Navigara
All Organizations

AWS — Engineering Performance

AWSEngineering capacity
+8engineers above headcount

88 engineers now deliver what 96 would have in Q1 2025.

Effective engineersReal engineers
Apr 2025Dec 2025Sep 2026
Where the work wentBiggest shift: Tests down 8 points
Features24%Maintenance10%Tests49%Docs5%Fixes12%

Performance snapshot

Today's rolling 90-day reading for AWS, compared with the start of the series. Pick a window to move that comparison point.

Avg. perf / dev / mo

+9.5%

1.15 → 1.26 ETV

Active engineers

+12.8%

78.0 → 88.0

Features

−13.1pp

37.4% → 24.3%

vs. 500 OSS index

0.33x

1.3x → 0.33x · −67% below

Engineering capacity

Effective engineers behind AWS, against its pre-AI baseline. Each subject has its own: AWS's is 1.15 ETV / dev / mo, its first reading in Q1 2025. Per-engineer ETV divided by that gives a capacity multiple, and that multiple applied to the engineers active in the trailing 90 days turns it into engineer-equivalents. The line is the real headcount, so the gap between line and area is what the leverage is worth. Because each baseline is its own, every subject opens at 1.0x on its first day: multiples measure improvement and are not comparable between subjects.

Effective engineers
96engineer-equivalents
+8 engineers above real headcount
Real engineers
88engineers
active in the trailing 90 days
Capacity vs pre-AI
1.1x
per engineer, vs 1.15 pre-AI

AWS vs. 500 OSS Performance Index

Per-engineer ETV for AWS against the pooled 500 OSS Performance Index. Both lines are 90-day rolling averages scaled to a 30-day month, so they share one axis and can be read against each other at any point. Pick a window to zoom the chart to it. Latest reading: AWS is 67% below the index (1.26 vs 3.85 ETV/dev/mo). At the start of the tracked period the gap was 26% above.

AWS
1.26ETV / dev / mo
+0.30 (+31.3%) past 90d
500 OSS Performance Index
3.85ETV / dev / mo
+1.66 (+75.8%) past 90d

Behind the numbers

Aug

Written summary of the work completed each month.

In August 2026, the team delivered 413 commits with a standout increase in feature output, driven by substantial infrastructure and migration initiatives including AWS Elemental MediaLive L2 constructs and expanded C2J-to-Smithy generator support. Features score surged +79% compared to the 5-month average (48 vs 27), representing a genuine step up that exceeded both the baseline average and the most recent two months. Concurrently, rework remained low, with Fixes score dropping 32% below the 5-month average (15 vs 22).

Highlights

  • Introduced the aws-medialive-alpha L2 construct library in 730b2eec (Jamie), delivering typed configurations for channels, inputs, and clusters along with MediaConnect integration.
  • Expanded SmithyDotNet generator capabilities during C2J-to-Smithy migration, adding support for streaming blobs in fe6dd43f (Peter), HTTP response/query/prefix traits in a3f88928 (Peter), scalar collections in 613fab03 (Daniel), and non-streaming blob members in 8a1c142a (adaines).
  • Delivered multi-tenant credential isolation, remote transport mechanisms (HTTP/SSE), and integration test harnesses for aws-healthomics-mcp-server in f6f1a566 (Mark).
  • Added multi-cloud telemetry and environment detection support for Google Compute Engine (GCE) in b062c098 (Jeffrey) and Google Kubernetes Engine (GKE) in a2fbeb61 (Jeffrey).
  • Extended cryptographic capabilities across AWS-LC and s2n-tls, including public key extraction APIs in 23089a4e (Carol) and critical memory safety fixes in EVP decryption in ed3d805d (Justin).

Observations

  • Features score surged +79% compared to the 5-month average (48 vs 27), representing a candidate-material increase driven by major construct development and migration frameworks.
  • Fixes score dropped 32% compared to the 5-month average (15 vs 22), indicating a healthy reduction in rework across core libraries.
  • Maintenance score declined 34% compared to the 5-month average (9 vs 14), while Docs score increased 73% (9 vs 5) with additions such as the AWS-LC threat model in 18c226ef (Wesley) and training SOPs in eb0f09e2 (jam-jee).
  • Core asset staging in AWS CDK required multiple iterations across 8fd1ef68 (L) and 8d8ae2c6 (L) to resolve external symlink validation errors and bundling rules under BLOCK_EXTERNAL modes.
  • The spec2cdk code generator required consecutive adjustments in c32f62e4 (Alisen), 9195f791 (Alisen), and be300a6a (L) to resolve attribute name collisions, exclude unvended logs, and prevent canned metrics compilation errors.

