Every figure on this page is badged by evidence tier. See the standard →
The record

Nine months. 391 assets.
Every dollar reconciled.

Not a projection, not a model output, and not a slide. A reconciliation against a paying customer's own cost records, on a fleet across eleven states, with zero field hardware installed and nobody from Firstlook ever on site.

Operator verified Reconciled to closed work orders
9.3×
Return on spend
391
Assets monitored
26 of 28
Failures flagged in advance
150+ days
Median advance notice

Annualized, that works out to $1,616 of realized savings per monitored asset, per year. It is the single number we carry into every other conversation.

Composition

What the 9.3× is made of.

Two things about that number matter more than its size, and both cut against the usual sales story.

🔍

Almost none of it was avoided outages

It came from asset-level failures caught before they escalated. That is exactly the category redundancy hides in a data center or a process plant, and exactly the category nobody counts today.

🌱

It is a floor, not a ceiling

A water failure costs far less than a thermal event on a GPU cluster or a lost pharmaceutical batch. So we carry $1,616 per asset per year into other sectors unchanged, as a floor rather than a target.

Case study · lift-station network

Nine interventions, line by line.

A separate eight-week validation on a Gulf-coast lift-station network, run with the same operator. Every row is a real work order: what PRISM flagged, what the crew spent, and what the failure would have cost had it run to completion. The operator priced the avoided cost on their own books.

Operator verified Nine closed work orders, Aug to Sep 2025
Preventive spend
$8,749

Parts and crew time across all nine. Six of the nine cost under $1,200.

Failure cost avoided
$138,101

Priced by the operator against their own historical cost for the same failure run to completion.

Return on the spend
15.8×

$129,352 net across eight weeks. Higher than the fleet-wide 9.3× because this window contains only acted-on flags.

StationLead timeSpentAvoidedWhat the crew found
Lift station, LA transfer3 days$225$29,740Major leak. Worn marine hose replaced.
Lift station, residential LA14 days$1,474$28,491Pump 2 overload. Replaced before it seized.
Lift station, subdivision12 days$2,981$26,984Both pumps clogging. Pulled, cleaned, reinstalled.
Lift station, coastal LA10 days$309$14,656Three floats fallen in the wet well, wiring nicked.
Lift station, LA collection9 days$1,145$13,820Rag build-up on Pump 1. Station failed two days after the clear.
Lift station, LA east10 days$2,475$12,490VFD miswired at install, all wet-well floats bad.
Lift station, LA residential3 days$28$3,992Floats greased over and off the rack.
Lift station, LA residential3 days$56$3,964Floats coated in grease. Cleaned and repositioned.
Lift station, LA north3 days$56$3,964Float adjustment. Corrected the following day.
Total, 9 interventions$8,749$138,10115.8× on the spend

Read the lead times carefully. These are days, not months, and that is the point of including them. The 150-day median elsewhere describes slow mechanical degradation: a bearing or an impeller wearing down over a season. The faults above are acute and hydraulic: a float falls off a rack, grease coats a switch, a hose gives way. They develop in days, so days is all the notice there is to get. A three-day warning on a $28 float that prevents a $3,992 sanitary overflow is the best return in the table.

Sixteen emergency callouts were avoided over the eight weeks. The operator's baseline for this network was roughly 1.1 catastrophic failures per week at an average of $20,000 each, which is the figure the avoided-cost column is priced against.

Advance notice

28 failures, scored against the model.

A regional extract from the nine-month deployment. Every failure in the window, with the model running the whole time and nothing wired to act on it.

26 of 28Flagged in advanceThe scoring window reaches back 180 days from each failure.
150 daysMedian advance noticeBetween the first model flag and the date the work order was written.
7At the window edgeStill flagged at 180 days, so their true lead time is longer than the window can show.
2Never flaggedNo crossing at all. They carry full cost in the analysis and earn credit nowhere.
Cost mechanics

The same repair, done on a schedule.

PRISM does not reduce the number of pumps needing attention. It moves the work from the emergency column to the planned column. The pump is replaced either way, so the credit is only what advance notice recovers. That turns out to be most of the bill.

Cost lineRun to failureIntervene on noticeRecovered
Parts, materials, contractorFull costIdenticalNothing
Emergency mobilization premiumIncurredAvoidedFully recovered
Cascade damage: drop pipe, wire, controlsIncurredAvoided by controlled shutdownFully recovered
Boil-water notice & clearance samplingIncurred on service lossNot triggeredFully recovered
Field labourAfter-hours rateStraight time, fewer hoursMost of the gap
Lost revenue & bill creditsIncurredNot triggeredFully recovered
Planned outage coordinationNoneSmall cost addedNet new cost

The labour line, in full. Over the nine-month deployment, 711 emergency crew hours at the after-hours rate came out of the schedule and 400 straight-time hours went back in inside the normal shift. That is 311 fewer hours worked, at a better rate, and $37,983 of avoided labour cost on that one line.

Expect the work-order count to rise, not fall. Acting on a warning means touching assets that had not yet failed. Any pilot review that measures success by counting work orders will read as a failure. The measure that holds up is emergency and after-hours labour hours against the same interval in the prior year.

The only number that should convince you is yours.

We build a model on your telemetry and run it backwards against failures you already lived through. Misses counted as loudly as hits.

No cost to evaluate. No live connection required. No obligation.

Basis of figures

Firstlook production data. Reconciled deployment results, event register, lead times and intervention rate: a production water deployment of 391 assets over nine months; a 28-event regional extract over a 228-day observation window scored against closed work orders; and a separate eight-week lift-station validation comprising nine closed interventions priced by the operator. The two engagements are reported separately and their figures are not combined.

Cost model. Built from a loaded straight-time field-labour rate with an after-hours multiplier, plus documented mobilization, cascade, notification, sampling and lost-revenue lines. A probability-weighted reputational allocation is included in the fully loaded basis and can be removed on request for a hard-cost view. Avoided-cost figures in the ledger are the operator's own pricing against their historical cost for the same failure run to completion.

Third-party research. Uptime Institute Annual Outage Analysis 2026 (n=94) and Global Survey 2025; ITIC 2024 Hourly Cost of Downtime Survey; Allianz Commercial data center claims review; Swiss Re and FM Global on direct liquid cooling; AFCOM State of the Data Center 2026.

Excluded on purpose. The widely quoted per-minute downtime cost that traces to a vendor-sponsored study of 63 sites and has not been refreshed in a decade; asset-life extension and capital-deferral upside; and energy and carbon savings from efficiency correction. Full reference list and the underlying cost model available on request under NDA.