Executive Summary
Software development teams are under pressure to produce faster at a lower cost while maintaining high levels of quality. At the same time, related AI tools are rapidly changing, being repositioned, and setting high expectations of greater productivity. Enterprises need tools that not only boost developer productivity and onboarding efficiency in a secure environment but also allow them to evaluate and integrate adjacent tools and capabilities, including language models and AI agents. They’re aiming for better-quality code, modernized software with accelerated iteration, and the ability to test and adopt new AI tools quickly and easily.
JetBrains IntelliJ IDEA is an integrated development environment (IDE) for Java and Kotlin code, primarily used by backend software developers in enterprises. The tool has multiple integrations and an open approach to plug-ins, including third-party AI language models and agents. It aims to help software developers optimize their setup and be more productive and efficient.
JetBrains commissioned Forrester Consulting to conduct a Total Economic Impact™ (TEI) study and examine the potential return on investment (ROI) enterprises may realize by deploying IntelliJ IDEA.1 The purpose of this study is to provide readers with a framework to evaluate the potential financial impact of IntelliJ IDEA on their organizations.
To better understand the benefits, costs, and risks associated with this investment, Forrester interviewed nine decision-makers with experience using IntelliJ IDEA. Interviewees included senior engineering and technology leaders responsible for software development teams ranging from 400 to 4,000 IntelliJ IDEA users across organizations in North America, Europe, and Asia. For the purposes of this study, Forrester aggregated the experiences of the interviewees and combined the results into a single composite organization, which is a global financial services organization with 10,000 developers, of which 2,000 use IntelliJ IDEA.
Interviewees said that prior to using IntelliJ IDEA, their organizations used a variety of fragmented tools for software development. They faced pressure to iterate software faster and had to manage a lot of legacy, monolithic code that was costly to maintain.
After the investment in IntelliJ IDEA, the interviewees said that their software development teams were much more efficient, code quality was higher, onboarding was faster, and the developer experience had improved. Key results from the investment included an improvement in developer productivity of up to 20%, increased tenure, and faster software iteration. In this study, developer productivity is defined as a composite of measurable output gains — faster PR throughput and team-level efficiency improvements — combined with reduced friction from tool consolidation and fewer context switches. These gains are reinforced by earlier defect detection through integrated testing and code analysis; they tend to increase over time as adoption deepens. The resulting efficiency improvements are also associated with higher levels of developer satisfaction and retention, indicating that productivity effects extend beyond output speeds alone. Interviewees noted that the open and flexible approach of the JetBrains integrated development environment (IDE) enabled their organizations to evaluate and adopt AI tools more effectively, and developers were able to switch between tools without losing context or momentum.
Key Findings
Quantified benefits. Quantified benefits for the composite organization include:
-
Improved code quality. By leveraging IntelliJ IDEA’s capabilities, such as automated inspections, real-time code analysis, and integrated testing tools, and its ability to understand large, complex codebases, the composite organization reduces defects early in the development lifecycle. The composite’s developers spend, on average, 30% of their time on code review, testing, and remediation. As organizations adopt AI-assisted development, code review becomes even more critical to validate AI-generated code and maintain quality standards, increasing the value of tools that improve code quality and streamline review processes. Improved code quality also makes ongoing codebase maintenance more efficient by making it easier to understand, debug, refactor, and enhance complex applications. At the composite, IntelliJ IDEA improves code quality by 15% in Year 1, 17.5% in Year 2, and 20% in Year 3, as developers increasingly leverage its advanced debugging, refactoring, and testing capabilities. In total, these efficiencies generate a three-year risk-adjusted present value of $16.3 million.
-
Increased developer efficiency for code creation. The composite uses JetBrains IntelliJ IDEA’s ecosystem of features, plug-ins, and integrations to support streamlined coding workflows. Its developers spend, on average, 10% of their time on code creation. Using IntelliJ IDEA enables the composite to improve developer coding efficiency by 15% in Year 1 and 20% in Year 2 and Year 3, driven by its intelligent code completion features, broad integrations and support, and intuitive interface. The benefit grows over time as developers adopt advanced features and optimize their use of IntelliJ IDEA’s capabilities. These productivity gains generate a three-year, risk-adjusted present value of $5.7 million.
-
Faster onboarding of new developers and new projects. The composite organization accelerates onboarding and project ramp-up by using IntelliJ IDEA to provide consistent environments and integrated workflows across teams. New developers become more productive due to IntelliJ IDEA’s intuitive user experience and streamlined project setup, which reduces the time the composite requires to configure environments and understand project structure. This accelerates onboarding by one week. In parallel, the IDE’s unified experience enables developers to quickly transition between projects, saving 16 hours per new project thanks to standardized configurations, codebase navigation, and remote development capabilities. The composite organization achieves a three-year risk-adjusted present value for this benefit of $5.1 million.
-
The impact of improved developer satisfaction on tenure. The composite improves developer satisfaction by offering a configurable environment, strong performance, and seamless integration with modern tooling in the JetBrains IDE. This reduces friction in daily workflows, allowing developers to focus more on productive work. As a result, the composite’s use of IntelliJ IDEA contributes to lower attrition by making the development experience more efficient, intuitive, and aligned with developer preferences. The composite reduces turnover by 5% annually; this avoids replacing 20 developers per year, reducing disruption and preserving knowledge within the teams. The three-year, risk-adjusted present value for this benefit totals $3.1 million.