Based on 413 commits71.9 ETVUpdated Sep 30, 2026, 4:01 PM

Repositories

Where each repository stands: average performance per engineer per month over the last 90 days, with the rolling 90-day curve behind it. The range picks the window (past 90d): it sets how much of the curve you see, the Δ across it, and the span the work mix is measured over. Ranked highest first.

sagemaker-python-sdk

Avg performance

2.99 ETV

per engineer per month

Avg. dev performance / month (90-day MA)

—

Work mix

Features

0%

Maint

0%

Tests

0%

Docs

0%

Fixes

0%

6 devs54 ETV+1742% since Q2 2025Repository report

aws-sdk-java-v2

Avg performance

2.75 ETV

per engineer per month

Avg. dev performance / month (90-day MA)

—

Work mix

Features

0%

Maint

0%

Tests

0%

Docs

0%

Fixes

0%

9 devs74 ETV+10% since Q2 2025Repository report

amazon-cloudwatch-agent

Avg performance

2.31 ETV

per engineer per month

Avg. dev performance / month (90-day MA)

—

Work mix

Features

0%

Maint

0%

Tests

0%

Docs

0%

Fixes

0%

3 devs21 ETV−67% since Q2 2025Repository report

mcp

Avg performance

1.58 ETV

per engineer per month

Avg. dev performance / month (90-day MA)

—

Work mix

Features

0%

Maint

0%

Tests

0%

Docs

0%

Fixes

0%

6 devs28 ETV−45% since Q2 2025Repository report

aws-cdk

Avg performance

0.89 ETV

per engineer per month

Avg. dev performance / month (90-day MA)

—

Work mix

Features

0%

Maint

0%

Tests

0%

Docs

0%

Fixes

0%

19 devs51 ETV+1% since Q2 2025Repository report

s2n-tls

Avg performance

0.57 ETV

per engineer per month

Avg. dev performance / month (90-day MA)

—

Work mix

Features

0%

Maint

0%

Tests

0%

Docs

0%

Fixes

0%

8 devs14 ETV+730% since Q2 2025Repository report

aws-parallelcluster

Avg performance

0.55 ETV

per engineer per month

Avg. dev performance / month (90-day MA)

—

Work mix

Features

0%

Maint

0%

Tests

0%

Docs

0%

Fixes

0%

5 devs8 ETV+248% since Q2 2025Repository report

eks-anywhere-build-tooling

Avg performance

0.36 ETV

per engineer per month

Avg. dev performance / month (90-day MA)

—

Work mix

Features

0%

Maint

0%

Tests

0%

Docs

0%

Fixes

0%

2 devs2 ETV+7% since Q2 2025Repository report

amazon-ecs-agent

Avg performance

0.16 ETV

per engineer per month

Avg. dev performance / month (90-day MA)

—

Work mix

Features

0%

Maint

0%

Tests

0%

Docs

0%

Fixes

0%

3 devs1 ETV−71% since Q2 2025Repository report

amazon-ssm-agent

Avg performance

0.13 ETV

per engineer per month

Avg. dev performance / month (90-day MA)

—

Work mix

Features

0%

Maint

0%

Tests

0%

Docs

0%

Fixes

0%

3 devs1 ETV−64% since Q2 2025Repository report

aws-toolkit-vscode

Avg performance

0.03 ETV

per engineer per month

Avg. dev performance / month (90-day MA)

—

Work mix

Features

0%

Maint

0%

Tests

0%

Docs

0%

Fixes

0%

2 devs0 ETV−46% since Q2 2025Repository report

aws-sdk-net

Avg performance

0.00 ETV

per engineer per month

Avg. dev performance / month (90-day MA)

—

Work mix

Features

0%

Maint

0%

Tests

0%

Docs

0%

Fixes

0%

8 devs56 ETV+110% since Q2 2025Repository report

aws-lc

Avg performance

0.00 ETV

per engineer per month

Avg. dev performance / month (90-day MA)

—

Work mix

Features

0%

Maint

0%

Tests

0%

Docs

0%

Fixes

0%

11 devs23 ETV−23% since Q2 2025Repository report

karpenter-provider-aws

Avg performance

0.00 ETV

per engineer per month

Avg. dev performance / month (90-day MA)

—

Work mix

Features

0%

Maint

0%

Tests

0%

Docs

0%

Fixes

0%

5 devs5 ETV+118% since Q2 2025Repository report

Performance Composition

Each month's output split by type of work: Features (new value), Maintenance (sustaining systems), Tests, Docs, and Fixes (rework). The yellow line is output per engineer, so when it rises each engineer is delivering more, whatever the team size did. Unit: Engineering Throughput Value (ETV).

