Technical due diligence

Timelines vary based on scope and access. A focused review of a single product or codebase typically takes one to two weeks from access to delivered report. More complex assessments covering multiple systems, integrations, or a larger engineering organization may take two to four weeks. For time-sensitive deals, expedited timelines are available. We'll scope the timeline clearly at the start of the engagement.

At minimum, I need read access to the code repositories, architecture documentation, and a walkthrough with someone who knows the systems (typically a senior engineer or CTO). For a more thorough review, access to infrastructure configuration, deployment pipelines, monitoring dashboards, and incident records is helpful. I work within whatever access constraints exist, and I'm comfortable with NDA arrangements before any access is granted.

A code review is a line-by-line examination of code quality in a narrow scope. Technical due diligence is a business-oriented assessment of the entire technology function. Codebase quality is one input, but the review also covers architecture, infrastructure, security, team, processes, and organizational risk. The output is designed to inform decisions at the executive or investor level, not just improve the code.

That depends on who commissioned the engagement. In investor-commissioned reviews, the report is delivered to the investor, though I'm happy to share findings with the target company's technical team afterward, as this often leads to a productive conversation. In founder-commissioned reviews, the report belongs entirely to the founder. I can also produce tailored versions of the report for different audiences if needed.

Yes, and this is one of the most common requests I receive. Outsourced codebases often have specific patterns: inconsistent quality across contractors, sparse documentation, tightly coupled architecture, and test coverage gaps. I'm experienced in assessing these environments objectively, without preconceived assumptions, and delivering findings that give you a clear picture of what you actually own and what it will take to maintain or improve it.

The report is designed to be self-contained and actionable. After delivery, I'm available for follow-up questions and clarification sessions. If you need ongoing support to act on the recommendations (whether that's architectural guidance, engineering leadership, or a structured improvement plan) I can help with that too, either directly or through a follow-on engagement. Many clients use the findings as the starting point for a broader technical advisory relationship.