Unquantified benefits. Benefits that provide value for the composite organization but are not quantified for this study include:
-
Faster software iteration. The biggest benefits quantified in this study are productivity and efficiency improvements for developers, but these can equate, or partially equate, to faster software iteration. In cases where these improvements are channeled into completing more projects and/or completing existing projects, this often results in software updates being completed sooner. For an organization like the composite, this results in better systems for customers and employees; for organizations that develop and sell software, upgrades can be delivered sooner and innovations implemented faster.
-
Security and privacy. Some software development involves sensitive data: For organizations like the composite, it is essential that this data is kept safe and private. IntelliJ IDEA provides a secure environment for the development of such software as well as features that can highlight vulnerabilities and noncompliant code where relevant.
-
Accelerated software modernization. As a large, traditional financial services organization, the composite has to spend a significant portion of its IT budget on maintaining legacy code and tools. It uses IntelliJ IDEA to manage large, complex codebases and modernize its software. This in turn enables the composite to reduce costs related to legacy technology faster.
-
An open, flexible, and scalable approach. The composite takes advantage of IntelliJ IDEA’s open, flexible approach, which not only supports an ecosystem of adjacent tools and capabilities but also enables the use of third-party AI tools within the IDE. Its scalability also means the composite can quickly and easily allocate additional seats as and when needed. One interviewee also mentioned that IntelliJ IDEA could reduce AI token expenditure, given overlaps in capabilities.
Together, these capabilities may help large financial organizations accelerate the execution of their technology strategy while maintaining the safety, reliability, and governance required in complex enterprise environments.
Costs. Quantified costs for the composite organization include:
-
IntelliJ IDEA fees amounting to $3.9 million. The composite organization incurs costs to license IntelliJ IDEA for its developer workforce. This includes a per-seat subscription as well as an optional management fee.
-
Implementation and ongoing costs of $7.9 million. The composite incurs an initial implementation cost when it migrates 2,000 developers to IntelliJ IDEA. These developers also need to spend an hour per quarter on ongoing training and updating the IDE.
The financial analysis that is based on the interviews found that a composite organization experiences benefits of $30.3 million over three years versus costs of $11.9 million, adding up to a net present value (NPV) of $18.4 million and an ROI of 155%.
20%
Developer code creation and code quality improvements in Year 3
Key Statistics
155%
Return on investment (ROI)
$30.3M
Benefits PV
$18.4M
Net present value (NPV)
9 months
Payback
Benefits (Three-Year)
IntelliJ IDEA: An Open Approach To AI
Access AI tools in IntelliJ IDEA. All of the interviewees highlighted the open approach to AI of JetBrains’ IntelliJ IDEA as a key benefit. The IDE allows developers to integrate and use a wide range of AI models and agents directly within it. Teams can easily try out and evaluate new AI capabilities and select relevant tools that suit different tasks. This increases development throughput and improves efficiency in coding creation and reviewing phases. As the global head of engineering at a financial services organization noted, “We appreciate the open approach that JetBrains has taken with IntelliJ IDEA; our developers are able to choose the models and tools they want to use inside the IDE.”
Variability in AI tool adoption. Interviewees at more mature organizations where AI adoption is already widespread — in some cases, 90% of developers are regularly using AI — noted that the open approach enables teams to deploy different AI tools for different use cases and continuously optimize their stack. The head of engineering, infrastructure at a software organization explained, “Around 80% of my coding is generated by AI; across the company, the number ranges from 40% to 60% but it is steadily increasing.” In these environments, AI is embedded in day-to-day workflows and is reflected by higher output volumes and an increase in pull requests per developer. The CTO at an e-commerce organization explained: “We have seen a 10% to 40% measured productivity lift per week (measured in pull requests per developer per week). Developers can produce more code. An entire team of developers has an efficiency gain of 10x.”
However, interviewees revealed that these gains are not realized uniformly across the entire software development lifecycle. While AI can accelerate code generation dramatically, it can create bottlenecks and complexity in later activities, such as debugging, review, and standardization. As the global head of engineering at a financial services organization explained, “While code creation with AI is much faster, review, debugging and standardization are much slower — so overall, from presubmit to production, the time is about the same.” Interviewees also noted concerns around token cost predictability and data privacy, which is fundamental in regulated environments.
Reducing the risks of AI. To fully maximize the value of IntelliJ IDEA’s open AI approach, organizations need to address several key factors that support driving AI improvements at scale. They must anticipate and manage adoption risks, looking at cost predictability, data privacy, and security considerations in particular. “We are able to use small LLMs behind a Firewall, i.e. use AI without connectivity, whether for security purposes or because there's no connectivity,” explained the Software engineering director, telecoms. They also shouldn’t ignore the increased effort associated with reviewing higher volumes of AI-generated code and upholding maintainability and code quality standards. Because IntelliJ IDEA understands the impact that code changes have across a project, it may help reduce the risks associated with AI-created code. Organizations must also give their workforce the necessary AI-related skills and training, including effective prompting techniques, AI-driven review methods, and the ability to understand, deploy, and work effectively with AI agents. Organizations that can align these skills with new demands will be better positioned to capitalize on the benefits enabled by JetBrains’ flexible AI ecosystem. “Features like AI-generated commit message summaries can save effort and AI token usage,” explained the Head of engineering, infrastructure, software.
