacting cloud costs.

Azul commissioned Forrester Consulting to conduct a Total Economic Impact™ (TEI) study and examine the potential return on investment (ROI) enterprises may realize by deploying Platform Prime.3 The purpose of this study is to provide readers with a framework to evaluate the potential financial impact of Platform Prime on their organizations.

129%

Return on investment (ROI)

 

$5.7M

Net present value (NPV)

 

To better understand the benefits, costs, and risks associated with this investment, Forrester interviewed six decision-makers with experience using Platform Prime. For the purposes of this study, Forrester aggregated the experiences of the interviewees and combined the results into a single composite organization, which is an organization that runs 550 Java applications of which 80% run in the cloud and 20% on-premises in data centers.

Interviewees said that prior to using Platform Prime, their organizations used a mix of paid JDK and free JDK distributions and noted how their organizations struggled with common challenges, including high and unpredictable cloud compute costs and performance issues.

After the investment in Platform Prime, the interviewees said their organizations experienced a reduction in cloud compute costs, lower on-premises data center costs, and an improvement in the productivity of their performance engineers.

Key Findings

Quantified benefits. Three-year, risk-adjusted present value (PV) quantified benefits for the composite organization include:

  • Reduction in cloud compute costs. After implementing Platform Prime, the number of compute instances required for the composite organization to run its Java applications was reduced due to optimized JVM performance and lower CPU utilization. With an average of 80% of its Java applications running in the cloud, the reduction in cloud compute costs is worth nearly $4 million to the composite organization over three years.

  • Reduction in data center infrastructure costs. The decrease in instances required to run its Java applications due to optimized JVM performance also impacts the composite organization’s on-premises data center. The composite requires fewer servers to run the same workloads. With an average of 20% of its Java applications hosted on-premises, the reduction in data center infrastructure costs is worth $523,000 to the composite organization over three years.

  • Engineer FTE reallocation to higher-value work. After implementing Platform Prime, Java performance is more stable and predictable, resulting in fewer alerts and decreasing the time that performance engineers spend troubleshooting and performance turning. This reduction allows the composite organization to reallocate engineer FTEs to higher-level work. This efficiency is worth $5.7 million over three years.

Unquantified benefits. Benefits that provide value for the composite organization but are not quantified for this study include:

  • Impact on customer experience. Platform Prime’s improvement in Java runtime and performance improves the customer experience for the composite organization. Faster transactions, smoother interactions, and decreased wait times all result from the improved application performance from Platform Prime.

  • Prior JDK license cost savings for switching to both Platform Prime and Platform Core. Licensing fees savings for the composite organization are possible for the prior JDK if it switches to Azul’s Platform Prime and to Azul’s Platform Core product. Platform Core is an OpenJDK product line for applications that aren’t as performance sensitive or that drive high cloud costs and don’t require Platform Prime. The combined switch enables license savings if the composite organization migrates all of its Java infrastructure off its prior paid JDK.

Costs. Three-year, risk-adjusted PV costs for the composite organization include:

  • Azul license fees. Fees are based on the number of vCores running the Prime JVM. The cost for Platform Prime for the composite organization over three years is $3.6 million.

  • Internal costs for configuration and migration of applications. Developers spend on average 14 hours per application for configuration and migration. The cost to migrate all 550 of the composite’s applications over three years is $491,000.

  • Internal costs for ongoing maintenance. Performance engineers spend on average 32 hours per month maintaining JVM performance. The cost for this ongoing maintenance is $368,000 over three years.

The financial analysis that is based on the interviews found that a composite organization experiences benefits of $10.2 million over three years versus costs of $4.4 million, adding up to a net present value (NPV) of $5.7 million and an ROI of 129%.

“After migrating to Platform Prime, we saw a 30% reduction in the number of instances needed to process the same amount of information — resulting in substantial cost savings.”

Chief technology officer, gaming technology

Key Statistics

129%

Return on investment (ROI) 

$10.2M

Benefits PV 

$5.7M

Net present value (NPV) 

<6 months

Payback 

Benefits (Three-Year)

[CHART DIV CONTAINER]
Reduction in cloud compute costs Reduction in data center infrastructure costs Engineer FTE reallocation to higher-value work

The Azul Platform Prime Customer Journey

Drivers leading to the Platform Prime investment
Interviews
Role Industry Region
Chief information officer Financial services North America
VP, digital and data platforms Financial services North America
Senior manager, performance, resilience, and scalability Cloud-based software provider Global
Chief technology officer Gaming technology Global
Enterprise architect Technology digital services provider Global
Chief information and technology officer Public sector European Union
Key Challenges

