Contents
- The COCOMO II (Constructive Cost Model) framework, the industry standard for software cost estimation, places typical development costs at $3-$18 per line of code depending on project complexity, team experience, and development environment.
- The $0.06/LOC figure is not a projection.
- Cost per LOC is a useful comparison metric because it normalizes across project sizes and timelines.
The audited cost per line of code with AI-assisted development is $0.06/LOC, based on Stealth Labz's $65,394 total build cost divided by 596,903 lines of production code across 10 deployed systems -- 50x-300x cheaper than traditional software development benchmarks.
Traditional Benchmarks
The COCOMO II (Constructive Cost Model) framework, the industry standard for software cost estimation, places typical development costs at $3-$18 per line of code depending on project complexity, team experience, and development environment. For mid-complexity business applications -- the category that covers CRM systems, lead generation platforms, and e-commerce tools -- COCOMO II estimates typically land at $8-$15/LOC. At those rates, Stealth Labz's 596,903-line portfolio would cost $4.8M-$9.0M.
How $0.06/LOC Was Achieved
The $0.06/LOC figure is not a projection. It is calculated from QuickBooks-verified expenditures:
| Cost Category | Amount |
|---|---|
| CON-02 (primary contractor) | $40,700 |
| CON-03 (secondary contractor) | $9,722 |
| CON-03/additional (contractor) | $12,308 |
| Anthropic/Claude (AI) | $1,333 |
| OpenAI (AI) | $1,301 |
| Leonardo.AI | $30 |
| Total build cost | $65,394 |
| Total LOC | 596,903 |
| Cost per LOC | $0.06 |
The cost per LOC also decreased over time as the portfolio compounded. Early projects carried higher per-LOC costs because infrastructure was being built for the first time. Later projects inherited 95%+ of their codebase from the foundation, driving the marginal cost per new line toward zero.
Why This Metric Matters (and Its Limits)
Cost per LOC is a useful comparison metric because it normalizes across project sizes and timelines. The 50x-300x gap between $0.06 and the $3-$18 COCOMO II range reflects three structural advantages of the CEM approach:
- Foundation reuse: 95%+ of infrastructure code was written once and deployed across all 10 systems. Traditional development rebuilds this infrastructure for every project.
- AI-assisted generation: AI tools handled boilerplate, pattern implementation, and documentation -- work that traditionally consumes 40-60% of developer time.
- Compounding cost reduction: The 97.6% cost reduction over the portfolio was driven by each project making the next one cheaper, not by any single efficiency gain.
The limitation: LOC is a quantity metric, not a quality metric. However, the portfolio's 12.1% product defect rate (against 20-50% industry norms) confirms that lower cost per line did not produce lower quality code.
For decision-makers evaluating development proposals: ask for cost-per-LOC estimates and compare against the $3-$18 COCOMO II baseline. Any AI-assisted operation with a compounding methodology should demonstrate costs well below traditional benchmarks.
Related: [FAQ #67 — Cost of Custom Software With AI]
References
- Boehm, B.W. et al. "COCOMO II Cost Estimation Model." Per line of code cost benchmarks for software development.