Summary Table: The Impact Of IntelliJ IDEA’s Flexible AI Ecosystem On Benefits And Costs
| Benefit/cost | Impact | Key quote |
|---|---|---|
| Improved code quality | •There is, at least initially, an increased need for reviewing code produced by AI as it tends to be inefficient, excessive, and difficult to understand. •Development teams face a growing need to restructure, with increased focus on tools management/precoding planning; AI coding capabilities; and code reviewing. |
“For the code review experience itself […] using agents to assist with that, we are seeing about a 12% to 15% faster PR cycle time.” Lead principal engineer, software |
| Increased developer efficiency for code creation | •AI tools undoubtedly have a strong positive impact on code creation. Some developers are able to use multiple AI agents concurrently, working on various tasks and projects in parallel. •Developers do not have to switch applications as they can use the tools from within the IDE. |
“We pushed the whole team to use IntelliJ IDEA because of its AI flexibility and multiple plug-ins; developers can choose between different models.” Lead principal engineer, software |
| Faster onboarding for new developers and new projects | •AI can have a positive impact on onboarding by helping developers get up to speed on projects faster. | N/A |
| The impact of improved developer satisfaction on tenure | •Organizations can attract and retain talent with a range of AI tools available for use in the IDE. •Employee satisfaction improves by automating routine tasks and augmenting human capabilities. •AI allows companies to offer best-of-breed AI models, ensuring developers have access to the most-effective tools. |
“These tools are absolutely essential to improve the productivity and satisfaction of our engineers. […] It basically reduces the frustration […] so that will give you higher reward recognitions. […] It’s all about positive employee satisfaction.” Director of software engineering, telecommunications |
| Subscription fees | •Using AI tools incurs a cost. Organizations are typically charged by the consumption of tokens. •Organizations show some concern about the lack of control over and unpredictability of AI token usage. |
“The current barriers to adopt more tools and a broader AI usage are cost predictability with regard to tokens, security and data concerns, and code review bottlenecks in the SDLC review phase.” Head of advanced strategy data ML models, banking |
| Implementation and ongoing costs | •Organizations continue to evaluate and assess AI tools, which are changing rapidly This is made easier with IntelliJ IDEA, given that developers are able to use different tools within the IDE. •Organizations need additional training around the use of AI tools, particularly for prompting but also for code standardization, review, and quality issues. •There is a general consensus that software development teams will need to restructure if they are to reap the gains that AI can offer. Change management takes time and resources. |
“We are focused on maintaining a competitive edge by enhancing developer productivity and experience. We prioritize delivering products faster and are open to adopting new tools that align with our strategic goals. The use of AI tools is central to this strategy, with an emphasis on training AI to adhere to our coding standards and practices.” Head of engineering infrastructure, software |
The JetBrains IntelliJ IDEA Customer Journey
Drivers leading to the IntelliJ IDEA investment
Interviews
| Role | Industry | Region | Annual Revenue | IntelliJ IDEA Users |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Director of software engineering | Telecommunications | North America | $88 billion | 1,000 |
| Senior software engineer | Financial services | North America | $72 billion | 1,000 |
| Senior quality assurance manager | Banking | Europe | $29 billion | 1,500 |
| Head of advanced strategy data ML models | Banking | Asia | $6.6 billion | 600 |
| Lead principal engineer | Software | North America | $5.2 billion | 4,000 |
| Global head of engineering | Financial services | North America | $5.0 billion | 700 |
| Software architect | IT services | Europe | $3.0 billion | 1,500 |
| Chief technology officer | E-commerce | Europe | $1.5 billion | 400 |
| Head of engineering infrastructure | Software | Europe | $600 million | 550 |
Key Challenges
Before adopting IntelliJ IDEA, the interviewees’ organizations relied on various fragmented tools, manual workflows, and inconsistent development practices. Development teams used a combination of standalone coding and other software development tools, testing platforms, alternative IDEs, and version control systems, which created inefficiencies, suboptimal code quality, and poor developer experiences. This not only resulted in the need for time-consuming remediation work but also impacted software quality in production, which in turn affected the stability and operation of important systems and processes.
Interviewees noted that their organizations struggled with common challenges, including:
-
Pressure for faster and better-quality software development. Interviewees explained that their teams struggled to balance speed with quality, resulting in defects due to compressed timelines. This pressure led to rework and delayed releases, which ultimately impacted customer satisfaction. The senior quality assurance manager at a banking organization noted: “That time period currently goes from one month up to six months, and some projects existed for a year. The idea is that we want to reduce time to market wherever it’s efficient, if possible, to less than a month.”
-
Multiple, disparate tools and platforms. Interviewees described how the lack of integration between tools created silos of information and reduced developer productivity. Developers frequently had to switch between systems, which slowed down development workflows. The senior quality assurance manager at a banking organization noted: “At some point [in the company], there were more than 100 tools, which we don’t want. You reduce [the number of tools] to as minimal as possible because there’s a cost element to maintaining that tool as well.”