Before implementing Platform Prime, interviewees used a mix of paid and free JDK distributions. Interviewees noted how their organizations struggled with common challenges, including:

  • High and unpredictable cloud compute costs. Organizations reported rising cloud costs due to inefficient JVM performance. Java services running on prior platforms consumed more CPU than expected, especially during garbage collection cycles. This unpredictability forced customers to overprovision resources and accept higher costs. The chief information officer at a financial services firm said: “We’re operating in a Java-heavy environment and have been migrating more workloads into AWS and Kubernetes. We could tell that even well-written Java services were consuming more CPU than expected, and we found that the standard OpenJDK runtime we were using wasn’t optimized for our needs. Auto-scaling ultimately spun up more pods, and that drove more cloud EC2 spend.”
    The VP of digital and data platforms at a financial services firm recognized that the cloud footprint would continue to increase as their company grew. They shared, “We recognized our growth trajectory meant that, without changes to our JVMs, cloud costs would continue to rise because every application we want to enhance or add would add incremental costs.”

  • Performance and latency issues. OpenJDK and other JVMs caused long pauses during garbage collection, especially for large heaps. Slow start-up and warm-up times for applications led to latency spikes and unpredictable performance during load surges, and applications behaved inconsistently under high load, causing intermittent slowdowns and SLA breaches.
    The senior manager for performance, resilience, and scalability at the cloud-based software provider said: “Before we moved to Azul Platform Prime, we were struggling with serious performance issues. Our in-memory database architecture required massive JVM heap sizes — sometimes up to 800 GB — and with OpenJDK using garbage-first garbage collector (G1GC) and parallel garbage collector (parallel GC), we were seeing full garbage collection pauses that lasted anywhere from 50 minutes to an hour. These delays weren’t just inconvenient — they directly impacted our customers, especially during critical operations like payroll processing. To keep things running, we had 20 to 30 engineers focused solely on mitigating GC-related disruptions. It was a huge operational burden.”
    The chief information officer at a financial services firm said: “Before, we were spending a disproportionate amount of engineering time managing performance volatility. The services were generally stable, but we saw frequent CPU spikes, latency issues, and garbage collection stalls. A lot of time went into manual runtime tuning — adjusting heap sizes, garbage collection types — which was not only time-consuming but also inconsistent across teams.”

  • High total cost of ownership. High cloud costs combined with performance issues’ impact on their organizations led interviewees to believe the total cost of operating applications under the prior platform was out of line. The chief information and technology officer in the public sector said: “Our main pain point is the total cost of ownership and budget monitoring — not just for the platform and tools we use but also for the impact on the underlying infrastructure and related IT services. That includes investments from my teams and money spent on managed service providers.”

“We were seeing increased CPU and GPU utilization, along with latency issues affecting both client-facing and employee-facing applications.”

VP, digital and data platforms, financial services

Composite Organization

Based on the interviews, Forrester constructed a TEI framework, a composite company, and an ROI analysis that illustrates the areas financially affected. The composite organization is representative of the interviewees’ organizations, and it is used to present the aggregate financial analysis in the next section. The composite organization has the following characteristics:

  • Description of composite. The composite organization runs Java applications in the cloud and in data centers on-premises. It has a total of 550 Java applications, of which 80% are run in the cloud and 20% are on-premises. The IT team includes 2,200 developers and 35 performance engineers dedicated to JVM maintenance.

  • Deployment characteristics. The composite organization begins migrating applications to Platform Prime in Year 1, following a three-month proof of concept (POC). In the first phase of the migration in Year 1, 40% of applications are migrated to Platform Prime. This scales to 70% of applications migrated in Year 2 and 100% in Year 3.

 KEY ASSUMPTIONS

  • 550 Java applications

  • 80% of Java applications run in cloud, 20% on-premises

  • 40% of applications migrated in Year 1, 70% in Year 2, and 100% in Year 3

  • 2,200 developers

  • 35 performance engineers dedicated to JVM performance maintenance

Analysis Of Benefits

Quantified benefit data as applied to the composite
Total Benefits
Ref. Benefit Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Total Present Value
Atr Reduction in cloud compute costs $1,227,353 $1,715,566 $1,917,493 $4,860,412 $3,974,239
Btr Reduction in data center infrastructure costs $187,110 $230,769 $216,128 $634,007 $523,198
Ctr Engineer FTE reallocation to higher-value work $1,439,424 $2,370,816 $3,175,200 $6,985,440 $5,653,494
  Total benefits (risk-adjusted) $2,853,887 $4,317,151 $5,308,821 $12,479,859 $10,150,931
Reduction In Cloud Compute Costs

Evidence and data. After interviewees’ organizations began migrating Java services to Platform Prime, they saw a reduction in their cloud costs. Platform Prime optimizes JVM performance and reduces CPU utilization and latency spikes. This means fewer compute instances are needed to process the same workload. The reductions interviewees saw in cloud costs ranged from 7% to 50%.

