[CONTENT]
$
USD
Total Economic Impact
Cost Savings And Business Benefits Enabled By OutSystems
A FORRESTER TOTAL ECONOMIC IMPACT STUDY COMMISSIONED BY OutSystems, NOVEMBER 2025
Total Economic Impact
A FORRESTER TOTAL ECONOMIC IMPACT STUDY COMMISSIONED BY OutSystems, NOVEMBER 2025
Organizations today face growing pressure to deliver AI-powered digital solutions faster, with greater agility and responsiveness to change. Fragmented tooling, legacy systems, and inconsistent development practices amplify this challenge for organizations. OutSystems can help enterprises overcome these constraints by enabling rapid delivery of custom applications and agents, improving developer productivity, and fostering tighter alignment between business and IT — all while accelerating innovation and time to value.
OutSystems is an AI-powered, low-code development platform that helps technology leaders build mission-critical applications and agentic systems that grow revenue, streamline operations, and deliver business needs. The platform’s AI-driven development experience enables lean IT teams to innovate faster, build applications and agents quicker, reduce reliance on specialized resources, and improve time to value for business stakeholders with the assurance of built-in security, scalability, and governance.
OutSystems commissioned Forrester Consulting to conduct a Total Economic Impact™ (TEI) study and examine the potential return on investment (ROI) enterprises may realize by deploying OutSystems.1 The purpose of this study is to provide readers with a framework to evaluate the potential financial impact of OutSystems on their organizations.
To better understand the benefits, costs, and risks associated with this investment, Forrester interviewed six decision-makers with experience using OutSystems. For the purposes of this study, Forrester aggregated the experiences of the interviewees and combined the results into a single composite organization that is a global enterprise with $50 billion in annual revenue, 100,000 employees, and a lean IT team of 20 developers.
Interviewees said that prior to using OutSystems, their organizations operated in fragmented high-code environments with little to no centralized governance, inconsistent tooling, and a lack of development standards. Development was spread across multiple teams using disparate technologies, such as AngularJS and .NET, resulting in duplication of effort, siloed processes, and limited scalability. Without a unified platform or architectural oversight, custom AI applications and agents were difficult to build, maintain, and evolve. The interviewees also said their organizations lacked the right skill sets to support legacy systems and that onboarding new developers was slow and costly due to the absence of standardized frameworks and reusable components. These limitations led to missed opportunities, increased costs, and reduced responsiveness to business needs.
After investing in OutSystems, the interviewees described a transformation to a centralized, AI-powered, low-code environment governed by standards, reusable components, and a dedicated center of excellence (CoE). This shift increased developer productivity and throughput, enabling lean teams to deliver more applications with fewer resources. Reusable frameworks and standardized templates accelerated development timelines and improved the ability to respond quickly to business needs through change requests.
Beyond these structural improvements, interviewees’ organizations also benefited from OutSystems’ Mentor for AI-driven development and Agent Workbench for agentic AI. The interviewees said these capabilities provided ideation, design, development, and deployment, reducing repetitive tasks and guiding their developers through complex workflows as well as offering their teams a way to design, build, govern, and scale agentic AI systems. Together, these enabled the interviewees’ organizations to reduce their reliance on specialized resources and onboarding new developers became faster and more efficient. As a result, OutSystems fostered stronger collaboration between business and IT teams, helping the interviewees’ organizations accelerate time to value and align solutions more closely with strategic goals.
Quantified benefits. Three-year, risk-adjusted present value (PV) quantified benefits for the composite organization include:
Application development savings of $1.2 million. Developers at the composite organization build applications 60% faster using OutSystems compared to their traditional high-code environments. The platform’s reusable components, standardized templates, AI capabilities, and one-click deployment streamline development workflows, improving developer throughput and enabling lean teams to deliver more applications with fewer resources.
Change request efficiency of $618,000. OutSystems streamlines the management of change requests at the composite, allowing developers to respond faster to evolving business needs. Requests that previously took days or weeks for the composite’s teams to implement could now be implemented in hours, improving agility and reducing backlog.
Specialized resource cost avoidance of $1.5 million. The platform’s built-in capabilities enable the composite’s generalist developers to handle tasks that would traditionally require niche expertise or roles, such as native mobile developers, UX designers, and integration specialists. This allows the composite organization to avoid hiring six specialized FTEs.