-
Attracting and retaining developer talent. Some interviewees highlighted the importance of adopting high-quality tools in attracting and retaining developers. The software architect at an IT services organization said, “It was important for us to attract high-quality junior developers, so we invested in the best tools.”
-
The high costs of maintaining legacy, monolithic software. Interviewees described how maintaining these systems required significant engineering effort, diverting resources away from innovation and new feature development and leading to increased technical debt over time. The lead principal engineer at a software company explained, “We have very large monoliths and monolithic repositories, and we also have thousands and thousands of microservices.”
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 is a large, established global financial services organization with 80,000 employees and annual revenues of $100 billion. It relies on a legacy on-premises tech stack and is under pressure to leverage AI to increase efficiency and productivity. Prior to adopting IntelliJ IDEA, the enterprise relies on other developer tools and has been utilizing some AI tools. The organization’s developers are distributed across the US (40%), Europe (40%), and India (20%). The ratio of junior to senior developers is 25% to 75%. The average fully burdened annual salary for a developer is $148,500.
-
Deployment characteristics. The composite organization begins its migration to IntelliJ IDEA before Year 1. A team of 10 developers plan and prepare for the migration, which takes about a month. The rollout covers 20% of the software development workforce, amounting to 2,000 developers, and stays consistent through Year 3. The implementation includes all geographies and channels. The contract includes maintenance, with JetBrains taking care of upgrades, managing the seats, and dealing with support issues.
KEY ASSUMPTIONS
-
$100 billion in revenue
-
80,000 employees
-
2,000 IntelliJ IDEA seats
-
$148,500 average fully burdened annual salary for a developer
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 | Improved code quality | $5,680,125 | $6,626,813 | $7,573,500 | $19,880,438 | $16,330,537 |
| Btr | Increased developer efficiency for code creation | $1,893,375 | $2,524,500 | $2,524,500 | $6,942,375 | $5,704,308 |
| Ctr | Faster onboarding for new developers and new projects | $2,044,800 | $2,044,800 | $2,044,800 | $6,134,400 | $5,085,115 |
| Dtr | The impact of improved developer satisfaction on tenure | $1,262,250 | $1,262,250 | $1,262,250 | $3,786,750 | $3,139,029 |
| Total benefits (risk-adjusted) | $10,880,550 | $12,458,363 | $13,405,050 | $36,743,963 | $30,258,989 |
Improved Code Quality
Evidence and data. All of the interviewees noted that improved code quality is the largest benefit of IntelliJ IDEA. Code quality includes several software development tasks completed in the IDE, including code review, remediation, debugging, and code refactoring. There are multiple contributing aspects:
-
Code standardization is an important capability of IntelliJ IDEA. Fewer errors in production reduce the additional work required to fix them later. The senior software engineer at a financial services organization explained, “Many alternatives to IntelliJ IDEA do not have code standardization, which would result in issues and challenges to address in production.”
-
Several interviewees shared that JetBrains’ tool reduces additional remediation work, as it understands dependencies, even in large codebases. The CTO at an e-commerce organization noted that, “IntelliJ IDEA is best for large, distributed codebases, even across enterprise architecture, as it understands links to other parts of the business.”
-
The lead principal engineer at a software company said, “IntelliJ IDEA is highly optimized, highly tuned, and very intuitive to use for our predominant tech stack.”
-
The director of software engineering at a telecommunications organization explained: “With respect to reliability, [IntelliJ IDEA] helps you avoid making or implementing wrong code […], so that will reduce the amount of errors or bugs you will be pushing to production. That error rate was also around 10% less when using IntelliJ IDEA even before AI came.”
Modeling and assumptions. Based on the interviews, Forrester assumes the following about the composite organization:
-
The 2,000 developers using IntelliJ IDEA at the composite spend an average of 40% of their time in the IDE; they spend three-quarters of this time (or 30% of their time overall) on code quality. Please note the points on p.19 to explain why developers spend more time in IntelliJ IDEA than average.
-
The average fully burdened annual salary for a software developer using IntelliJ IDEA is $148,500.
-
The reduction in time spent on code review, testing, security, and debugging is 15% in Year 1, 17.5% in Year 2, and 20% in Year 3, reflecting steady improvements in code quality as developers adopt IntelliJ IDEA features and reduce errors earlier in the development process.
-
A 50% productivity capture rate is applied, as the time freed up for developers does not fully translate into additional productive output; for example, some of the time savings may not be fully redirected toward additional development output.
Risks. The scale of this benefit may vary from organization to organization based on:
-
The amount of time spent in the IDE.
-
The average fully burdened salary for a software developer.
-
The proportion of time spent on code review.
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 $16.4 million.