  • The chief information officer at a financial services firm said: “On the financial side, we saw improvements in runtime efficiency and overall optimization. Across some of our Java-heavy workloads, we observed a 7% to 10% reduction in total compute costs. In many cases, that translated to nearly seven figures in annual cloud spend savings. Given that our cloud spend is in the hundreds of millions, even partial migration has already resulted in multimillion-dollar annual reductions. We believe there’s still more savings to be realized as we continue the migration.”

  • The VP of digital and data platforms at a financial services firm said, “Through more efficient utilization of our Java applications, we’ve been able to reduce the number of physical and virtual servers in use, resulting in a 15% to 20% reduction in cloud costs.”

  • The chief information and technology officer at the public sector company described the reduction in costs in public and private cloud environments: “In public cloud or SaaS-like environments, we see improvements closer to 50%, while air-gapped private clouds are more around 20%, because those environments are less elastic. The reason for such a significant reduction in infrastructure cost is that compute resources are used far more efficiently. Each application runs more efficiently, consumes less, and can handle more transactions on the same hardware. That means that I need fewer resources to process the same workload.”

  • The VP of digital and data platforms at a financial services firm experienced long-term savings, even though Platform Prime’s upfront costs may be higher than those of other platforms. “While you’re spending more upfront on Azul Platform Prime compared to other platforms, it delivers savings by reducing the need to expand physical or virtual server footprint.”

Modeling and assumptions. Based on the interviews, Forrester assumes the following about the composite organization:

  • The composite organization has 550 Java applications.

  • The percentage of Java applications running in the cloud begins at 75% in Year 1 and increases 5 percentage points each year.

  • Cloud compute costs per Java application begin at $29,000 in Year 1 and decrease 7.5% each year.

  • The total cloud compute cost for Java applications before Platform Prime is just under $12 million per year.

  • The migration to Platform Prime and resulting reduction in cloud compute costs is achieved in three phases:

    • In phase 1, the composite migrates 40% of Java applications, resulting in a 27% reduction in cloud costs. In this initial phase, the most resource-intensive applications are migrated first, realizing the larger gains in cost reduction.
    • In phase 2, 30% of Java applications are migrated, and the composite realizes a reduction in cloud costs of 15%. In this phase, the gains begin to taper as the remaining applications are less resource-intensive.
    • In phase 3, the composite migrates the final 30% of Java applications, reducing cloud costs by 7%.

Risks. Forrester recognizes that these results may not be representative of all experiences. The following factors may impact this benefit:

  • The number of Java applications running in the cloud.

  • The size of the Java applications and the sequencing of the migration of larger Java applications.

Results. To account for these risks, Forrester adjusted this benefit downward by 5%, yielding a three-year, risk-adjusted total PV (discounted at 10%) of $4.0 million.

“We used to reserve roughly 20% to 30% of CPU capacity to guard against unpredictable JVM behavior. That extra buffer was necessary just to be safe. But with the move to Platform Prime, we’ve been able to cut a lot of that reserved CPU capacity, which is a pretty meaningful gain.”

Chief information officer, financial services

Reduction In Cloud Compute Costs
Ref. Metric Source Year 1 Year 2 Year 3
A1 Java applications Composite 550 550 550
A2 Percentage of Java applications in the cloud Composite 75% 80% 85%
A3 Cloud compute cost per Java application Composite $29,000 $26,825 $24,813
A4 Total cloud compute costs for Java applications before Platform Prime A1*A2*A3 $11,962,500 $11,803,000 $11,600,078
A5 Percentage of applications migrated to Platform Prime in phase 1 Composite 40% 40% 40%
A6 Reduction in cloud compute costs for applications migrated in phase 1 Interviews 27% 27% 27%
A7 Percentage of applications migrated to Platform Prime in phase 2 Composite   30% 30%
A8 Reduction in cloud compute costs for applications migrated in phase 2 Interviews   15% 15%
A9 Percentage of applications migrated to Platform Prime in phase 3 Composite     30%
A10 Reduction in cloud compute costs for applications migrated in phase 3 Interviews     7%
At Reduction in cloud compute costs (A4*A5*A6)+(A4*A7*A8)+(A4*A9*A10) $1,291,950 $1,805,859 $2,018,414
  Risk adjustment ↓5%      
Atr Reduction in cloud compute costs (risk-adjusted)   $1,227,353 $1,715,566 $1,917,493
Three-year total: $4,860,412 Three-year present value: $3,974,239
Reduction In Data Center Infrastructure Costs

Evidence and data. Interviewees’ organizations also reported a reduction in on-premises data center costs due to decreasing instance numbers. The reduced need for on-premises servers allowed the organizations to reallocate the hardware to other workloads.