Training and onboarding efficiency of $1.3 million. Developers at the composite ramp up 80% faster in the OutSystems environment compared to their traditional high-code platforms. Standardized frameworks and reusable components enable new hires to become productive in weeks rather than months.
Avoided legacy application costs of $1.3 million. OutSystems enable the replacement of legacy systems and high-code tools at the composite, helping it avoid licensing, infrastructure, and maintenance costs associated with outdated platforms.
Unquantified benefits. Benefits that provide value for the composite organization but are not quantified for this study include:
Accelerated time to value. For the composite organization, OutSystems enables faster delivery of applications and agents that directly address evolving market and customer needs. Shorter development cycles and rapid prototyping help the composite’s business units launch solutions earlier, reducing time lost to market delays and enabling quicker monetization of digital initiatives.
Increased responsiveness to market changes. The ability to iterate quickly and manage change requests efficiently allows the composite’s business teams to adapt faster to shifting priorities, improving agility and reducing backlog.
Strengthened executive confidence in IT. Rapid prototyping and tangible proof of value help derisk investment decisions for the composite and build trust in IT’s ability to deliver strategic outcomes.
Reduced operational risk and improved compliance. Consistent development standards, reusable components, and centralized governance ensures scalable, secure, and compliant agent application delivery across the composite organization.
Enhanced developer morale. Developers at the composite appreciate the speed and simplicity of the platform, which improve morale, reduce frustration, and enable faster onboarding.
Expanded AI and agentic innovation capacity. The ability to test AI and agentic ideas in weeks rather than months lowers the cost of failure and enables the composite organization to pursue more ambitious, forward-looking initiatives.
Costs. Three-year, risk-adjusted PV costs for the composite organization include:
OutSystems licensing and platform fees of $974,000. Includes platform usage fee, internal and external user costs, add-ons, and premium support.
Initial and ongoing labor costs of $304,000. This investment covers the internal effort spent on piloting OutSystems, establishing standards, frameworks, and ongoing developer training.
The financial analysis that is based on the interviews found that a composite organization experiences benefits of $5.9 million over three years versus costs of $1.3 million, adding up to a net present value (NPV) of $4.6 million and an ROI of 363%.
Return on investment (ROI)
Benefits PV
Net present value (NPV)
Payback
| Role | Industry | Region |
|---|---|---|
| Product manager | Pharmaceuticals | Headquartered in Europe; global operations |
| Senior director, IT | Life sciences | Headquartered in North America; global operations |
| Senior manager, application development | Life sciences | Headquartered in North America; global operations |
| Chief information officer | Manufacturing | Headquartered in North America; North American operations |
| Software development manager | Manufacturing | Headquartered in North America; North American operations |
| Enterprise architect | Distribution | Headquartered in Europe; global operations |
The interviewees noted how their organizations struggled with common challenges that drove their decisions to deploy OutSystems, including the following:
Fragmented tooling and complex development environments limited the developer’s productivity and throughput. Prior to adopting OutSystems, the interviewees noted how their development landscape was spread across multiple teams using disparate technologies, such as AngularJS and .NET. This created duplication of effort, inconsistent architectures, and siloed processes. Interviewees said that their developers spent significant time navigating legacy systems and managing dependencies, which reduced their overall productivity and throughput and slowed down time to value. Due to having a limited number of developers, some interviewees said their organizations had to hire a contingent workforce to support business needs.
Slow and costly development with traditional systems limited agility to support business change. Interviewees realized that traditional systems lacked the flexibility and speed required to keep pace with evolving business models and regulatory demands. In several cases, the interviewees’ organizations struggled to adapt quickly to shifts, such as B2B-to-B2C transitions or new compliance requirements, due to rigid architectures and slow development cycles. The absence of a unified, scalable, and responsive platform limited IT’s ability to support strategic pivots or deliver tailored solutions at speed. This demand for agility and responsiveness created pressure on lean IT teams and highlighted the need for a platform that could support rapid iteration, experimentation, and continuous delivery.
A lack of centralized governance and standards hindered scalability and maintainability. Interviewees noted that prior to OutSystems, their organizations lacked platform-level guardrails and standardized development practices. This led to inconsistent application architectures, limited visibility into end-to-end processes, and in some cases, development that was error-prone or difficult to maintain. The interviewees described how IT teams began making decisions in isolation from the business due to the absence of shared ownership and process understanding, introducing risk and misalignment. This lack of governance increased technical debt, reduced adaptability to regulatory and market changes, and made it harder to scale development efforts across the interviewees’ organizations.