20%
Reduction in code review, testing, and remediation time in Year 3
Improved Code Quality
| Ref. | Metric | Source | Year 1 | Year 2 | Year 3 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A1 | IntelliJ IDEA developers | Composite | 2,000 | 2,000 | 2,000 | |
| A2 | Percentage of time spent on code review, testing, and remediation | Interviews | 30% | 30% | 30% | |
| A3 | Reduction in code review, testing, and remediation time with IntelliJ IDEA | Interviews | 15% | 17.5% | 20.0% | |
| A4 | Fully burdened annual salary for a developer using IntelliJ IDEA | Composite | $148,500 | $148,500 | $148,500 | |
| A5 | Productivity capture rate | TEI standard | 50% | 50% | 50% | |
| At | Improved code quality | A1*A2*A3*A4*A5 | $6,682,500 | $7,796,250 | $8,910,000 | |
| Risk adjustment | ↓15% | |||||
| Atr | Improved code quality (risk-adjusted) | $5,680,125 | $6,626,813 | $7,573,500 | ||
| Three-year total: $19,880,438 | Three-year present value: $16,330,537 | |||||
Increased Developer Efficiency For Code Creation
Evidence and data. All the interviewees highlighted the significant impact that IntelliJ IDEA has on the ability of developers to write code more efficiently. There are several aspects to this:
-
Code completion — the ability of the IntelliJ IDEA IDE to understand what the developer is doing and to automatically make relevant suggestions — is a key feature. As the lead principal engineer at a software company explained, “The autocomplete functionality makes you code faster; it senses what you want to do.”
-
Several interviewees highlighted IntelliJ IDEA’s capability to manage large, complex codebases, which in turn avoids the need for code. The CTO at an e-commerce organization pointed out, “IntelliJ IDEA is best for microservices type environments and modernizing monolithic code because it understands links between microservices and so avoids additional code that other tools would come up with or require.”
-
Interviewees also noted that IntelliJ IDEA integrates well with a large variety of tools, databases, plug-ins, and workflows, facilitating efficient code creation. The head of engineering infrastructure at a software organization explained: “It’s very convenient to work with. … You have all the required paints, you have many tools, connections to databases, connections to [other developer tools] today, let’s say, plus it’s adding more and more tools about AI.” The Language Server Protocol was mentioned as an example of a plug-in that helps developers with code completion, documentation, and formatting, in addition to JetBrains’ custom language support.
-
Many interviewees also emphasized IntelliJ IDEA’s open approach in terms of AI. They noted that developers can choose different AI tools and language models to use within the IDE, which further improves developers’ coding efficiency. Not only does this mean that the developer can use AI tools within the IDE, rather than moving constantly from one environment to another, but they can also choose the best tool depending on the use case. The CTO at an e-commerce organization said: “We have seen a 10% to 40% measured productivity lift per week (measured in PRs per developer per week). Developers can produce more code [by using LLMs within IntelliJ IDEA].” (Please note that the productivity impact of these additional AI tools has not been included in the quantitative analysis.)
Modeling and assumptions. Based on the interviews, Forrester assumes the following about the composite organization:
-
The 2,000 developers using IntelliJ IDEA at the composite spend an average of 40% of their time in the IDE; they spend a quarter of this time (or 10% of their time overall) on code creation. The overall time they spend in the IntelliJ IDEA IDE is higher than for other IDEs for a number of reasons: For example, the broad availability of plug-ins (including many bundled with the Ultimate subscription, such as those for debugging, testing, profiling, and working with databases and HTTP requests) mean developers complete more of these tasks in the IDE; the nature of Java and backend work and its use in code modernization means developers can handle more tasks related to software design and architecture; and developers can use it for security-related work, given IntelliJ IDEA’s capabilities for identifying and fixing software vulnerabilities.
-
The composite experiences productivity improvements of 15% in Year, which increases to 20% in Year 2 and 20% in Year 3 as the software development team better understands the capabilities of the IDE, better integrates with its complementary tools and technologies, and further optimizes its workflows.
-
The average fully burdened annual salary for a developer using IntelliJ IDEA is $148,500.
-
A 50% productivity capture rate is applied, as time freed up for developers does not necessarily go back into productive use; for instance, it may enable reduced out-of-hour working times.
Risks. The scale of this benefit may vary from organization to organization based on:
-
The amount of time spent in the IDE.
-
The average fully burdened annual salary for a developer.
-
The proportion of time spent coding or the coding efficiency previously achieved.
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 $5.7 million.
20%
Increase in developer coding efficiency in Year 2 and Year 3
Increased Developer Efficiency For Code Creation
| Ref. | Metric | Source | Year 1 | Year 2 | Year 3 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| B1 | Developers using IntelliJ IDEA | A1 | 2,000 | 2,000 | 2,000 | |
| B2 | Portion of time spent on coding | Interviews | 10% | 10% | 10% | |
| B3 | Increased developer coding efficiency with IntelliJ IDEA | Interviews | 15% | 20% | 20% | |
| B4 | Fully burdened annual salary for a developer using IntelliJ IDEA | A4 | $148,500 | $148,500 | $148,500 | |
| B5 | Productivity capture rate | TEI standard | 50% | 50% | 50% | |
| Bt | Increased developer efficiency for code creation | B1*B2*B3*B4*B5 | $2,227,500 | $2,970,000 | $2,970,000 | |
| Risk adjustment | ↓15% | |||||
| Btr | Increased developer efficiency for code creation (risk-adjusted) | $1,893,375 | $2,524,500 | $2,524,500 | ||
| Three-year total: $6,942,375 | Three-year present value: $5,704,308 | |||||
Faster Onboarding For New Developers And New Projects
Evidence and data. Several of the interviewees explained that they can onboard new developers joining the team more quickly following their IntelliJ IDEA investment, while existing developers can move more easily to different projects when required.
