Guides → Playground & Guide → AI ROI Quick Check - Will Your AI Investment Pay Back?

AI ROI Quick Check - Will Your AI Investment Pay Back?

Meet Marcus Lee. CFO at a 250-person professional services firm. "Engineering wants to spend $5K/month on AI tools. Will this pay back, or am I subsidizing a vendor?"

🔥 MIT NANDA: 95% of GenAI pilots fail to show ROI.

The story

The MIT NANDA finding is brutal: 95% of GenAI pilots fail to demonstrate measurable ROI. Not because AI doesn't work - because nobody priced the workload first.

Marcus has 50 employees who'd benefit from an AI assistant. Engineering wants to spend $5K/mo on the API + tools. He's been burned before - 'productivity tools' that turned into shelfware. He wants the math, defensible to his board.

The math has 4 inputs: hours saved per user × loaded hourly cost × number of users − monthly AI spend. Add revenue lift if any. Subtract risk-adjusted setup cost. The number you get is monthly ROI in dollars. The payback period tells you when this becomes net-positive.

Most teams skip this calculation, then act surprised when the CFO kills the project at month 6. Don't be that team.

About this calculator: AI ROI Quick Check - Will Your AI Investment Pay Back?

MIT NANDA reports 95% of GenAI pilots fail to show ROI. This calculator + guide pricing the workload - hours saved, revenue lift, risk avoided, AI spend - with payback period.

Inputs you control

Input Impact on result Range Typical
Hours saved per user per month How much time the AI tool saves the average user, per month. Be conservative - the calc will show whether even modest savings cover cost. 0 – 80 8
Number of affected users How many people actually use the tool regularly. Critical: this is ACTIVE users, not licensed seats. Most B2B AI tools have a 30-50% adoption gap between purchased seats and actual use. 1 – 5K 50
Loaded hourly cost ($) Salary ÷ 2080 hours/year + benefits + overhead. Knowledge work typically lands at $50-$150 fully loaded. Engineers $80-$200. Lawyers $200-$500. 25 – 500 75

Outputs computed for you · model: roi

Output How inputs affect it
Monthly cost ($) computed from inputs
Annual cost ($) monthlyUsd × 12

Below: live sliders. Move them to see numbers change in real time. * Output uses the generic compute model — for precise numbers use the full calculator below.

What you're looking at

Each input shapes your cost. Move the slider — see the impact.

8

How much time the AI tool saves the average user, per month. Be conservative - the calc will show whether even modest savings cover cost.

Estimated:
50

How many people actually use the tool regularly. Critical: this is ACTIVE users, not licensed seats. Most B2B AI tools have a 30-50% adoption gap between purchased seats and actual use.

Estimated:
75

Salary ÷ 2080 hours/year + benefits + overhead. Knowledge work typically lands at $50-$150 fully loaded. Engineers $80-$200. Lawyers $200-$500.

Estimated:

Ready to run the numbers?

Open the full calculator — pick a model, enter your tokens, see per-call, daily, monthly, and annual cost.

🚀 Open the full calculator →

Reading your result

Net monthly ROI = (hours × users × hourly cost) + revenue lift + cost displaced + (risk × impact ÷ 12) − AI spend. The setup cost gets amortized over 12-24 months.

Read the payback period. Under 6 months: green light, this is a real ROI. 6-12 months: defensible if you have committed budget. 12-24 months: risky in volatile org. Beyond 24 months: don't bother - vendor pricing or AI capability will change before payback.

Read the headroom. If your monthly ROI is 3× your AI spend, you have margin to be wrong about hours saved by 50% and still come out ahead. If it's 1.2×, you're betting the project on optimistic estimates.

Test the conservative case. Halve your hours-saved estimate. Does the math still work? If yes, this is robust. If no, you're hoping more than calculating - and your CFO will sniff that out.

What "good" looks like:
  • Strong ROI: 10-50× monthly AI spend in time saved (knowledge work + 50+ users)
  • Defensible ROI: 3-10× monthly AI spend (typical for engineering tools)
  • Marginal ROI: 1-3× - works but easily falls apart with adoption gaps
  • Negative ROI: <1× - kill it, or scope it down to a smaller pilot team

Top 3 cost-effective vendors right now

Verified 20 hours ago
  1. 1
    GPT-5 Mini
    $0.250 in · $2.00 out ·
  2. 2
    Command
    $1.00 in · $2.00 out ·
  3. 3
    devstral-2
    $0.400 in · $2.00 out ·

Three real scenarios

Same calculator, three different team sizes. Click a tab to see how the numbers shift.

$5,000 / month ≈ $60,000 / year

8hr/user × 50 users × $75/hr = $30K/mo time saved against $5K AI spend = 6× ROI. Payback ~1 month including setup. This is the textbook positive case.

Healthy range: Strong ROI: $30K/mo saved on $5K spend (6×)

See inputs used
hoursSavedPerUserMonth
8
affectedUsers
50
hourlyValueUsd
75
monthlyAiSpendUsd
5,000
revenueLiftMonthlyUsd
0
costDisplacedMonthlyUsd
0
riskProbabilityPct
0
riskImpactUsd
0
setupCostMultiplier
1.5

Trade-offs

Cost isn't the only dimension. Click any constraint — see how recommendations change.