Legacy applications created bottlenecks that slowed innovation and increased operational risk. Interviewees described how legacy systems — particularly those built on .NET and even mainframes — were difficult to update, scale, and support. Basic changes often required multiple teams and specialized skill sets, leading to delays and high maintenance overhead. In some cases, applications became so complex they were no longer actively maintained, resulting in growing technical debt and reduced agility. The lack of modern architecture and reusable components meant IT teams at the interviewees’ organizations spent disproportionate time on upkeep rather than innovation, limiting their ability to respond to business needs or regulatory changes.
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 is a global enterprise operating across multiple regions with a workforce of 100,000 employees and annual revenue of $50 billion. It has a lean IT team that supports both internal and external application development needs. Prior to adopting OutSystems, the organization operated in a fragmented high-code environment with limited governance, inconsistent tooling, and siloed development practices. Applications were built using a mix of technologies including AngularJS and .NET, resulting in high maintenance overhead and limited scalability.
Deployment characteristics. The composite organization begins using OutSystems in Year 1, following a three-month pilot and onboarding phase. Initial rollout includes 20 developers and 15 applications developed on OutSystems. By Year 3, the organization scales to 60 developers and 120 applications. The rollout includes reusable frameworks, standardized templates, and governance structures that enable faster development, improved maintainability and reduced reliance on specialized resources. Applications span internal employee-facing systems and external customer-facing portals, with use cases including enterprise resource planning (ERP) modernization, inventory management, mobile field service apps, and case management.
$50 billion in annual revenue
100,000 employees
20 developers in Year 1 scaling to 60 by Year 3
15 applications developed in Year 1 scaling to 120 by Year 3
Lean IT organization with limited specialized resources
Transition from fragmented high-code to centralized AI powered low-code
| Ref. | Benefit | Year 1 | Year 2 | Year 3 | Total | Present Value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Atr | Application development savings | $121,505 | $486,019 | $972,037 | $1,579,561 | $1,242,433 |
| Btr | Change request efficiency | $60,432 | $241,728 | $483,456 | $785,616 | $617,941 |
| Ctr | Specialized resource cost avoidance | $601,290 | $601,290 | $601,290 | $1,803,870 | $1,495,319 |
| Dtr | Training and onboarding efficiency | $506,686 | $506,686 | $506,686 | $1,520,058 | $1,260,053 |
| Etr | Avoided costs of replaced legacy applications | $180,000 | $720,000 | $720,000 | $1,620,000 | $1,299,624 |
| Total benefits (risk-adjusted) | $1,469,913 | $2,555,723 | $3,283,469 | $7,309,105 | $5,915,370 |
Evidence and data. Interviewees consistently reported that OutSystems improved developer productivity and reduced the time required to build applications. Interviewees highlighted that developers were able to deliver applications 50% to 60% faster compared to their previous high-code environments. A senior director of IT at a life science organization noted their team doubled its output in the first year without increasing headcount and saw further gains as they matured on the platform. This interviewee said a key driver of these gains was the platform’s reusable components and standardized templates.
Interviewees also emphasized that these assets eliminated the need to start from scratch for each project, reduced repetitive coding tasks, and enabled faster iteration. The senior director of IT at a life science organization noted that OutSystems removed many of the mechanical aspects of development (e.g., regression testing, deployment). This interviewee also cited the platform’s one-click deployment and automated dependency management as time-saving features that streamlined release cycles. Interviewees noted AI features like code quality checks helped simplify the software development process. Importantly, it was noted that the platform’s enterprise vibe coding experience, which blends visual development with AI-assisted guidance, was also seen as a catalyst for productivity, enabling faster iteration, reducing repetitive tasks, and fostering human-AI collaboration that accelerated delivery without compromising security, governance, or quality.
Modeling and assumptions. For the composite organization, Forrester assumes the following:
The organization develops 15 applications in Year 1, 60 in Year 2, and 120 in Year 3.
Each application involves an average of 1.5 developers.
The average amount of developer effort saved per project is 60%.
The average fully burdened annual salary for a developer is $144,450.
A standard productivity recapture rate of 50% is applied to reflect the portion of time savings that translates into business value.
Risks. Application development savings may vary due to:
The complexity and scope of applications developed.
The maturity of the organization’s development practices prior to OutSystems.
Availability of reusable components and standardized templates to develop 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 $1.2 million.