-
The head of engineering, infrastructure at a software organization explained, “IntelliJ IDEA has a strong virtual environment management that reduces the need for building preapproved environments and avoids custom scripting.”
-
The CTO at an e-commerce organization said: “Onboarding software developers is faster through consistent coding style and naming conventions. IntelliJ IDEA AI guidance also reduces the onboarding time for new developers.”
-
The lead principal engineer at a software company noted, “What took weeks beforehand can be accomplished in a number of seconds due to IntelliJ IDEA’s remote connection.”
-
The senior software engineer at a financial services organization said, “IntelliJ IDEA’s shared configurations and standardized setups allow new developers to resolve environment issues quickly and therefore reduces peer support time.”
Modeling and assumptions. Based on the interviews, Forrester assumes the following about the composite organization:
-
The turnover rate for developers using IntelliJ IDEA is 20%, so the composite needs to onboard 400 new developers each year.
-
Onboarding with IntelliJ IDEA enables new developers to be productive one week sooner than prior to the investment.
-
Half of all developers using IntelliJ IDEA must move to another project every year; with IntelliJ IDEA, they can onboard to new projects two days faster than prior to the investment.
Risks. The scale of this benefit may vary from organization to organization based on:
-
The rate of developer turnover.
-
The onboarding time prior to the investment.
-
The rate at which developers need to change projects.
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 $5.1 million.
Faster Onboarding For New Developers And New Projects
| Ref. | Metric | Source | Year 1 | Year 2 | Year 3 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| C1 | New developers using IntelliJ IDEA | Composite | 400 | 400 | 400 | |
| C2 | Hours saved on onboarding a new developer | Interviews | 40 | 40 | 40 | |
| C3 | Developers switching projects | Composite | 1,000 | 1,000 | 1,000 | |
| C4 | Hours saved on onboarding for a new project | Interviews | 16 | 16 | 16 | |
| C5 | Fully burdened hourly rate for a for a developer using IntelliJ IDEA | Composite | $71 | $71 | $71 | |
| Ct | Faster onboarding for new developers and new projects | ((C1*C2)+(C3*C4))*C5 | $2,272,000 | $2,272,000 | $2,272,000 | |
| Risk adjustment | ↓10% | |||||
| Ctr | Faster onboarding for new developers and new projects (risk-adjusted) | $2,044,800 | $2,044,800 | $2,044,800 | ||
| Three-year total: $6,134,400 | Three-year present value: $5,085,115 | |||||
The Impact Of Improved Developer Satisfaction On Tenure
Evidence and data. Interviewees consistently highlighted that using IntelliJ IDEA improved developer satisfaction and retention by increasing productivity, reducing friction, and delivering strong language support tailored to specific use cases. They explained that developers appreciate the highly configurable IDE, as they can optimize its look and feel for their personal preferences. Interviewees also noted that using IntelliJ IDEA as the primary IDE contributed to attracting young software development talent. These capabilities, along with integrated tooling and AI features, helped their engineers minimize issues and feel more effective and recognized, contributing to higher happiness and longer tenure.
-
The global head of engineering at a financial services organization said: “The richness of the tools is what makes it very, very sticky for experienced hires. [They] want to be more productive, and that makes retention easier.”
-
The lead principal engineer at a software company explained, “Having very good language support and a good IDE that’s highly tailored to your use case does have a big effect on happiness.”
-
The CTO at an e-commerce organization noted that, “Having an integrated proper IDE [IntelliJ IDEA] that supports the entire interfacing and interaction side plus the AI side is something that engineers like quite a bit.”
-
The director of software engineering at a telecommunications organization said, “You are improving your efficiency […] reducing the issues, and you’re able to do more things faster […] so that will give you higher reward recognitions.”
-
The software architect at an IT services organization explained: “IntelliJ [IDEA] was, or still is, very attractive because it’s the market leader for Java IDE. […] It works fine for us, and it’s attractive for Java developers.”
Modeling and assumptions. Based on the interviews, Forrester assumes the following about the composite organization:
-
The turnover rate for developers using IntelliJ IDEA is 20%, so the composite needs to onboard 400 new developers each year.
-
The composite reduces developer turnover by 5% by using IntelliJ IDEA, so it avoids having to recruit 20 developers per year.
-
The average cost of replacing a developer is 50% of the fully burdened annual salary for a software developer; at the composite, the fully burdened annual salary is $148,500.
Risks. The scale of this benefit may vary from organization to organization based on:
-
Reduction in turnover. This may be lower than expected if external factors, such as competitive job markets, outweigh improvements in the developer experience.
-
Organizational factors unrelated to tooling, such as management practices or workload. These may continue to drive attrition despite improvements in the developer environment.
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 $3.1 million.