What matters most to you? Click any dimension — recommendations update.

Best fit for "cost":

  1. Conservative input estimates Cuts ROI claim 40-60%

    Better to under-promise. Halve your hours-saved estimate before bringing the analysis to the CFO.

ROI calcs are gamed all the time. The cheapest model gets picked, the highest hours-saved estimate gets used, the adoption gap gets ignored. Result: 95% of pilots fail. Always run the conservative case in parallel with the optimistic case.

Use cases

Pre-loaded scenarios for the most common applications. Click a tab to see realistic numbers — then the "Try this scenario" button to load it into the calculator above.

$1,200 / month ≈ $14,400 / year

Lower hourly cost ($35 - support reps), but adds $8K/mo of displaced contractor spend. Total: $5,250 hours + $8K displaced = $13,250 vs $1,200 spend. 11× ROI. Cost-displacement is huge for support.

Healthy range: Support ROI: 9× including displaced contractor cost

See inputs used
hoursSavedPerUserMonth
6
affectedUsers
25
hourlyValueUsd
35
monthlyAiSpendUsd
1,200
revenueLiftMonthlyUsd
0
costDisplacedMonthlyUsd
8,000
riskProbabilityPct
0
riskImpactUsd
0
setupCostMultiplier
1.4

What this calculator can't tell you

Honest limitations — every model is wrong; some are useful. Where this one falls short:

For these, use: Agentic Workflow Cost for accurate AI spend estimate. Full TCO Wizard for adoption gap, time-to-value, and sensitivity analysis.

Where to go next

Refine your AI spend estimate →

Don't guess at the AI spend. Calculate it from team size, usage, model tier.

Stress-test for vendor pricing volatility →

What's your exposure if your primary vendor raises prices 50%?

Full TCO Wizard with sensitivity analysis →

Tornado chart, adoption-gap modeling, 12-month projection.

Methodology

Source
https://www.media.mit.edu/posts/the-95-failure-rate-of-genai-pilots/
Extraction
MIT NANDA Project framework + ROI engine validated against 28 published case studies
Editorial gate
8-layer defense — see aicost.ai/ai-cost-economics
Last verified
6/4/2026, 8:00:00 PM

Author: Subu Vdaygiri, Founder & CEO of CloudIntelligence.ai. 17 years Fortune 100 (Ingram Micro, Siemens). Wharton CTO program · Kellogg CPO program · 10× AWS+Azure certified.

3 years of pricing history

Why this matters: pricing for major vendors has dropped 40-90% in the last 24 months. A budget set 12 months ago is probably wrong by 30%+.

View 3-year history for →
📖 Data sources & methodology 161 text models · 9 embeddings · 24 vision · 41 audio · 8 vector DBs across 10 vendor pages · last verified 2026-06-05

Methodology

  • All prices are USD per 1 million tokens, current as of 2026-06-05.
  • Vendor-published values have no mark. Inferred/extrapolated values are marked with * and listed below.
  • Batch API discounts are 50% off standard rates across providers that offer Batch mode.
  • Prompt caching discounts vary by provider (typically 80-90% off cached input tokens).
  • Regional data-residency surcharges (Anthropic 1.1x, OpenAI 1.1x, Google regional tiers) are NOT included in base rates.
  • Long-context pricing tiers apply when input exceeds model threshold.
  • Embedding prices are input-only (no output tokens generated).

Primary sources

Last-verified date is the most recent successful daily snapshot (aicost_pricing_snapshots) or, when no snapshot exists yet, the latest successful crawler run (aicost_crawler_runs). 10 of 10 vendors are currently verified. Aggregator services (TokenCost, AI Pricing Guru, etc.) are not listed.

Anthropic
2026-06-05
https://www.anthropic.com/pricing
Daily snapshot since Sep 2023 · 578 days captured
Anthropic Docs
2026-06-05
https://platform.claude.com/docs/en/about-claude/pricing
Daily snapshot since Sep 2023 · 578 days captured
OpenAI
2026-06-05
https://openai.com/api/pricing/
Daily snapshot since Sep 2023 · 579 days captured
Google AI
2026-06-05
https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/pricing
Daily snapshot since Dec 2023 · 554 days captured
Google Vertex
2026-06-05
https://cloud.google.com/vertex-ai/generative-ai/pricing
Daily snapshot since Dec 2023 · 554 days captured
DeepSeek
2026-06-05
https://api-docs.deepseek.com/quick_start/pricing
Daily snapshot since May 2024 · 493 days captured
xAI
2026-06-05
https://x.ai/api
Daily snapshot since Nov 2024 · 411 days captured
Mistral
2026-06-05
https://mistral.ai/pricing
Daily snapshot since Dec 2023 · 552 days captured
Cohere
2026-06-05
https://cohere.com/pricing
Daily snapshot since Sep 2023 · 578 days captured

Inferred values (marked with * in calculator tables)

Derived from industry conventions, not directly published by the vendor. Typical conventions: cached input = 10% of base (90% off), Batch API = 50% of base (50% off).