Faster development
| Ref. | Metric | Source | Year 1 | Year 2 | Year 3 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A1 | Apps developed using OutSystems | Composite | 15 | 60 | 120 | |
| A2 | Average number of developers involved per application | Interviews | 1.5 | 1.5 | 1.5 | |
| A3 | Average time taken to develop applications without OutSystems (weeks) | Interviews | 7.2 | 7.2 | 7.2 | |
| A4 | Percentage of time saved with OutSystems | Interviews | 60% | 60% | 60% | |
| A5 | Fully burdened annual salary for a developer | Composite | $144,450 | $144,450 | $144,450 | |
| A6 | Developer efficiency savings for application development | A1*A2*(A3/52)*A4*A5 | $270,010 | $1,080,042 | $2,160,083 | |
| A7 | Productivity recapture rate | TEI methodology | 50% | 50% | 50% | |
| At | Application development savings | A6*A7 | $135,005 | $540,021 | $1,080,042 | |
| Risk adjustment | ↓10% | |||||
| Atr | Application development savings (risk-adjusted) | $121,505 | $486,019 | $972,037 | ||
| Three-year total: $1,579,561 | Three-year present value: $1,242,433 | |||||
Evidence and data. Interviewees noted that OutSystems reduced the time and effort required to manage change requests on existing applications. These change requests typically referred to modifications, enhancements, or fixes applied to applications after they were deployed. A software development manager at an manufacturing organization shared that after implementing OutSystems, change requests that previously took days or even weeks were instead implemented in hours. A senior director of IT at a life science organization emphasized that OutSystems’ modular architecture and built-in DevOps capabilities allowed their developers to push updates faster and with less risk. Interviewees also highlighted that the ability to manage changes at the application level — without impacting other systems — improved agility and reduced backlog across business units.
Modeling and assumptions. For the composite organization, Forrester assumes the following:
Ten percent of all applications generate change requests annually. This includes UX/UI updates, functional enhancements, integration updates, and compliance- or localization-related changes.
Each application receives an average of 130 change requests per year.
Each change request previously required 21 hours of developer effort.
OutSystems enables a 50% reduction in time spent managing change requests.
The average fully burdened annual salary for a developer is $144,450.
A standard productivity recapture rate of 50% is applied to reflect the portion of time savings that translates into business value.
Risks. Change request efficiency may vary due to:
The complexity and frequency of change requests across applications.
The organization’s existing DevOps maturity and automation capabilities.
The extent to which change request savings are reinvested into new development.
Results. To account for these risks, Forrester adjusted this benefit downward by 15% yielding a three-year, risk-adjusted total PV (discounted at 10%) of $618,000.
| Ref. | Metric | Source | Year 1 | Year 2 | Year 3 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| B1 | Applications generating change requests | Composite | 2 | 6 | 12 | |
| B2 | Average number of change requests per year | Composite | 195 | 780 | 1,560 | |
| B3 | Average time taken for change request without OutSystems (hours) | Interviews | 21 | 21 | 21 | |
| B4 | Percentage of time saved with OutSystems | Interviews | 50% | 50% | 50% | |
| B5 | Developer time saved on change requests management (hours) | B2*B3*B4 | 2,048 | 8,190 | 16,380 | |
| B6 | Fully burdened annual salary for a developer | Composite | $144,450 | $144,450 | $144,450 | |
| B7 | Productivity recapture rate | TEI methodology | 50% | 50% | 50% | |
| Bt | Change request efficiency | B5*(B6/2,080)*B7 | $71,096 | $284,386 | $568,772 | |
| Risk adjustment | ↓15% | |||||
| Btr | Change request efficiency (risk-adjusted) | $60,432 | $241,728 | $483,456 | ||
| Three-year total: $785,616 | Three-year present value: $617,941 | |||||
Evidence and data. Interviewees shared that prior to adopting OutSystems, their organizations needed specialized roles to deliver full-stack applications. These included roles like native mobile developers, UX designers, front-end and back-end developers, and integration specialists, which were often hired on a contractual basis. Interviewees noted these roles were not only costly but also difficult to scale within lean IT teams. After implementing OutSystems, interviewees noted that generalist developers were able to take on end-to-end development tasks without needing to engage niche experts. A senior director of IT at life science organization described how OutSystems’ built-in capabilities allowed their team to deliver mobile and web applications without hiring additional mobile developers or UI specialists. Interviewees also emphasized that the platform’s visual development environment and reusable components helped reduce the need for deep technical specialization.