20
Number of developer recruits avoided per year
The Impact Of Improved Developer Satisfaction On Tenure
| Ref. | Metric | Source | Year 1 | Year 2 | Year 3 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| D1 | Developer turnover rate | Composite | 20% | 20% | 20% | |
| D2 | New developers | D1*A1 | 400 | 400 | 400 | |
| D3 | Reduction in developer turnover | Composite | 5% | 5% | 5% | |
| D4 | Developer recruits avoided | D2*D3 | 20 | 20 | 20 | |
| D5 | Average cost to replace a developer | Composite | $74,250 | 74,250 | 74,250 | |
| Dt | The impact of improved developer satisfaction on tenure | D4*D5 | $1,485,000 | $1,485,000 | $1,485,000 | |
| Risk adjustment | ↓15% | |||||
| Dtr | The impact of improved developer satisfaction on tenure (risk-adjusted) | $1,262,250 | $1,262,250 | $1,262,250 | ||
| Three-year total: $3,786,750 | Three-year present value: $3,139,029 | |||||
Unquantified Benefits
Interviewees mentioned the following additional benefits that their organizations experienced but were not able to quantify:
-
Faster software iteration. Most of the interviewees highlighted that more efficient software development enables them to iterate faster and release upgrades sooner. In the case of software organizations, this is a fundamental competitive advantage, as they can innovate faster and deliver better products to market sooner. In other industries, it can result in better systems for customer usage, such as better telecoms networks or an improved online banking experience; this can impact business growth and the customer experience. The senior quality assurance manager at a banking organization said: “There’s a reduced operational and reputational risk through faster fixes. This in turn reduces financial losses or potentially avoids reputational damage.”
-
Greater security and privacy. Some of the interviewees highlighted that IntelliJ IDEA provides a more secure environment for the development of software that manages sensitive data. The director of software engineering at a telecommunications organization explained, “IntelliJ IDEA can be fully deployed behind the firewall, including AI models, which enables work on sensitive telecom, billing, and network systems without having to expose data externally.” They also noted, “It highlights noncompliant code, with reference to, for example, GDPR and FCC, and requests extra checks.” The head of advanced strategy data ML models at a financial services organization said, “It provides a compliance-aligned vendor posture with documentation maturity; this leads to easier internal approval to open network connectivity and adopting capabilities without data leakage concerns.”
-
Accelerated software modernization. Many of the interviewees noted that as a result of their investment in IntelliJ IDEA, they have been able to complete their software modernization projects faster. For many organizations, the cost of supporting legacy code and related infrastructure is high; being able to move to a more modern and efficient architecture enables them to reduce these IT maintenance costs.
Flexibility
The value of flexibility is unique to each customer. There are multiple scenarios in which a customer might implement IntelliJ IDEA and later realize additional uses and business opportunities, including:
-
An open approach to AI. All the interviewees mentioned that one of the core benefits of IntelliJ IDEA is its open approach to AI. Developers can choose which AI tools they want to use within the IDE; they can use not only JetBrains’ AI Assistant and Junie but also many of the other leading AI tools, both language models and agents. At a time when AI is changing rapidly in terms of capabilities and cost, it is important for software development teams to be able to evaluate different tools and keep up with developments. Interviewees also noted that different AI tools suit different use cases, so it is important for developers to have access to different tools to optimize their work. For more details, see IntelliJ IDEA: An Open Approach To AI at the end of the Executive Summary.
-
Scalability. Some of the interviewees highlighted the ease of adding and changing IntelliJ IDEA seats as needed. The director of software engineering at a telecommunications organization said, “There is also flexibility in terms of new developers accessing the IDE: It is automatically done — there are extra seats, so we can scale up and down easily without requiring multiple approval steps.”
-
Integration with other systems. Interviewees told us that IntelliJ IDEA is a rich and mature IDE that integrates with multiple systems and capabilities through plug-ins, workflow integrations, and other capabilities like the database tool window, which facilitates connectivity to a range of databases. JetBrains Marketplace is also a type of app store for the IDE that makes many JetBrains and third-party plug-ins easily available.
Flexibility would also be quantified when evaluated as part of a specific project (described in more detail in Total Economic Impact Approach). In this case, openness to AI, scalability, and integration with other systems can fall into increased developer productivity and efficiency due to the time is saved in being able to access AI from within the IDE, rapid scaling, and easy and fast integration with other systems.
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Etr | IntelliJ IDEA platform fees | $0 | $1,585,395 | $1,585,395 | $1,585,395 | $4,756,185 | $3,942,643 |
| Ftr | Implementation and ongoing costs | $6,372,960 | $624,800 | $624,800 | $624,800 | $8,247,360 | $7,926,745 |
| Total costs (risk-adjusted) | $6,372,960 | $2,210,195 | $2,210,195 | $2,210,195 | $13,003,545 | $11,869,388 |
IntelliJ IDEA Platform Fees
Evidence and data. IntelliJ IDEA is licensed on a per-seat basis as standard. It is also available, at a higher cost, as part of the All Products Pack; discounts may be available depending on the volume.
Modeling and assumptions. The composite’s IntelliJ IDEA fees are based on a per-seat price, with the addition of a management fee.
-
The IntelliJ IDEA fees are based on the composite organization’s requirement for 2,000 seats. The standard price in North America is $719 per seat.
-
The composite adds a 5% management fee so that it does not need to allocate resources to manage the subscription, including license management, upgrades, maintenance, and IDE provisioning.
Risks. The impact of this cost may vary by organization depending on the following:
-
Timing and pricing changes over the period.
-
Regional pricing variations.
-
Discounts, which may vary depending on the scale and broader contract requirements.
Results. To account for these risks, Forrester adjusted this cost upward by 5%, yielding a three-year, risk-adjusted total PV (discounted at 10%) of $3.9 million.
