Cloudflare — Engineering Performance
99 engineers now deliver what 405 would have in Q1 2025.
Performance snapshot
Today's rolling 90-day reading for Cloudflare, compared with the start of the series. Pick a window to move that comparison point.
Avg. perf / dev / mo
+309.5%
0.42 → 1.72 ETV
Active engineers
−19.5%
123.0 → 99.0
Features
+2.3pp
27.5% → 29.8%
vs. 500 OSS index
0.45x
0.46x → 0.45x · −55% below
Engineering capacity
Effective engineers behind Cloudflare, against its pre-AI baseline. Each subject has its own: Cloudflare's is 0.42 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.
Cloudflare vs. 500 OSS Performance Index
Per-engineer ETV for Cloudflare 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: Cloudflare is 55% below the index (1.72 vs 3.85 ETV/dev/mo). At the start of the tracked period the gap was 54% below.
Behind the numbers
Written summary of the work completed each month.
During August 2026, the team focused extensively on webstreams parity, test infrastructure consolidation, and OpenAPI specification alignment across 530 commits. Total output remained steady and in line with the recent run rate, marked by an 80% increase in Tests score compared to the 5-month average alongside candidate-material drops in Features (-37%) and Fixes (-49%).
Highlights
- Enhanced the webstreams implementation with support for
TransformStream({ expectedLength })in 0d682925 (James), per-write non-fatal rejections andSharedArrayBufferhandling in aa3f1901 (James), and synthesizedbyobRequesthandling in 518caabc (James). - Expanded and structured stream test coverage by introducing dedicated test suites for sockets in c4ca7e95 (James) and Cache, HTMLRewriter, and FormData in 4edf3452 (James).
- Conducted extensive OpenAPI schema updates across
openapi.jsonandopenapi.yaml, adding 504 Gateway Timeout definitions (8b3172aa (cloudflare-schema-publisher[bot)], 2b0937f3 (cloudflare-schema-publisher[bot)]), required repositorydisplay_nameattributes (efc9e12b (cloudflare-schema-publisher[bot)], a1b6e7a6 (cloudflare-schema-publisher[bot)]), and Cloudforce One binary storage configurations (6f3c2e6c (cloudflare-schema-publisher[bot)], 8eb6034e (cloudflare-schema-publisher[bot)]).
Observations
- Tests score rose to 46 (+80% above the 25-point 5-month average), driven by new test suites and stream verification hardening such as 620e9071 (James) and 4d64d5b0 (James).
- Features score dropped 37% relative to the 5-month average (21 vs 33), while Maintenance increased 36% (14 vs 10 5-month average), reflecting an operational shift toward release housekeeping (8865ba50 (Workers), cb5785a0 (Workers)) and schema hygiene.
- Fixes score decreased 49% from the 5-month average (9 vs 17 5-month average), with bug fixes primarily resolving stream edge cases like parked BYOB reads in 6b1f619f (James) and schema corrections in 401ea427 (cloudflare-schema-publisher[bot)].
- Commit volume reached 530 (+42% compared to the 373-commit 5-month average), with a large proportion of changes concentrated in OpenAPI definition files.
Based on 530 commits42.9 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.
agents
Avg performance
10.77 ETV
per engineer per month
Avg. dev performance / month (90-day MA)
+22.8%
Work mix
Features
30%
Maint
9%
Tests
39%
Docs
8%
Fixes
15%
sandbox-sdk
Avg performance
2.36 ETV
per engineer per month
Avg. dev performance / month (90-day MA)
+31.1%
Work mix
Features
43%
Maint
9%
Tests
30%
Docs
11%
Fixes
7%
workerd
Avg performance
1.75 ETV
per engineer per month
Avg. dev performance / month (90-day MA)
+1237.5%
Work mix
Features
32%
Maint
8%
Tests
40%
Docs
6%
Fixes
14%
workers-sdk
Avg performance
1.13 ETV
per engineer per month
Avg. dev performance / month (90-day MA)
+30.3%
Work mix
Features
27%
Maint
20%
Tests
34%
Docs
7%
Fixes
11%
pingora
Avg performance
1.04 ETV
per engineer per month
Avg. dev performance / month (90-day MA)
-17.9%
Work mix
Features
45%
Maint
25%
Tests
16%
Docs
1%
Fixes
13%
cloudflared
Avg performance
1.00 ETV
per engineer per month
Avg. dev performance / month (90-day MA)
+624.8%
Work mix
Features
10%
Maint
17%
Tests
53%
Docs
6%
Fixes
14%
foundations
Avg performance
0.68 ETV
per engineer per month
Avg. dev performance / month (90-day MA)
-29.3%
Work mix
Features
82%
Maint
14%
Tests
2%
Docs
2%
Fixes
0%
cloudflare-docs
Avg performance
0.44 ETV
per engineer per month
Avg. dev performance / month (90-day MA)
+16.5%
Work mix
Features
20%
Maint
15%
Tests
8%
Docs
51%
Fixes
7%
workers-rs
Avg performance
0.26 ETV
per engineer per month
Avg. dev performance / month (90-day MA)
-36.4%
Work mix
Features
50%
Maint
9%
Tests
18%
Docs
4%
Fixes
19%
telescope
Avg performance
0.20 ETV
per engineer per month
Avg. dev performance / month (90-day MA)
+100.0%
Work mix
Features
25%
Maint
13%
Tests
16%
Docs
12%
Fixes
34%
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
−76%
If performance per engineer more than doubled, each unit of engineering performance now costs approximately 76% 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
+306 engineers
At today's productivity, the current 99-person team delivers the performance equivalent of 405 engineers at the baseline 90-day rolling window (ending 2025-04-01). That's roughly 306 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.
- CapEx %
- 86.1%
- OpEx %
- 13.9%
- CapEx %
- 83.9%
- OpEx %
- 16.1%
- CapEx %
- 78.2%
- OpEx %
- 21.8%
- CapEx %
- 78.0%
- OpEx %
- 22.0%
- CapEx %
- 77.0%
- OpEx %
- 23.0%
- CapEx %
- 71.4%
- OpEx %
- 28.6%
- CapEx %
- 68.9%
- OpEx %
- 31.1%
- CapEx %
- 68.8%
- OpEx %
- 31.2%
- CapEx %
- 62.1%
- OpEx %
- 37.9%
- CapEx %
- 52.5%
- OpEx %
- 47.5%
- CapEx %
- 75.7%
- OpEx %
- 24.3%
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.
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.
- Engineers
- 134
- Cost / Perf Unit
- 0%
- Engineers vs headcount
- +36 engineers
- Work mix
- 29% Features
- Engineers
- 145
- Cost / Perf Unit
- −2%
- Engineers vs headcount
- +43 engineers
- Work mix
- 32% Features
- Engineers
- 140
- Cost / Perf Unit
- −3%
- Engineers vs headcount
- +42 engineers
- Work mix
- 28% Features
- Engineers
- 148
- Cost / Perf Unit
- −38%
- Engineers vs headcount
- +152 engineers
- Work mix
- 36% Features
- Engineers
- 136
- Cost / Perf Unit
- −49%
- Engineers vs headcount
- +202 engineers
- Work mix
- 28% Features