Modeling and assumptions. For the composite organization, Forrester assumes:
Six specialized roles would have been required annually to support full-stack development in a high-code environment.
The average fully burdened annual salary for each specialized role is $117,900.
These roles are avoided entirely due to OutSystems’ capabilities, which enable generalist developers to take on more responsibility.
Risks. Specialized resource cost avoidance may vary due to:
Differences in organizational structure and role definitions.
The complexity of applications developed.
The extent to which generalist developers can fully replace specialized roles.
Results. To account for these risks, Forrester adjusted this benefit downward by 15%, yielding a three-year, risk-adjusted total PV (discounted at 10%) of $1.5 million.
| Ref. | Metric | Source | Year 1 | Year 2 | Year 3 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| C1 | Average number of specialized roles required for full stack development on high-code platform | Interviews | 6 | 6 | 6 | |
| C2 | Fully burdened annual salary for a specialized role | TEI methodology | $117,900 | $117,900 | $117,900 | |
| Ct | Specialized resource cost avoidance | C1*C2 | $707,400 | $707,400 | $707,400 | |
| Risk adjustment | ↓15% | |||||
| Ctr | Specialized resource cost avoidance (risk-adjusted) | $601,290 | $601,290 | $601,290 | ||
| Three-year total: $1,803,870 | Three-year present value: $1,495,319 | |||||
Evidence and data. Interviewees highlighted that OutSystems reduced the time required to onboard new developers. A product manager at pharmaceuticals organization noted that developers who previously took months to become productive in high-code environments were able to contribute within weeks using OutSystems. This interviewee pointed to the platform’s visual development tools, reusable components, and standardized frameworks as helping new hires ramp up quickly without needing deep technical expertise. A software development manager at manufacturing organization emphasized that OutSystems enabled their organization to scale development capacity faster by reducing dependency on traditional onboarding programs and lengthy shadowing periods.
Modeling and assumptions. For the composite organization, Forrester assumes the following:
Each year, 20 developers are onboarded.
The average ramp-up time in a high-code environment is 24 weeks.
OutSystems reduces ramp-up time by 80%.
The average fully burdened annual salary for a developer is $144,450.
A standard productivity recapture rate of 50% is applied to reflect the portion of time savings that translates into business value.
Risks. Training and onboarding efficiency may vary due to:
Differences in developer experience and background.
The organization’s internal training programs and support structures.
The complexity of applications developed.
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 $1.3 million.
Average time taken for developers with no background in OutSystems to ramp-up and fully contribute to development
| Ref. | Metric | Source | Year 1 | Year 2 | Year 3 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| D1 | Developers onboarded | Composite | 20 | 20 | 20 | |
| D2 | Average ramp-up time for a new developer on a high-code platform (weeks) | Interviews | 24 | 24 | 24 | |
| D3 | Percentage of time saved with OutSystems | Interviews | 80% | 80% | 80% | |
| D4 | Fully burdened annual salary for a developer | Composite | $144,450 | $144,450 | $144,450 | |
| D5 | Productivity recapture rate | TEI methodology | 50% | 50% | 50% | |
| Dt | Training and onboarding efficiency | D1*(D2/52)*D3*D4*D5 | $533,354 | $533,354 | $533,354 | |
| Risk adjustment | ↓5% | |||||
| Dtr | Training and onboarding efficiency (risk-adjusted) | $506,686 | $506,686 | $506,686 | ||
| Three-year total: $1,520,058 | Three-year present value: $1,260,053 | |||||
Evidence and data. Interviewees described how OutSystems enabled their organizations to retire legacy systems and high-code applications that were expensive to maintain and license. The enterprise architect at a distribution organization shared that their team was able to replace a legacy commerce platform entirely with OutSystems, eliminating recurring subscription fees and infrastructure costs. The interviewees noted that OutSystems allowed them to consolidate multiple internal tools into a single platform, reducing overhead and simplifying support. Interviewees emphasized that these legacy systems were not only costly but also difficult to update and their replacement helped reduce operational risk and improve scalability.
Modeling and assumptions. For the composite organization, Forrester assumes the following:
It has $800,000 in annual licensing and subscription costs associated with legacy platforms.
In Year 1, only a portion of these costs are avoided as OutSystems is gradually adopted.
By Year 2 and Year 3, the full cost is avoided as OutSystems fully replaces legacy systems.
