Elite teams deploy182x more often
DORA 2024 surfaced only 19% of teams reach elite performance. Security issue queues that wait for sprint allocation are one of the primary blockers. Hyrax closes the gap.
- Source: DORA, Accelerate State of DevOps Report 2024.
Security issues that stall your DORA metrics
19% of teams are elite. Lead time explains most of the gap.
DORA 2024 surfaced elite teams have lead times 127x faster than low performers. Security review queues, unresolved SAST issues, and manual triage are among the most consistent contributors to lead time inflation.
DORA, Accelerate State of DevOps Report 2024.Developers spend 84% of their time on work that isn't coding.
IDC 2024 surfaced developers spend only 16% of their time on direct feature development. The rest goes to meetings, context switching, code review, security triage, and unplanned maintenance.
IDC, "The Business Value of Developer Productivity," 2024.Elite cycle time is under 25 hours. Most teams aren't close.
LinearB 2026 Engineering Benchmarks set elite cycle time at under 25 hours. Security issue backlogs that grow between sprint cycles extend cycle time without appearing on the sprint board.
LinearB, 2026 Software Engineering Benchmarks Report.Move your DORA metrics without adding sprint work
Lead time and deployment frequency
- Hyrax runs continuously - issues surface at introduction, not at quarterly review
- Autonomous upgrade execution means security issues don't wait for sprint allocation
- Every change is a PR - review and merge without a context-switch
Developer time reclaimed
- Hyrax closes issues without developer intervention - no triage, no manual application
- Engineers review and approve PRs Hyrax opens; they don't generate them
- Discovery profiles your codebase automatically - no authoring sprints
Cycle time and PR throughput
- Issues execute as PRs with full test suite validation before delivery
- Hyrax works through the backlog continuously, including debt accumulated between sprints
- Linear ticket lifecycle closes automatically
How Hyrax moves your DORA metrics
| DORA metric | How unresolved issues affect it | Hyrax |
|---|---|---|
| Deployment Frequency | Security blocks in CI/CD reduce merge confidence | Continuous upgrade execution keeps the pipeline clear |
| Lead Time for Changes | Manual triage and sprint allocation inflate lead time | Issues execute autonomously - lead time impact is measured |
| Change Failure Rate | Unvalidated changes shipped under pressure increase incidents | 13-step verification runs before any change merges |
| Time to Restore | Unpatched vulnerabilities extend MTTR | Known issues are closed before they reach production |
Common questions
from engineering leads
Our SAST scanner already runs in CI/CD. What does Hyrax add?
The scanner surfaces issues. Hyrax closes them. If your SAST issues are going into a dashboard queue and waiting for sprint allocation, Hyrax is the execution layer that turns scanner output into merged PRs.
How does Hyrax fit into a team already running code review?
Hyrax opens PRs for issues it resolves autonomously. Each one is scoped to a single issue and arrives pre-verified - issue, resolve diff, and passing tests attached - so reviewing it is faster than the manual find-fix-close cycle it replaces. The PR Review workflow reviews every Hyrax PR and blocks merge on must-resolve issues before a human looks. Code review doesn't change; the manual remediation work that used to precede it goes away.
We already have a security team. Why does this affect engineering leads?
Because SAST queues land on the engineering backlog, not the security backlog. The security team surfaces issues; engineering allocates sprint time. Hyrax removes unresolved security issues from sprint planning entirely.
Can I measure Hyrax's impact on DORA metrics?
Yes. You can measure lead time from issue introduction to PR merge, compare change failure rate before and after, and track backlog reduction. The metrics are derivable from the PR and Linear ticket history.