IBM
Guild Systems
Guild ControlPlane
Storage Economics
AI Cloud Storage
SIMULATED DATA
Tools|
Simulation Context
Persona:
Task:
Driver:
Policy:
Projected Risk
Reconciled 100.0%· ±$1K tolerance · 8 dimensions verified
ALL VIEWS RECONCILED
Storage Economics Command Center

Know what storage costs. Prove what it delivers.

Capacity, $/TB, commitment savings, cyber resilience, and investment decisions across IBM storage and market competitors — in one closed loop.

SIMULATED DATARISK 20 · LOW
STORAGE ROI
-94%
▲ Customer Service leads at -81%
TOTAL STORAGE SPEND
$12.45M
▲ 21 solutions · 28 workloads
BUSINESS VALUE
$0.71M
▲ 58% measured confidence
NET ECONOMIC VALUE
$-11.73M
▲ Evidence-backed
EFFECTIVE CAPACITY
70,858 TB
▲ 37,120 TB raw → 34,936 TB usable
MAINTENANCE SAVINGS
$5.26M
▲ 30% effective discount
AVG EFFICIENCY SCORE
43/100
▲ Dedup + compression + thin-prov
AVG RESILIENCE SCORE
77/100
▲ Cyber resilience readiness
AI Executive Summary

Current enterprise storage operations reflect a concerning 94% negative ROI on $12.45 million in total spend, despite maintaining a 54% IBM portfolio share and a solid 77/100 cyber resilience score. We must prioritize immediate cost restructuring by leveraging the identified $5.26 million in maintenance savings while aggressively pursuing the $2.11 million optimization opportunity to address the inefficient spend on high-cost assets like the DS8000. Realignment of these infrastructure investments is essential to reversing current value deficits and improving the bottom-line impact of our storage strategy.

Source: Canonical Storage Cost Model

Actual vs Budget vs Forecast

Storage spend • trailing 12 months + forward outlook
ActualBudgetForecast
ONDJFMAMJJAS$0K$350K$700K$1050K$1400K
  • Budget
  • Actual
  • Forecast

Decision Intelligence

Highest-impact signals requiring executive attention
4 INSIGHTS
IBM storage accounts for 54% of portfolio spendIBM delivers $0.49MM value at -93% ROI vs competitors at -96% ROI.
$5.26MM annual maintenance savings achievedMaintenance contracts and capacity bundles cover 30% of gross storage spend.
29120 TB cold data on hot tierTiering this data to warm/cold/archive could reduce $/TB by 40-60%.
$12447K addressable storage spend detectedRight-sizing, tiering, idle elimination, and consolidation account for 100% of opportunity.

Business Unit Economics

Click any row to inspect the underlying storage economics
Business UnitSpendValueROIRaw CapacityCommit SavingsAction
Engineering$4.50M$0.24M-95%10,930 TB$1.84MEXPAND
Marketing$1.20M$0.03M-98%170 TB$0.50MOPTIMIZE
Sales$2.42M$0.08M-97%3,820 TB$0.87MEXPAND
Operations$3.39M$0.19M-94%8,100 TB$1.76MMAINTAIN
Customer Service$0.94M$0.18M-81%14,100 TB$0.29MOPTIMIZE

Storage Portfolio Mix

IBM + competitor economics across all solutions
SolutionVendorSpendROI
FlashSystemIBM$1.35M-98%
DS8000IBM$1.71M-96%
Storage TapeIBM$0.25M-57%
Storage ScaleIBM$0.79M-97%
Scale System 6000IBM$0.57M-96%
Storage CephIBM$0.57M-99%
Cloud Object StorageIBM$0.33M-67%
Storage DefenderIBM$0.20M-85%
IBM
Guild Systems
Guild ControlPlane
Storage Economics Integrated Demo
SIMULATED enterprise data • 11 IBM solutions + 10 competitors • Customer-ready prototype
Metric Evidence

Enterprise Storage Economics

Every executive metric is traceable to normalized telemetry, cost allocation, business-value evidence and planning assumptions.

Source composition

IBM Storage Insights$1.35M
IBM DS8000 Reporting$1.71M
IBM Tape Library Manager$0.25M
IBM Storage Scale GUI$0.79M
IBM Ceph Dashboard$0.57M
IBM Storage Defender$0.20M
IBM Fusion Console$0.32M
IBM Storage Protect$0.40M
IBM Cloud Object Storage$0.33M
IBM Storage Scale System$0.57M
IBM SAN Volume Controller$0.25M
Dell PowerMax GUI$1.00M
NetApp ONTAP$0.77M
Pure Storage Pure1$0.70M
HPE InfoSight$0.44M
Hitachi Storage Navigator$0.85M
AWS Cost Explorer$0.96M
Azure Cost Management$0.26M
GCP Billing Export$0.21M
NetApp Cloud Manager$0.52M

Evidence status

RECONCILED   100.0% cost reconciliation

Source system, timestamp, telemetry version, evidence ID and confidence classification are retained for auditability.

Trust layer

Sources connected
20/20
Normalized
99.8%
Reconciliation
100%
Telemetry coverage
97.9%