Назад към всички

afrexai-ai-spend-audit

// Audit your company's AI spending — find waste, measure ROI, and right-size your tool stack.

$ git log --oneline --stat
stars:1,933
forks:367
updated:March 4, 2026
SKILL.mdreadonly

AI Spend Audit

Audit your company's AI spending — find waste, measure ROI, and right-size your tool stack.

When to Use

  • Quarterly AI budget reviews
  • Before renewing AI tool subscriptions
  • When AI spend exceeds 3% of revenue without clear ROI
  • Evaluating build vs buy decisions for AI capabilities

The Framework

Step 1: Inventory Every AI Line Item

Map all AI spending across these categories:

CategoryExamplesTypical Waste
Foundation ModelsOpenAI, Anthropic, Google API keys40-60% (unused capacity, wrong model tier)
SaaS with AISalesforce Einstein, HubSpot AI, Notion AI30-50% (features enabled but unused)
Custom DevelopmentInternal ML teams, fine-tuning, RAG pipelines25-45% (duplicate efforts, over-engineering)
InfrastructureGPU instances, vector DBs, embedding compute35-55% (over-provisioned, always-on dev instances)
Data & TrainingLabeling services, training data, synthetic data20-40% (one-time costs recurring unnecessarily)

Step 2: Score Each Tool (0-100)

Usage Score (0-30)

  • 0: Nobody uses it
  • 10: <25% of licensed users active
  • 20: 25-75% active
  • 30: >75% active, daily use

ROI Score (0-40)

  • 0: No measurable business impact
  • 10: Saves time but no revenue/cost link
  • 20: Measurable cost reduction (<2x spend)
  • 30: Clear ROI (2-5x spend)
  • 40: High ROI (>5x spend)

Replaceability Score (0-30)

  • 0: Commodity (10+ alternatives at lower cost)
  • 10: Some alternatives exist
  • 20: Few alternatives, moderate switching cost
  • 30: Irreplaceable, deep integration

Action Thresholds:

  • Score 0-30: CUT — cancel immediately
  • Score 31-50: REVIEW — renegotiate or find alternative
  • Score 51-70: OPTIMIZE — right-size tier/usage
  • Score 71-100: KEEP — monitor quarterly

Step 3: Model Cost Optimization

For every API-based AI tool, check:

  1. Model Selection: Are you using GPT-4 where GPT-3.5 suffices? Claude Opus where Sonnet works?

    • Rule: Use the cheapest model that meets quality threshold
    • Test: Run 100 production queries through cheaper model, measure quality delta
  2. Caching: Are you re-processing identical or similar queries?

    • Semantic cache can cut 20-40% of API calls
    • Exact-match cache catches another 5-15%
  3. Batch vs Real-time: Which requests actually need sub-second response?

    • Batch processing is 50% cheaper on most providers
    • Queue non-urgent requests for batch windows
  4. Token Optimization:

    • Trim system prompts (every token costs money at scale)
    • Use structured output to reduce response tokens
    • Implement max_tokens limits per use case

Step 4: Vendor Consolidation

Map overlapping capabilities:

Current State → Target State
─────────────────────────────────────────
ChatGPT Teams + Claude Pro + Gemini → Pick ONE primary + ONE backup
Jasper + Copy.ai + ChatGPT for content → Single content tool
3 different vector databases → Consolidate to 1
Internal embeddings + OpenAI embeddings → Standardize on one

Consolidation savings: Typically 25-40% of total AI spend.

Step 5: Build the Audit Report

AI SPEND AUDIT — [Company Name] — [Quarter/Year]
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━

Total AI Spend: $___/month ($___/year)
AI Spend as % Revenue: ___%
Industry Benchmark: 2-5% (early adopter) / 0.5-2% (mainstream)

WASTE IDENTIFIED
├── Unused licenses: $___/month
├── Over-provisioned infra: $___/month
├── Model tier downgrades: $___/month
├── Vendor consolidation: $___/month
└── TOTAL RECOVERABLE: $___/month ($___/year)

ACTIONS
┌─ CUT (Score 0-30): [list tools]
├─ REVIEW (Score 31-50): [list tools]
├─ OPTIMIZE (Score 51-70): [list tools]
└─ KEEP (Score 71-100): [list tools]

90-DAY PLAN
Week 1-2: Cancel CUT items, begin REVIEW negotiations
Week 3-4: Implement model downgrades and caching
Week 5-8: Vendor consolidation migration
Week 9-12: Measure savings, establish ongoing monitoring

Company Size Benchmarks (2026)

Company SizeTypical AI SpendTypical WasteRecoverable
10-25 employees$2K-$8K/mo35-50%$700-$4K/mo
25-50 employees$8K-$25K/mo30-45%$2.4K-$11K/mo
50-200 employees$25K-$80K/mo25-40%$6K-$32K/mo
200-500 employees$80K-$300K/mo20-35%$16K-$105K/mo
500+ employees$300K-$1M+/mo15-30%$45K-$300K/mo

Red Flags

  • AI spend growing faster than revenue (unsustainable)
  • More than 3 overlapping tools in same category
  • No usage tracking on AI SaaS licenses
  • GPU instances running 24/7 for dev/test workloads
  • Paying for enterprise tiers with startup-level usage
  • No A/B testing between model tiers
  • "Innovation budget" with no success metrics

Industry Adjustments

  • SaaS/Tech: Higher AI spend acceptable (5-8%) if it's in the product
  • Professional Services: Focus on billable hour impact — $1 AI spend should save $5+ in labor
  • Manufacturing: AI spend should tie to defect reduction or throughput gains
  • Healthcare: Compliance costs inflate spend 20-30% — factor in before judging waste
  • Financial Services: Model risk management adds 15-25% overhead — legitimate cost
  • Ecommerce: Measure AI spend per order — should decrease as volume scales

Built by AfrexAI — AI operations context packs for business teams. Run the AI Revenue Calculator to find your biggest automation opportunities.