Vendor / Model Field Why it’s inferred
Anthropic — Claude Sonnet 4.6 cachedInput Derived at 10% of input rate — Anthropic publishes 90% cache-hit discount on this tier.
Anthropic — Claude Sonnet 4.5 cachedInput Derived at 10% of input rate; same 90% cache-hit convention as Sonnet 4.6.
Anthropic — Claude Sonnet 4.5 batchInput Derived at 50% of standard input — Anthropic documents uniform 50% Batch discount.
Anthropic — Claude Sonnet 4.5 batchOutput Derived at 50% of standard output — Anthropic documents uniform 50% Batch discount.
Anthropic — Claude Haiku 4.5 cachedInput Derived at 10% of input rate — Anthropic 90% cache-hit discount convention.
OpenAI — GPT-5.4 Mini cachedInput Derived at 10% of input — OpenAI documents automatic 90% discount on cache hits across GPT-5.x tier.
OpenAI — GPT-5.4 Nano cachedInput Derived at 10% of input — OpenAI 90% cache-hit convention.
OpenAI — GPT-5.4 Nano batchInput Derived at 50% of input — OpenAI Batch API uniform 50% discount.
OpenAI — GPT-5.4 Nano batchOutput Derived at 50% of output — OpenAI Batch API uniform 50% discount.
OpenAI — GPT-5.4 Pro cachedInput Derived at 10% of input — OpenAI 90% cache-hit convention.
OpenAI — GPT-5.4 Pro batchInput Derived at 50% of input — OpenAI Batch API uniform 50% discount.
OpenAI — GPT-5.4 Pro batchOutput Derived at 50% of output — OpenAI Batch API uniform 50% discount.
OpenAI — GPT-5.2 cachedInput Derived at 10% of input; no residency uplift.
OpenAI — GPT-5.2 batchInput Derived at 50% of input.
OpenAI — GPT-5.2 batchOutput Derived at 50% of output.
OpenAI — GPT-5 cachedInput Derived at 10% of input.
OpenAI — GPT-5 batchInput Derived at 50% of input.
OpenAI — GPT-5 batchOutput Derived at 50% of output.
OpenAI — GPT-5.5 Pro cachedInput Derived at 10% of input — OpenAI does not publish a cached rate for *-pro models; using the family convention.
OpenAI — GPT-5.5 Pro batchInput Derived at 50% of input.
OpenAI — GPT-5.5 Pro batchOutput Derived at 50% of output.
OpenAI — GPT-5.2 Pro cachedInput Derived at 10% of input — pro-tier convention.
OpenAI — GPT-5.2 Pro batchInput Derived at 50% of input.
OpenAI — GPT-5.2 Pro batchOutput Derived at 50% of output.
OpenAI — GPT-5.1 batchInput Derived at 50% of input.
OpenAI — GPT-5.1 batchOutput Derived at 50% of output.
OpenAI — GPT-5 Pro batchInput Derived at 50% of input.
OpenAI — GPT-5 Pro batchOutput Derived at 50% of output.
OpenAI — GPT-5 Nano cachedInput Derived at 10% of input.
OpenAI — GPT-5 Nano batchInput Derived at 50% of input.
OpenAI — GPT-5 Nano batchOutput Derived at 50% of output.
Google — Gemini 3 Flash cachedInput Derived at 10% of input — Google caching discount convention ~90%.
Google — Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite cachedInput Derived at 10% of input — Google caching convention.
Google — Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite batchInput Derived at 50% of input — Google Batch API uniform 50% discount.
Google — Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite batchOutput Derived at 50% of output — Google Batch API uniform 50% discount.
Google — Gemini 2.5 Pro cachedInput Derived at 10% of input.
Google — Gemini 2.5 Flash cachedInput Derived at 10% of input.
Google — Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite cachedInput Derived at 10% of input — Google caching convention.
Google — Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite batchInput Derived at 50% of input — Google Batch API uniform 50% discount.
Google — Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite batchOutput Derived at 50% of output — Google Batch API uniform 50% discount.
Google — Gemini 2.0 Flash cachedInput Derived at 25% of input per Google 2.0 family caching rates.
Google — Gemini 2.0 Flash batchInput Derived at 50% of input — Google Batch API uniform 50% discount.
Google — Gemini 2.0 Flash batchOutput Derived at 50% of output — Google Batch API uniform 50% discount.
Google — Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite cachedInput Derived at 10% of input — Google caching convention.
Google — Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite batchInput Derived at 50% of input — Google Batch API uniform 50% discount.
Google — Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite batchOutput Derived at 50% of output — Google Batch API uniform 50% discount.
xAI — Grok 4 (legacy) cachedInput Extrapolated at 25% of base.

Pricing is cross-verified against the LiteLLM community registry when available. Daily snapshots are kept in aicost_pricing_snapshots; every change is logged to aicost_price_changelog with old & new values for full audit trail. Read the full methodology →