  • The VP of digital and data platforms at a financial services firm said: “Although Azul Platform Prime primarily supports our cloud infrastructure, we also have physical servers on-premises that are integrated. As we optimize the cloud environment, those improvements extend to our on-prem architecture as well. This integration reduces the number of physical servers we need to maintain on-prem.”

  • The senior manager for performance, resilience, and scalability at the cloud software provider discussed savings benefits: “By using Azul Platform Prime in our private cloud, we’ve been able to reduce costs by about 3x. Its low-latency JVM lets us pack up to three times more customers onto the same machine compared to before, which makes a big difference in efficiency and scalability.”

  • The enterprise architect at the technology digital services provider described their capacity planning and their ability to decrease the number of servers required in their upcoming infrastructure refresh: “As we prepare for our infrastructure refresh next fiscal year, we’re planning for future capacity needs, and based on what we’re seeing, we anticipate using roughly 25% to 30% less capacity on these systems overall. There are some nuances here that aren’t directly related to Azul, but I’d estimate that about 15% of the reduction is directly tied to the optimizations Azul provides. That’s a significant impact for us.”

Modeling and assumptions. Based on the interviews, Forrester assumes the following about the composite organization:

  • The percentage of Java applications running on-premises begins at 25% in Year 1 and decreases 5 percentage points each year.

  • Data center infrastructure compute costs per Java application begin at $21,000 in Year 1 and decrease 7.5% each year.

  • The total data center infrastructure compute costs for Java applications before Platform Prime are $2.9 million in the first year, $2.1 million in the second year, and $1.5 million in the third.

  • The migration to Platform Prime and resulting reduction in on-premises compute costs are achieved in three phases:

    • In phase 1, 40% of Java applications are migrated, resulting in an 18% reduction in costs. In this first phase, the most resource-intensive applications are migrated first, realizing the larger gains in cost reduction.
    • In phase 2, 30% of Java applications are migrated, resulting in a reduction in costs of 16%. In this phase, the gains begin to taper as the remaining applications are less resource-intensive.
    • In phase 3, the remaining 30% of Java applications are migrated to Platform Prime, resulting in 14% savings on data center infrastructure costs.

Risks. Forrester recognizes that these results may not be representative of all experiences. The following factors may impact this benefit:

  • The number of Java applications running on-premises in the data center.

  • The size of the Java applications and the sequencing of the migration of larger Java applications.

Results. To account for these risks, Forrester adjusted this benefit downward by 10%, yielding a three-year, risk-adjusted total PV (discounted at 10%) of $523,000.

“Platform Prime has enabled us to reduce the number of servers in the data center, translating to significant infrastructure savings.”

Chief technology officer, gaming technology

Reduction In Data Center Infrastructure Costs
Ref. Metric Source Year 1 Year 2 Year 3
B1 Percentage of applications on-premises 100%-A2 25% 20% 15%
B2 Cost per application Composite $21,000 $19,425 $17,968
B3 Data center costs before Platform Prime A1*B1*B2 $2,887,500 $2,136,750 $1,482,360
B4 Percentage of applications migrated to Platform Prime in phase 1 A5 40% 40% 40%
B5 Reduction in data center costs for applications migrated in phase 1 Interviews 18% 18% 18%
B6 Percentage of applications migrated to Platform Prime in phase 2 A7   30% 30%
B7 Reduction in data center costs for applications migrated in phase 2 Interviews   16% 16%
B8 Percentage of applications migrated to Platform Prime in phase 3 A9     30%
B9 Reduction in data center costs for applications migrated in phase 3 Interviews     14%
Bt Reduction in data center infrastructure costs (B3*B4*B5)+(B3*B6*B7)+(B3*B8*B9) $207,900 $256,410 $240,142
  Risk adjustment 10%      
Btr Reduction in data center infrastructure costs (risk-adjusted)   $187,110 $230,769 $216,128
Three-year total: $634,007 Three-year present value: $523,198
Engineer FTE Reallocation To Higher-Value Work

Evidence and data. Before implementing Platform Prime, customers’ performance engineers spent a significant amount of time handling application performance issues and outages. This included mitigating GC-related disruptions, managing performance volatility, and conducting manual runtime tuning (i.e., adjusting heap sizes and garbage collection types). After implementing Platform Prime, the Java performance was more stable and predictable, resulting in fewer alerts and less time spent troubleshooting and performance turning. This reduction in the amount of time performance engineers spent handling performance issues allowed teams to reallocate engineer FTEs to higher-level work.