Risks. Avoided legacy costs may vary due to:
Differences in licensing models and contract terms.
The pace of migration from legacy systems to OutSystems.
The scope of legacy systems replaced.
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 $1.3 million.
| Ref. | Metric | Source | Year 1 | Year 2 | Year 3 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| E1 | Average licensing/subscription fees avoided | Interviews | 200,000 | 800,000 | 800,000 | |
| Et | Avoided costs of replaced legacy applications | E1 | $200,000 | $800,000 | $800,000 | |
| Risk adjustment | ↓10% | |||||
| Etr | Avoided costs of replaced legacy applications (risk-adjusted) | $180,000 | $720,000 | $720,000 | ||
| Three-year total: $1,620,000 | Three-year present value: $1,299,624 | |||||
Interviewees mentioned the following additional benefits that their organizations experienced but were not able to quantify:
Accelerated time to value. OutSystems enabled the interviewees’ organizations to deliver applications faster by streamlining development workflows and reducing reliance on legacy systems. Interviewees described how the platform helped them move from ideation to deployment in weeks, even in complex environments. A senior director of IT at life science organization modernized its legacy ERP system by building inventory and order management capabilities in OutSystems. This transformation enabled faster onboarding, improved visibility, and reduced dependency on scarce mainframe expertise. A software development manager at manufacturing organization shared how OutSystems helped deliver a compliance form to thousands of employees in just one week — a task that would have taken a month using traditional tools.
Increased responsiveness to market changes. OutSystems helped the interviewees’ organizations respond faster to evolving business needs. The ability to manage change requests quickly and iterate on applications allowed teams to reduce backlog and adapt to shifting priorities. One of the interviewee’s said their organization reduced its price adjustment process from a range of 50 to 60 days to just four days, enabling quarterly updates instead of annual ones. This helped the business become resilient. The software development manager in manufacturing noted that OutSystems enabled their team to handle five to 10 change requests per week without expanding headcount, something that the interviewee highlighted would have been impossible with traditional development.
Strengthened executive confidence in IT. Interviewees noted that rapid prototyping and the successful delivery of high-visibility projects helped build trust between IT and executive leadership at their organizations. Several interviewees described how OutSystems enabled IT to deliver on strategic priorities with speed and reliability. A software development manager at manufacturing organization delivered a CEO-sponsored initiative in just one week, exceeding expectations and reinforcing IT’s credibility. A product manager at a pharmaceutical organization emphasized how OutSystems helped IT meet urgent business needs without delays or excuses, which they said was a key factor in maintaining executive trust.
Reduced operational risk and improved compliance. OutSystems’ centralized governance, reusable components, and standardized frameworks helped the interviewees’ organizations reduce technical debt and improve compliance. Interviewees emphasized the importance of architectural discipline and platform-level guardrails. An enterprise architect at a distribution organization noted that legacy applications often became unmanageable due to lack of governance, which was a challenge OutSystems helped overcome.
Enhanced developer morale. Interviewees reported that their developers appreciated the speed, simplicity, and visual nature of the OutSystems platform. Faster onboarding, reduced frustration, and the ability to contribute quickly were frequently cited as morale boosters. Interviewees cited they were able to onboard developers who became productive within a week despite having no prior OutSystems experience. They also highlighted how OutSystems reduced the need for specialized roles, allowing generalist developers to deliver full-stack applications, therefore improving their throughput and morale.
Expanded AI and agentic innovation capacity. OutSystems’ Agent Workbench lowered the barrier to agentic AI experimentation for the interviewees’ organizations, enabling them to test agentic AI ideas quickly and cost-effectively. A senior manager of application development at a life sciences organization and their team were able to build an intelligent customer escalation agent to interpret a variety of unstructured data from customer interactions. This approach eliminated the need for manual triaging, thereby resolving issues faster. Interviewees also described how the platform supported a culture of innovation by reducing the cost of failure and accelerating AI application and agent delivery. The ability to deliver prototypes in weeks, helping business units validate ideas and move forward with confidence, was also highlighted to be of great value, especially in industries where agility and responsiveness were critical.
The value of flexibility is unique to each customer. There are multiple scenarios in which a customer might implement OutSystems and later realize additional uses and business opportunities, including:
Support for AI and emerging technologies. According to interviewees, OutSystems’ AI capabilities, such as Mentor and Agent Workbench, position the platform to support future innovation. Interviewees expressed optimism about their potential to accelerate development and improve governance. A product manager at pharmaceutical organization highlighted the platform’s built-in code scanning and governance tools as key enablers of scalable development.
