Starting from this site's own default example — 850 systems, $180 revenue impact per system-hour, 3.5-hour MTTR, 14 incidents a year, 99.9% SLA target — here's what four common reliability investments actually change, run through the same formula.
All four start from the identical $12,894,840 baseline. Only one input changes per scenario, so you can see each lever's effect in isolation.
Three of these scenarios behave predictably. One doesn't, and it's the most common mistake in a reliability budget conversation.
Halving either one produces almost the same savings here, because both reduce annual outage hours by the same amount — the better lever for your business depends on which is cheaper to actually improve, not which the formula favors.
Raising your target without reducing MTTR or frequency doesn't lower modeled cost at all in this example — the hidden-tax multiplier was already at its cap, so a stricter target only makes your breach measurement look worse, not your actual risk lower.
Cutting frequency enough to fall under the SLA budget doesn't just cut direct cost proportionally — it also collapses the hidden-tax multiplier from its 72% cap down near its 18% floor, producing an 81% total reduction from a 75% input change.
Questions that come up when using these scenarios to compare investment options.
Mode
Accent