  • The senior manager of performance, resilience, and scalability at the cloud-based software provider noted a significant decrease in tickets: “Before migrating to Platform Prime, we were handling hundreds of support tickets related to performance issues and tenant outages. Since the migration, that number has dropped significantly. This dramatic reduction has eliminated the need for dedicated engineering teams to troubleshoot JVM-related problems, saving significant engineering hours and improving overall operational efficiency.”

  • The chief information officer at a financial services firm described the advantages of a more predictable system: “When you have a more predictable system — fewer alerts and stabilized scaling issues — you reduce the amount of troubleshooting required. Our platform engineers and [site reliability engineering] teams end up spending less time firefighting and more time focusing on productive, value-driven work like automation and observability improvements.”
    The executive went on to describe how performance monitoring was more effective with fewer triggered events: “When you’re looking at performance monitoring — like your application performance management dashboards — you can get a lot of noise. Tons of events pop up, and it takes time for teams to sift through them. If you reduce the number of events triggered by performance issues, you improve your signal-to-noise ratio. That means teams can respond to meaningful events faster and more effectively.”

Modeling and assumptions. Based on the interviews, Forrester assumes the following about the composite organization:

  • Thirty-five performance engineer FTEs are dedicated to maintaining JVM performance and mitigating disruptions and outages before Platform Prime, and they spend 80% of their time on these tasks.

  • After migrating to Platform Prime, the need to manage JVM performance issues decreases significantly, and performance engineers reduce their effort by 85% in Year 1 and by an additional 5 percentage points each subsequent year.

  • These savings are applied to the number of applications migrated over time. The percentage of applications migrated to Platform Prime in Year 1 is 40%. In Year 2, the percentage of migrated applications grows to 70%, and in Year 3, to 100%.

  • The fully burdened annual salary of an engineer FTE is $168,000.4

  • The reduced effort allows engineers to be reallocated to higher-value work.

Risks. Forrester recognizes that these results may not be representative of all experiences. The following factors may impact this benefit:

  • The frequency and complexity of performance issues, disruptions, and outages prior to deploying Platform Prime.

  • The size of the performance engineer team.

Results. To account for these risks, Forrester adjusted this benefit downward by 10%, yielding a three-year, risk-adjusted total PV (discounted at 10%) of $5.7 million.

“We had 30 to 40 engineers spending about 50% of their time each week just dealing with JVM operational issues. Now, JVM maintenance is handled by a single dedicated team, and it doesn’t take much time. Just two engineers manage JVM issues across all services, and they don’t even spend all their time on it.”

Senior manager, performance, resilience, and scalability, cloud-based software provider

Engineer FTE Reallocation To Higher-Value Work
Ref. Metric Source Year 1 Year 2 Year 3
C1 Developers supporting Java applications Composite 2,200 2,200 2,200
C2 Performance engineer FTEs dedicated to maintaining JVM performance and mitigating disruptions and outages before Platform Prime Composite 35 35 35
C3 Percentage of time spent on JVM tuning and performance optimization before Platform Prime Interviews 80% 80% 80%
C4 Reduction in engineer FTE effort maintaining JVM performance and mitigating disruptions and outages after Platform Prime Interviews 85% 80% 75%
C5 Percentage of applications migrated to Platform Prime A5 40% 70% 100%
C6 Fully burdened annual salary of an engineer FTE US Bureau of Labor Statistics $168,000 $168,000 $168,000
Ct Engineer FTE reallocation to higher-value work C2*C3*C4*C5*C6 $1,599,360 $2,634,240 $3,528,000
  Risk adjustment 10%      
Ctr Engineer FTE reallocation to higher-value work (risk-adjusted)   $1,439,424 $2,370,816 $3,175,200
Three-year total: $6,985,440 Three-year present value: $5,653,494
Unquantified Benefits

Interviewees mentioned the following additional benefits that their organizations experienced but were not able to quantify:

  • Impact on customer experience. The implementation of Platform Prime went beyond technical and financial metrics — it also impacted the customer experience. Faster transactions and smoother interactions resulted in improved application performance due to Platform Prime. The chief information officer at a financial services firm stated: “With the improvements we’ve made, transactions post faster, pages load quicker, and the overall experience just feels smoother. You’re getting faster response times, and that makes a noticeable difference in how the customer interacts with the platform.”
    At the gaming technology company, the chief technology officer said the lack of noticeable issues made a difference. They said, “The biggest impact on customer experience is what they don’t notice — no latency, no login issues, and no long waits for results.”
    The VP of digital and data platforms at the financial services firm cited faster foreign exchange transfers: “Platform Prime has led to faster transaction processing, which improves both customer experience and institutional performance. For example, in online banking, a customer conducting a foreign exchange transfer benefits from quicker execution — even if the difference is measured in nanoseconds.”

