Estimate your savings with Cypress

Select your team size to estimate your potential savings with conservative defaults.

Team size
Team details
Team members
Runs / week
Test suite size

Estimated annual savings

$26,500
≈ 330 hours saved / year

Savings breakdown

Smart Orchestration

Shorter runs and fewer wasted machine-minutes on every build.
$10,100
125 hrs

Test Replay

Engineers debug from the recorded run instead of reproducing failures locally.
$8,000
100 hrs

Flake Detection

Flaky tests are flagged automatically, so reruns and triage stop blocking releases.
$5,200
65 hrs
ModelContextProtocol

Cloud MCP

Your AI tools read run history directly, automating triage and debugging.
$1,600
20 hrs

Test Generation

New tests drafted from real interactions instead of written from scratch.
$1,600
20 hrs

Branch Review

Visual and functional regressions caught at PR time, before they reach production.
Reduced risk

UI Coverage

Untested elements and flows surfaced before they become incidents.
Reduced risk

Cypress Accessibility

Replaces manual spot-checks with checks on every recorded run — before audit findings pile up.
Reduced risk
Schedule a demo

Customer stories

Meet the teams saving money with Cypress

See all stories

Pendo team member adding sticky notes to a whiteboard Pendo logo

180+

Days saved in a single year through CI parallelization, with 3,500+ automated tests added.

Read their story
Perlego engineer working on a laptop Perlego logo

71%

Drop in test run times after migrating from Selenium — now shipping 20 releases a day.

Read their story
GoFundMe team collaborating GoFundMe logo

30×

Faster test runs for developers and QA engineers after adopting Cypress.

Read their story
Vidyard engineering team at work Vidyard logo

80%

Reduction in test run times with parallelization across the suite.

Read their story
Spotahome team collaborating in the office Spotahome logo

70%

More time saved once parallelization was turned on in their CI pipeline.

Read their story
DHL logistics operations DHL logo

50%

Less test execution time, while broadening coverage across the platform.

Read their story

Trusted by startups and enterprises all over the world

Frequently asked questions

Ask our support assistant

How is the estimated savings calculated?
The total is the sum of five capability estimates — Smart Orchestration, Test Replay, Flake Detection, Test Generation, and Cloud MCP — each priced from your inputs (team members, runs per week, and suite size) and a small set of named assumptions. Nothing is hidden: every assumption is editable under "Advanced assumptions", and every result row shows its exact math in a tooltip. The model is deliberately conservative — it only prices time and compute directly attributable to a specific capability, credits adoption below what Cypress observes across Cloud organizations, and leaves protection-style value (like the incidents that never happen) out of the total entirely.
What is Smart Orchestration?
Smart Orchestration is Cypress Cloud's set of CI coordination features: Parallelization and Load Balancing split your suite across machines based on real spec timings, Spec Prioritization runs recently failed specs first so failures surface sooner, and Auto Cancellation stops a run on the first failure instead of burning machine-minutes on a build that is already red. The calculator credits it two ways: machine-minutes cut from every run, and shorter wall-clock time on the runs someone is actively waiting for.
How do flaky tests impact my team's efficiency?
Flaky tests impose three distinct costs. They block releases — a flaky failure on a release branch is a red build someone must notice, re-trigger, and wait out. They waste CI compute — the manual fix replays the entire suite to clear a single unreliable test. And they consume triage time — without run history, identifying which tests are flaky means log-diving across builds by hand. Flake Detection addresses all three: it flags flaky tests automatically with their full history and artifacts, and paired with Test Retries it keeps a flaky failure from turning the build red in the first place. This row of the calculator is calibrated against anonymized usage data from thousands of organizations on Cypress Cloud, and it deliberately credits your team below the observed medians.
How is Parallelization different with Cypress Cloud compared to other frameworks?
Most frameworks shard statically: spec files are split across machines by file count or by a config you maintain by hand, which drifts out of balance as the suite grows. Cypress Cloud load balances dynamically, assigning specs to machines based on the actual timing history of your previous runs, so no machine sits idle while another finishes a long spec. There is no sharding config to maintain — add machines in any CI provider, pass --parallel, and Cloud handles the distribution as your suite changes.
How does Test Replay save debugging time?
When a test fails in CI, Test Replay captures the complete run — DOM snapshots, network requests, and console output — so engineers debug the exact failure in Cypress Cloud instead of pulling the branch and attempting to reproduce it locally. Reproduction is usually the most expensive part of a CI failure, and flaky or environment-specific failures often can't be reproduced locally at all. The calculator credits a conservative 10 hours per team member per year; teams that debug CI failures weekly typically save more.
What does the calculator assume about AI features like Test Generation and Cloud MCP?
Adoption, not magic. Both rows credit roughly one in five team members actively using these workflows — never the whole team across the board. Each Test Generation adopter is credited a fixed 20 generated tests per year, and each Cloud MCP adopter is credited agent-assisted triage hours that scale with how much failure volume there actually is to remediate — more failing tests means more credited time, with diminishing returns so a large suite can't inflate the row. If your team adopts these workflows faster than one in five, the estimate runs low.
Why isn't every product included in the estimated savings?
Some value is real but resists honest pricing. Branch Review, UI Coverage, and Cypress Accessibility primarily prevent things — visual and functional regressions reaching production, untested flows becoming incidents, accessibility findings accumulating into a costly remediation project — and the cost of an incident that never happened varies too much between teams to claim a defensible dollar figure. Rather than inflate the total, the calculator lists these as unquantifiable. That understates them: a single prevented production incident can exceed the entire annual estimate above it, and for businesses where revenue flows through the product — a checkout, a trading platform, a booking flow — a regression caught before release can be worth millions in revenue that never went missing.
How is Cypress Accessibility more efficient than other automated accessibility testing tools?
Cypress Accessibility runs entirely in Cypress Cloud on the test runs you already record — no new tests to write, no plugins to configure, and no added run time. Every page and component state your tests visit is checked automatically, so coverage grows with your suite instead of with a separate audit effort, and issues are grouped across views with the full DOM context needed to fix them. Manual audits and unit-level checkers cover one page at a time; Cypress Accessibility covers everything your tests already reach, on every run.
Can I get a tailored savings analysis for my team?
Absolutely. Talk to our team — we'll walk through your CI setup and build a projection specific to your organization.