IntelliJ IDEA Platform Fees
| Ref. | Metric | Source | Initial | Year 1 | Year 2 | Year 3 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| E1 | IntelliJ IDEA seats | Composite | 0 | 2,000 | 2,000 | 2,000 |
| E2 | Cost per seat | JetBrains | $719 | $719 | $719 | |
| E3 | Cost of IntelliJ IDEA seats | E1*E2 | $1,438,000 | $1,438,000 | $1,438,000 | |
| E4 | Management fee | E3*5% | $71,900 | $71,900 | $71,900 | |
| Et | IntelliJ IDEA platform fees | E3+E4 | $0 | $1,509,900 | $1,509,900 | $1,509,900 |
| Risk adjustment | ↑5% | |||||
| Etr | IntelliJ IDEA platform fees (risk-adjusted) | $0 | $1,585,395 | $1,585,395 | $1,585,395 | |
| Three-year total: $4,756,185 | Three-year present value: $3,942,643 | |||||
Implementation And Ongoing Costs
Evidence and data. Most of the interviewees’ organizations have been using IntelliJ IDEA for many years, gradually increasing their adoption as their requirements grow. However, they shared some indications of what it would require to implement the interface. Interviewees also indicated some limited ongoing costs in terms of developer training. Please note that there are no ongoing maintenance fees, given the 5% management fee included in the subscription described in the previous cost category.
Modeling and assumptions. Based on the interviews, Forrester assumes the following about the composite organization:
-
It makes a wholesale transition to IntelliJ IDEA for 2,000 developers.
-
The composite requires an implementation team for planning, testing, preparation, and workflow updates. This comprises 10 FTEs: primarily software developers but also some IT and project management resources. This implementation team takes a month overall (160 hours per resource); its efforts include integrating and testing plug-ins, databases, other tools, and workflows with the IDE.
-
Each of the 2,000 developers requires a week of training and change management time initially. In addition, they need to allocate an hour per quarter for training on and upgrading of the tool.
Risks. The impact of this cost may vary by organization depending on the following:
-
The implementation efforts, given different skills, legacy tools, and team composition.
-
The training and implementation time for developers.
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 $7.9 million.
160 hours
Implementation time per planning and development resource
Implementation And Ongoing Costs
| Ref. | Metric | Source | Initial | Year 1 | Year 2 | Year 3 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| F1 | Planning and deployment FTE resources | Assumption | 10 | |||
| F2 | Fully burdened hourly rate for a for a planning and deployment resource | Composite | $71 | |||
| F3 | Average number of hours per planning and deployment FTE | Interviews | 160 | |||
| F4 | Initial training and change management time per developer using IntelliJ IDEA (hours) | Composite | 40 | 4 | 4 | 4 |
| F5 | Developers using IntelliJ IDEA | Composite | 2,000 | 2,000 | 2,000 | 2,000 |
| F6 | Fully burdened hourly rate for a developer using IntelliJ IDEA | C5 | $71 | $71 | $71 | $71 |
| Ft | Implementation and ongoing costs | (F1*F2*F3)+(F4*F5*F6) | $5,793,600 | $568,000 | $568,000 | $568,000 |
| Risk adjustment | ↑10% | |||||
| Ftr | Implementation and ongoing costs (risk-adjusted) | $6,372,960 | $624,800 | $624,800 | $624,800 | |
| Three-year total: $8,247,360 | Three-year present value: $7,926,745 | |||||
Financial Summary
Consolidated Three-Year, Risk-Adjusted Metrics
Cash Flow Chart (Risk-Adjusted)
Cash Flow Analysis (Risk-Adjusted)
| Initial | Year 1 | Year 2 | Year 3 | Total | Present Value | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total costs | ($6,372,960) | ($2,210,195) | ($2,210,195) | ($2,210,195) | ($13,003,545) | ($11,869,388) |
| Total benefits | $0 | $10,880,550 | $12,458,363 | $13,405,050 | $36,743,963 | $30,258,989 |
| Net benefits | ($6,372,960) | $8,670,355 | $10,248,168 | $11,194,855 | $23,740,418 | $18,389,601 |
| ROI | 155% | |||||
| Payback | 9 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 IntelliJ IDEA.
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 IntelliJ IDEA can have on an organization.
Due Diligence
Interviewed JetBrains stakeholders and Forrester analysts to gather data relative to IntelliJ IDEA.
Interviews
Interviewed nine decision-makers at organizations using IntelliJ IDEA 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
The State Of Agentic Software Development, 2026, Forrester Research, Inc., June 3, 2026.
The Quantitative Employment Impact Of AI On The Software Development Lifecycle, Forrester Research, Inc., October 29, 2025
Appendix C
Endnotes
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.
Disclosures
Readers should be aware of the following:
This study is commissioned by JetBrains 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 IntelliJ IDEA. 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 IntelliJ IDEA based on the inputs provided and any assumptions made. Forrester does not endorse JetBrains or its offerings. Although great care has been taken to ensure the accuracy and completeness of this model, JetBrains 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 JetBrains make no warranties of any kind.
JetBrains 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.
JetBrains provided the customer names for the interviews but did not participate in the interviews.
Consulting Team:
Jan Sythoff
Published
Jared Dalichow