ROVQIX performs independent code audits and technical due diligence covering architecture, security, maintainability, test coverage, dependency risk and delivery velocity — delivered as a plain-language report with severity-ranked findings and remediation estimates.
Whether you are acquiring a company, inheriting a codebase or deciding whether to rebuild, the question is the same: what is actually here, and what will it cost to live with.
Typical audit
Findings by severity
Remediation estimates
No incentive to find work
How the system is structured, whether it matches its scale, and where it will strain next.
Authorisation, input handling, secrets, dependencies and exposure reviewed against OWASP guidance.
Test coverage, documentation, consistency and how quickly a new engineer could become productive.
Outdated, unmaintained or vulnerable dependencies, plus licence compatibility for commercial use.
CI, deployment, rollback and monitoring — how safely the team can actually ship.
Written for a decision-maker, with severity, cost to remediate and what happens if you do nothing.
Severity-ranked findings, each with evidence, business impact and a remediation estimate.
| Severity | Meaning | Expected action |
|---|---|---|
| Critical | Active security or data-loss risk | Fix before anything else |
| High | Will cause an incident or block growth | Fix within a quarter |
| Medium | Slows delivery or raises cost | Plan into roadmap |
| Low | Worth doing when nearby | Opportunistic |
| Observation | Context, not a defect | Awareness only |
An audit is priced and delivered independently of any implementation work. We are paid the same whether the conclusion is 'this is in good shape' or 'this needs significant work'.
No. Read access to the repository, plus conversations with the team, covers most of it. Some findings need infrastructure visibility, which can be a walkthrough rather than access.
One week for a focused review, two to three for a full codebase audit, and up to four for investment due diligence including team assessment.
Rarely. Rewrites are usually the wrong answer and we say so. When one is genuinely justified we explain specifically why incremental improvement will not work.
For architecture, security patterns, testing and operations, often yes. For deep language-specific idiom review in Java, Go or C#, we would tell you to use a specialist rather than charging you to learn.
Indicative ranges in USD. Every engagement is quoted to a written scope before work starts, so the number you approve is the number you pay.
$2,500 – $5,000
1 week
Best for: One specific concern
$5,000 – $15,000
2–3 weeks
Best for: Inheriting or acquiring a codebase
$8,000 – $25,000
2–4 weeks
Best for: Investors and acquirers
How we think about this work, in more depth.
Audit
A 30-minute call, then a written proposal with scope, price and timeline within two to three working days. No retainer required to get a real number, and no obligation if the answer is that we are not the right fit.