Human-AI collaboration in development. OutSystems’ Mentor provided the interviewees’ organizations with a team of specialized AI agents that helped ideate, design, develop, deploy, and manage apps with full enterprise context and scalable architecture. Interviewees expressed optimism about their potential to accelerate development and improve governance. This collaborative approach was central to the enterprise vibe coding experience, where developers worked alongside AI in a visual, intuitive environment that boosted productivity, reduced friction, and empowered faster delivery for the interviewees’ organizations.
Reusable components and scalability. Interviewees emphasized the strategic value of reusable components, standardized templates, and architectural guardrails. These provided the interviewees’ organizations with a scalable foundation for development. Interviewees described how their organizations started with a handful of apps and quickly scaled to dozens. In some cases, the interviewees’ organizations scaled to over 90 production applications without compromising governance or performance.
Rapid prototyping and experimentation. OutSystems enabled lean IT teams at the interviewees’ organizations to quickly prototype and validate new ideas. Interviewees shared examples of delivering working solutions in days or weeks, helping business units test concepts, gather feedback, and iterate without lengthy development cycles.
Flexibility would also be quantified when evaluated as part of a specific project (described in more detail in Total Economic Impact Approach).
| Ref. | Cost | Initial | Year 1 | Year 2 | Year 3 | Total | Present Value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ftr | OutSystems fees | $0 | $129,773 | $237,917 | $878,129 | $1,245,819 | $974,352 |
| Gtr | Initial and ongoing labor costs | $183,952 | $0 | $76,392 | $76,392 | $336,736 | $304,480 |
| Total costs (risk-adjusted) |
$183,952 | $129,773 | $314,309 | $954,521 | $1,582,553 | $1,278,832 |
Evidence and data. Interviewees said OutSystems fees included subscription fees and, depending on the interviewee, premium support or other optional add-on services. Subscription fees varied depending on the platform usage, the number of end users, and the number of application objects.
Because OutSystems fees vary based on customer-specific factors, consult with OutSystems for pricing specific to your organization when conducting your own analysis.
Modeling and assumptions. For the composite organization, Forrester assumes the following:
The composite uses the SaaS standard edition of OutSystems.
Year 1 includes 15 apps and 100 internal users.
Year 2 includes 60 apps, 500 internal users, and 500 external users.
Year 3 includes 120 apps, 2,500 internal users, 5,000 external users, and premium support.
Add-ons such as Sentry and additional application objects are included in Year 3.
Risks. Licensing costs may vary due to:
Changes in user volume or application complexity.
Adoption of additional add-ons or premium services.
Results. To account for these risks, Forrester adjusted this cost upward by 10%, yielding a three-year, risk-adjusted total PV of $974,000.
| Ref. | Metric | Source | Initial | Year 1 | Year 2 | Year 3 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| F1 | Platform cost | Composite | $44,044 | $62,920 | $125,840 | |
| F2 | Internal user cost | Composite | $3,146 | $15,730 | $94,380 | |
| F3 | External user cost | Composite | $19,663 | $58,988 | ||
| F4 | Add-ons | Composite | $70,785 | $117,975 | $412,913 | |
| F5 | Premium support | Composite | $106,178 | |||
| Ft | OutSystems fees | F1+F2+F3+F4+F5 | $0 | $117,975 | $216,288 | $798,299 |
| Risk adjustment | ↑10% | |||||
| Ftr | OutSystems fees (risk-adjusted) | $129,773 | $237,917 | $878,129 | ||
| Three-year total: $1,245,818 | Three-year present value: $974,352 | |||||
Evidence and data. Interviewees’ organizations typically implemented OutSystems using internal staff, supported by OutSystems during the initial setup. The implementation journey at the interviewees’ organizations typically began with a pilot phase involving three to five developers, architects, and business stakeholders for feedback and validation. Activities in this phase primarily included platform configuration, integration tasks, and setting up identities and permissions. Interviewees noted this structured approach ensured a smooth and effective start to the implementation.
Following the pilot, the interviewees said their organizations entered a rollout phase that required internal effort to establish foundational elements such as development standards, reusable components, and governance frameworks. This upfront investment was critical for the interviewees’ organizations to ensure scalable and maintainable application delivery. Interviewees noted that their team spent three months building out a center of excellence (CoE), defining software development lifecycle (SDLC) processes, and developing architectural guardrails, standardized templates, reusable components, and rapid development frameworks to support future development.
