Loading…
Assessment · Free
Score a legacy system across three modernization paths — replatform, rearchitect, replace — with weighted scoring against architecture, data model, regulatory frame, and engineering reality. Output: a recommendation with prioritized next steps.
0 of 8 answered
0%
Question 1
Question 2
Question 3
Question 4
Question 5
Question 6
Question 7
Question 8
How it works
We don’t gate the tool behind a form. Take the assessment; share your email at the end if you want a written report.
Multi-axis scoring: architecture state, codebase, data model, business criticality, SaaS replacement viability, regulatory frame, timeline pressure, and engineering team appetite. Each option weights the three modernization paths.
Three-axis breakdown: replatform / rearchitect / replace. The headline recommendation is the highest-scoring path; the breakdown shows how close the alternatives are.
Each modernization path has a different sequence. Replatform: workload disposition + IaC + wave plan. Rearchitect: bounded-context decomposition + strangler-fig. Replace: SaaS gap analysis + data migration + sunset plan.
The output is directional. Bring it to a 30-minute discovery call and we'll calibrate against your actual data model, integration surface, and regulatory frame.
Common questions
Each option carries weights across the three axes (replatform / rearchitect / replace) tuned against patterns we've observed across modernization engagements. The weights aren't optimistic; they reflect the actual frequency of each path being the right call across the conditions described.
Close scores typically mean the right answer is hybrid. Common patterns: replatform some workloads while rearchitecting one critical bounded context; replace a non-differentiating workload while rearchitecting the rest. We design hybrid paths in real engagements; the calculator gives you the directional starting point.
It is — by design. Replatform is the lowest-risk path that produces real modernization benefit. We over-weight conservatism in the calculator because most failed modernizations failed by attempting too much rearchitecture in one program. Replatform is rarely the wrong answer; rearchitect can be.
Rarely. Greenfield rebuilds carry the highest risk and the longest timeline. Replace (with a SaaS or commercial alternative) is the right answer when a viable product exists; otherwise, rearchitect is usually a better path than greenfield-rebuild even when it feels heavier.
Yes — retake it for each system. In an enterprise modernization program we typically score every workload in the inventory and produce a per-workload disposition. The calculator supports the per-workload analysis as a starting point.
Indirectly. Timeline pressure, regulatory frame, and engineering capacity questions push the scoring toward the lower-cost paths when constraints favor them. For an explicit cost projection, follow up with a discovery engagement where we model implementation, ongoing, and total-cost-of-ownership for each path.
More tools
15-question scored report across data, infrastructure, talent, governance, and use cases.
Open the toolProject the financial return of a proposed AI use case — labor savings, error reduction, payback period.
Open the toolPick the right LLM family for your workload — frontier API, mid-tier, or self-hosted.
Open the toolTalk to us
Bring your scored report to a 30-minute call. Senior engineer plus department lead. No discovery gauntlet, no junior reps.