  • Prior JDK license cost savings for customers that switch to both Platform Prime and Platform Core. Some of the customers that switched to Azul’s Platform Prime also made a switch to Azul’s Platform Core product, which is an OpenJDK product line for less mission-critical applications that don’t require the advanced performance optimizations provided by Platform Prime. The combined switch has been instrumental in allowing these customers to migrate all of their Java infrastructure off their prior paid JDK, saving license costs in the process. The chief technology officer at a gaming technology company said, “Azul’s pricing was about 30% less per vCore per year, which was a significant cost improvement over our prior JDK.”
    The enterprise architect at the technology digital services provider said: “The prior JDK provider changed how they were going to be charging for their product. Thinking it was going to be a huge financial impact on our company, we started looking for alternatives, which led us to Azul.”

“I would just say by every measure, the adoption of Azul Platform Prime has been a tremendous success — one of the top five initiatives we’ve executed in the past three years.”

VP, digital and data platforms, financial services

Flexibility

The value of flexibility is unique to each customer. There are multiple scenarios in which a customer might implement Platform Prime and later realize additional uses and business opportunities, including:

  • Cost savings allow redeployment of capital. Cloud cost savings exceeded interviewees’ expectations, which opened up other opportunities. The VP of digital and data platforms at the financial services firm said:During the pilot phase, we saw a 10% to 12% improvement in cloud and application performance, which formed the baseline of our business case for investing in Platform Prime. However, actual results were up to 20%. This unexpected gain allowed us to redeploy capital beyond what we had planned.”

Flexibility would also be quantified when evaluated as part of a specific project (described in more detail in Total Economic Impact Approach).

Analysis Of Costs

Quantified cost data as applied to the composite
Total Costs
Ref. Cost Initial Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Total Present Value
Dtr Azul Platform Prime license fees $0 $1,437,500 $1,437,500 $1,437,500 $4,312,500 $3,574,850
Etr Internal costs for configuration and migration of applications $17,002 $216,770 $175,329 $175,329 $584,430 $490,693
Ftr Internal costs for ongoing maintenance $0 $147,840 $147,840 $147,840 $443,520 $367,656
  Total costs (risk-adjusted) $17,002 $1,802,110 $1,760,669 $1,760,669 $5,340,450 $4,433,199
Azul Platform Prime License Fees

Evidence and data. Interviewees reported that they partnered with Azul to conduct a formal pilot with Platform Prime that helped determine the associated license fees. Fees were based on the number of vCores required to run Java applications on the Azul Platform Prime JVM.

Modeling and assumptions. Based on the interviews, Forrester assumes the following about the composite organization:

  • Annual license fees for Platform Prime are $1,250,000.

  • Pricing may vary. Contact Azul for additional details.

Risks. Forrester recognizes that these results may not be representative of all experiences. The following factors may impact this benefit:

  • The complexity of the workloads being migrated.

Results. To account for these risks, Forrester adjusted this cost upward by 15%, yielding a three-year, risk-adjusted total PV (discounted at 10%) of $3.6 million.

“It’s not a flashy product, but in my view, it’s a high-ROI product. That’s what makes it worth considering.”

Chief information officer, financial services

Azul Platform Prime License Fees
Ref. Metric Source Initial Year 1 Year 2 Year 3
D1 Azul Platform Prime license fees Azul $0 $1,250,000 $1,250,000 $1,250,000
Dt Azul Platform Prime license fees D1 $0 $1,250,000 $1,250,000 $1,250,000
  Risk adjustment 15%        
Dtr Azul Platform Prime license fees (risk-adjusted)   $0 $1,437,500 $1,437,500 $1,437,500
Three-year total: $4,312,500 Three-year present value: $3,574,850
Internal Costs For Configuration And Migration Of Applications

Evidence and data. The interviewees’ organizations incurred internal costs for configuring and migrating their Java applications to Platform Prime. While many migrated applications required little or no code changes, developers had to validate compatibility for each application and perform testing.

Modeling and assumptions. Based on the interviews, Forrester assumes the following about the composite organization:

  • The composite migrates 40% of its applications by the end of Year 1, 70% by the end of Year 2, and 100% by the end of Year 3.

  • Developers invest a total of 14 hours per application in migration efforts.

  • The fully burdened hourly rate for a developer FTE is $69.5

Risks. Forrester recognizes that these results may not be representative of all experiences. The following factors may impact this benefit:

  • The size and complexity of the applications being migrated.

  • The experience and skill level of the developer FTEs.