Cost per Performance Unit

−9%

If performance per engineer grew 9%, each unit of engineering performance now costs approximately 9% less than at the baseline 90-day window (ending 2025-04-01). Treat this as a direction, not a price: the exact figure depends on fully-loaded engineer cost, but which way it moved is not in doubt.

Effective Capacity Added

+8 engineers

At today's productivity, the current 88-person team delivers the performance equivalent of 96 engineers at the baseline 90-day rolling window (ending 2025-04-01). That's roughly 8 engineers worth of capacity added through productivity gains, not hiring.

CapEx vs OpEx

Each month's work split two ways. CapEx (capitalizable investment) is the work that builds the asset: Features, plus the Tests that prove it works and the Docs that explain it. OpEx (operating expense) is keeping it running: Maintenance and Fixes. The yellow line is the CapEx share, so a rising line means more of the month went into building new rather than sustaining what exists. Unit: Engineering Throughput Value (ETV).

Hours per Repository

Trailing 90-day window (64 working days). Org-level capacity is allocated to each repo by its share of org performance, then split CapEx / OpEx by that repo's own Features + Tests + Docs vs Maintenance + Fixes mix.

aws-parallelcluster
CapEx %
0.0%
OpEx %
0.0%
aws-cdk
CapEx %
0.0%
OpEx %
0.0%
aws-sdk-net
CapEx %
0.0%
OpEx %
0.0%
aws-sdk-java-v2
CapEx %
0.0%
OpEx %
0.0%
aws-lc
CapEx %
0.0%
OpEx %
0.0%
sagemaker-python-sdk
CapEx %
0.0%
OpEx %
0.0%
s2n-tls
CapEx %
0.0%
OpEx %
0.0%
karpenter-provider-aws
CapEx %
0.0%
OpEx %
0.0%
amazon-cloudwatch-agent
CapEx %
0.0%
OpEx %
0.0%
mcp
CapEx %
0.0%
OpEx %
0.0%
amazon-ecs-agent
CapEx %
0.0%
OpEx %
0.0%
eks-anywhere-build-tooling
CapEx %
0.0%
OpEx %
0.0%
amazon-ssm-agent
CapEx %
0.0%
OpEx %
0.0%
aws-toolkit-vscode
CapEx %
0.0%
OpEx %
0.0%
Total
CapEx %
0.0%
OpEx %
100.0%

Feature Contribution

Who shipped each month's new feature work, as a share of that month's total. Bands of similar width mean new value is coming from across the team; one band that stays wide means most of it rests on the same person. Named engineers shipped the most Features over the period. Everyone else is grouped as Others.

Peter Song

44 ETV · 12% share

Jamie Mullan

17 ETV · 5% share

Rico Hermans

14 ETV · 4% share

Daniel Pinheiro

14 ETV · 4% share

James Mayclin

14 ETV · 4% share

Mark Schreiber

13 ETV · 4% share

Quarterly Summary

Engineers and the Features / Maintenance / Tests / Docs / Fixes mix for each quarter. Cost / Perf Unit is what one unit of performance costs against Q2'25. Engineers vs headcount is measured against this org's own pre-AI baseline instead, its first reading in the index, so it agrees with the capacity tile and chart above.

Q2'25—
Engineers
91
Cost / Perf Unit
0%
Engineers vs headcount
−33 engineers
Work mix
22% Features
Q3'25+11%
Engineers
96
Cost / Perf Unit
−5%
Engineers vs headcount
−32 engineers
Work mix
30% Features
Q4'250%
Engineers
109
Cost / Perf Unit
+8%
Engineers vs headcount
−45 engineers
Work mix
31% Features
Q1'26+43%
Engineers
106
Cost / Perf Unit
−26%
Engineers vs headcount
−15 engineers
Work mix
19% Features
Q2'26−10%
Engineers
98
Cost / Perf Unit
−24%
Engineers vs headcount
−16 engineers
Work mix
21% Features