Initial labor costs also included training and enablement. Interviewees described a mix of formal training sessions and self-guided learning using OutSystems’ documentation and tutorials. Ongoing costs included periodic training sessions, such as peer coaching (typically one week) from experienced developers and onboarding support for new developers as the interviewees’ organizations scaled their use of OutSystems.
Modeling and assumptions. For the composite organization, Forrester assumes the following:
Initial pilot involves 4 FTEs for 10 weeks at 40% capacity.
Governance and framework development involves 4 FTEs for 3 months at 40% capacity.
Ongoing training requires 50 hours per developer annually, with 20 developers trained each year as the composite scales its use of OutSystems.
The fully burdened hourly rate for developers is $69.
Risks. Internal labor costs may vary due to:
Differences in organizational complexity and IT architecture.
Varying levels of internal expertise and readiness.
Depth and frequency of training programs.
Results. To account for these risks, Forrester adjusted this cost upward by 10%, yielding a three-year, risk-adjusted total PV of $304,000.
| Ref. | Metric | Source | Initial | Year 1 | Year 2 | Year 3 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| G1 | Time spent by internal FTEs during pilot (hours) | Interview | 640 | |||
| G2 | Time spent by internal FTEs to establish standards, frameworks, reusable components, and templates before launching their first application | Interview | 768 | |||
| G3 | Developers trained | Composite | 20 | 20 | 20 | |
| G4 | Time spent on training and ongoing development per developer | Interview | 50 | 50 | 50 | |
| G5 | Fully burdened hourly rate for a developer/IT team member | Composite | $69 | $69 | $69 | |
| Gt | Initial and ongoing labor costs | (G1+G2+(G3*G4))*G5 | $167,229 | $0 | $69,447 | $69,447 |
| Risk adjustment | ↑10% | |||||
| Gtr | Initial and ongoing labor costs (risk-adjusted) | $183,952 | $0 | $76,392 | $76,392 | |
| Three-year total: $336,735 | Three-year present value: $304,480 | |||||
| Initial | Year 1 | Year 2 | Year 3 | Total | Present Value | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total costs | ($183,952) | ($129,773) | ($314,309) | ($954,521) | ($1,582,553) | ($1,278,832) |
| Total benefits | $0 | $1,469,913 | $2,555,723 | $3,283,470 | $7,309,105 | $5,915,370 |
| Net benefits | ($183,952) | $1,340,140 | $2,241,414 | $2,328,949 | $5,726,552 | $4,636,538 |
| ROI | 363% | |||||
| Payback | <6 months |
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 OutSystems.
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 OutSystems can have on an organization.
Interviewed OutSystems stakeholders and Forrester analysts to gather data relative to OutSystems.
Interviewed six decision-makers at organizations using OutSystems to obtain data about costs, benefits, and risks.
Designed a composite organization based on characteristics of the interviewees’ organizations.
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.
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.
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 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 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 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.”
The present or current value of (discounted) cost and benefit estimates given at an interest rate (the discount rate). The PV of costs and benefits feed into the total NPV of cash flows.
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.
A project’s expected return in percentage terms. ROI is calculated by dividing net benefits (benefits less costs) by costs.
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%.
The breakeven point for an investment. This is the point in time at which net benefits (benefits minus costs) equal initial investment or cost.
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.
1 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.
Readers should be aware of the following:
This study is commissioned by OutSystems 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 OutSystems.
OutSystems 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.
OutSystems provided the customer names for the interviews but did not participate in the interviews.
Elina Bauwens
Bharath Sivan
November 2025
ABOUT FORRESTER CONSULTING
Forrester provides independent and objective research-based consulting to help leaders deliver key transformation outcomes. Fueled by our customer-obsessed research, Forrester’s seasoned consultants partner with leaders to execute on their priorities using a unique engagement model that tailors to diverse needs and ensures lasting impact. For more information, visit forrester.com/consulting.
© Forrester Research, Inc. All rights reserved. Unauthorized reproduction is strictly prohibited. Information is based on best available resources. Opinions reflect judgment at the time and are subject to change. Forrester®, Technographics®, Forrester Wave, and Total Economic Impact are trademarks of Forrester Research, Inc. All other trademarks are the property of their respective companies.
https://mainstayadvisor.com/go/mainstay/gdpr/policy.html
PDF