Results. To account for these risks, Forrester adjusted this cost upward by 10%, yielding a three-year, risk-adjusted total PV (discounted at 10%) of $491,000.

Internal Costs For Configuration And Migration Of Applications
Ref. Metric Source Initial Year 1 Year 2 Year 3
E1 Applications migrated Composite 16 204 165 165
E2 Developer time spent per application on migration to Azul Platform Prime (hours) Composite 14 14 14 14
E3 Fully burdened hourly rate for a developer FTE US Bureau of Labor Statistics $69 $69 $69 $69
Et Internal costs for configuration and migration of applications E1*E2*E3 $15,456 $197,064 $159,390 $159,390
  Risk adjustment ↑10%        
Etr Internal costs for configuration and migration of applications (risk-adjusted)   $17,002 $216,770 $175,329 $175,329
Three-year total: $584,430 Three-year present value: $490,693
Internal Costs For Ongoing Maintenance

Evidence and data. At the organizations Forrester interviewed for this study, the JVM migration reduced the amount of time performance engineers spent maintaining JVM performance and mitigating disruptions and outages to a fraction of the effort before Platform Prime. However, performance engineers still needed to carry out certain tasks to ensure the smooth operation and performance of Java applications.

Modeling and assumptions. Based on the interviews, Forrester assumes the following about the composite organization:

  • The number of performance engineer FTEs dedicated to maintaining JVM performance and mitigating disruptions and outages after Platform Prime is 10% of what it was before Platform Prime.

  • The performance engineers spend 20% of their time on this effort.

  • The fully burdened annual rate for an engineer FTE is $168,000.

Risks. Forrester recognizes that these results may not be representative of all experiences. The following factors may impact this benefit:

  • The size and complexity of the organization’s applications.

  • The experience and skill level of its performance engineers.

Results. To account for these risks, Forrester adjusted this cost upward by 10%, yielding a three-year, risk-adjusted total PV (discounted at 10%) of $368,000.

Internal Costs For Ongoing Maintenance
Ref. Metric Source Initial Year 1 Year 2 Year 3
F1 Performance engineer FTEs dedicated to maintaining JVM performance and mitigating disruptions and outages C2*0.1   4 4 4
F2 Percentage of time spent on JVM tuning and performance optimization Composite   20% 20% 20%
F3 Fully burdened annual salary for an engineer FTE C6   $168,000 $168,000 $168,000
Ft Internal costs for ongoing maintenance F1*F2*F3   $134,400 $134,400 $134,400
  Risk adjustment ↑10%        
Ftr Internal costs for ongoing maintenance (risk-adjusted)   $0 $147,840 $147,840 $147,840
Three-year total: $443,520 Three-year present value: $367,656

Financial Summary

Consolidated Three-Year, Risk-Adjusted Metrics

Cash Flow Chart (Risk-Adjusted)

[CHART DIV CONTAINER]
Total costs Total benefits Cumulative net benefits Initial Year 1 Year 2 Year 3
Cash Flow Analysis (Risk-Adjusted)
  Initial Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Total Present Value
Total costs ($17,002) ($1,802,110) ($1,760,669) ($1,760,669) ($5,340,450) ($4,433,199)
Total benefits $0 $2,853,887 $4,317,151 $5,308,821 $12,479,859 $10,150,931
Net benefits ($17,002) $1,051,776 $2,556,482 $3,548,152 $7,139,409 $5,717,732
ROI           129%
Payback           <6 months

 Please Note

The financial results calculated in the Benefits and Costs sections can be used to determine the ROI, NPV, and payback period for the composite organization’s investment. Forrester assumes a yearly discount rate of 10% for this analysis.

These risk-adjusted ROI, NPV, and payback period values are determined by applying risk-adjustment factors to the unadjusted results in each Benefit and Cost section.

The initial investment column contains costs incurred at “time 0” or at the beginning of Year 1 that are not discounted. All other cash flows are discounted using the discount rate at the end of the year. PV calculations are calculated for each total cost and benefit estimate. NPV calculations in the summary tables are the sum of the initial investment and the discounted cash flows in each year. Sums and present value calculations of the Total Benefits, Total Costs, and Cash Flow tables may not exactly add up, as some rounding may occur.

From the information provided in the interviews, Forrester constructed a Total Economic Impact™ framework for those organizations considering an investment in Platform Prime.

The objective of the framework is to identify the cost, benefit, flexibility, and risk factors that affect the investment decision. Forrester took a multistep approach to evaluate the impact that Platform Prime can have on an organization.

Due Diligence

Interviewed Azul stakeholders and Forrester analysts to gather data relative to Platform Prime.

Interviews

Interviewed six decision-makers at organizations using Platform Prime to obtain data about costs, benefits, and risks.

Composite Organization

Designed a composite organization based on characteristics of the interviewees’ organizations.

Financial Model Framework

Constructed a financial model representative of the interviews using the TEI methodology and risk-adjusted the financial model based on issues and concerns of the interviewees.

Case Study

Employed four fundamental elements of TEI in modeling the investment impact: benefits, costs, flexibility, and risks. Given the increasing sophistication of ROI analyses related to IT investments, Forrester’s TEI methodology provides a complete picture of the total economic impact of purchase decisions. Please see Appendix A for additional information on the TEI methodology.

Total Economic Impact Approach
Benefits

Benefits represent the value the solution delivers to the business. The TEI methodology places equal weight on the measure of benefits and costs, allowing for a full examination of the solution’s effect on the entire organization.

Costs

Costs comprise all expenses necessary to deliver the proposed value, or benefits, of the solution. The methodology captures implementation and ongoing costs associated with the solution.

Flexibility

Flexibility represents the strategic value that can be obtained for some future additional investment building on top of the initial investment already made. The ability to capture that benefit has a PV that can be estimated.

Risks

Risks measure the uncertainty of benefit and cost estimates given: 1) the likelihood that estimates will meet original projections and 2) the likelihood that estimates will be tracked over time. TEI risk factors are based on “triangular distribution.”

Financial Terminology
Present value (PV)

The present or current value of (discounted) cost and benefit estimates given at an interest rate (the discount rate). The PVs of costs and benefits feed into the total NPV of cash flows.

Net present value (NPV)

The present or current value of (discounted) future net cash flows given an interest rate (the discount rate). A positive project NPV normally indicates that the investment should be made unless other projects have higher NPVs.

Return on investment (ROI)

A project’s expected return in percentage terms. ROI is calculated by dividing net benefits (benefits less costs) by costs.

Discount rate

The interest rate used in cash flow analysis to take into account the time value of money. Organizations typically use discount rates between 8% and 16%.

Payback

The breakeven point for an investment. This is the point in time at which net benefits (benefits minus costs) equal initial investment or cost.

Appendix A

Total Economic Impact

Total Economic Impact is a methodology developed by Forrester Research that enhances a company’s technology decision-making processes and assists solution providers in communicating their value proposition to clients. The TEI methodology helps companies demonstrate, justify, and realize the tangible value of business and technology initiatives to both senior management and other key stakeholders.

Appendix B

Supplemental Material

Related Forrester Research

Gauge Your FinOps Maturity, Forrester Research, Inc., April 14, 2023

What Technology Executives Need To Know: FinOps, Forrester Research, Inc., April 5, 2023

The Cloud Cost Management And Optimization Solutions Landscape, Q3 2025, Forrester Research, Inc., August 28, 2025

Make Plans Now For Major Changes To Oracle Java Licensing Costs, Forrester Research, Inc., March 17, 2023

Appendix C

Endnotes

1 Forrester defines FinOps as a practice dedicated to maximizing cloud value though technology-powered cloud optimization, process change, operational excellence, and cultural transformation to ensure IT financial responsibility around cloud investments.

2 Source: The Cloud Cost Management And Optimization Solutions Landscape, Q3 2025, Forrester Research, Inc., August 28, 2025.

3 Total Economic Impact is a methodology developed by Forrester Research that enhances a company’s technology decision-making processes and assists solution providers in communicating their value proposition to clients. The TEI methodology

4 US Bureau of Labor Statistics, 12/2/25

5 Ibid.

Disclosures

Readers should be aware of the following:

This study is commissioned by Azul and delivered by Forrester Consulting. It is not meant to be used as a competitive analysis.

Forrester makes no assumptions as to the potential ROI that other organizations will receive. Forrester strongly advises that readers use their own estimates within the framework provided in the study to determine the appropriateness of an investment in Platform Prime. For any interactive functionality, the intent is for the questions to solicit inputs specific to a prospect's business. Forrester believes that this analysis is representative of what companies may achieve with Platform Prime based on the inputs provided and any assumptions made. Forrester does not endorse Azul or its offerings. Although great care has been taken to ensure the accuracy and completeness of this model, Azul and Forrester Research are unable to accept any legal responsibility for any actions taken on the basis of the information contained herein. The interactive tool is provided ‘AS IS,’ and Forrester and Azul make no warranties of any kind.

Azul reviewed and provided feedback to Forrester, but Forrester maintains editorial control over the study and its findings and does not accept changes to the study that contradict Forrester’s findings or obscure the meaning of the study.

Azul provided the customer names for the interviews but did not participate in the interviews.

Consulting Team:

Lori Heckmann

Published

February 2026