XGInfoTech
Services · AI-native software engineering

We build software with AI in the loop.

30–50% lower total cost than a traditional outsourced build. 2–3x faster on well-scoped work. Production-grade because senior engineers stay in the loop — that's what AI-assisted delivery actually requires. The methodology is the product; the code is the by-product.

30–50%
Lower total project cost
vs. a traditional outsourced custom build, on suitable workloads
2–3x
Faster delivery
on well-scoped greenfield and integration work
Up to 70%
On the right workload
where the codebase, stack, and scope are AI-friendly

Ranges drawn from McKinsey's 2025 software-development research, the MIT/GitHub Copilot RCT, Google's DORA 2024–25 reports, and our own engagement data. Outcomes vary by codebase, scope clarity, stack, and how much legacy or non-API integration is involved — see where the numbers fit best.

What we build

Production software, end to end.

Generalists by design — full-stack web, mobile, backend, AI, data, integrations, dashboards, agents, and the unglamorous infrastructure that keeps systems alive after launch. AI in the loop lets a small senior team cover the surface area that used to require a department.

Data integration, ETL & connected systems

Disparate sources unified into one model. ETL pipelines that shape raw data into a structure primed for analytics and ML. Connected systems across CRMs, ERPs, ESPs, ad platforms, billing, product, and finance — wherever APIs exist, plus adapters where they don't.

Data modeling & analytics

Purpose-built data models — typically fewer than 20 tables — designed to feed BI, ML, and operational systems alike. Real-time and historical analysis, KPI tracking, and the integrated business view that lets the rest of the AI stack work.

ML & predictive systems

Model development, training, validation, deployment. Predictive segmentation, scenario modeling, recommender systems, channel and budget allocation. The same ML discipline that powers XGAIMS — built for client-specific problems.

Custom AI applications

LLM features, RAG over your data, agentic workflows, AI-generated content. Hallucination-grounded, eval-gated, cost-disciplined — the same way we run XGAIMS.

Dashboards & analytics surfaces

Executive dashboards, real-time operational surfaces, embedded analytics inside your product. From data-warehouse + BI integrations to fully custom interactive surfaces — built for the people who need answers, not for the analyst who has to maintain the report.

Agentic bots & assistants

Domain-specific AI agents that take action: customer-support agents, internal assistants for sales, ops, and HR, autonomous workflows. Built with eval suites, hallucination grounding, action gates, and audit trails — the same discipline that protects XGAIMS in production.

Full-stack web & mobile

Next.js + React 19 on the front, Python/FastAPI or Node on the back, Postgres / Supabase / S3 underneath. Production-ready front-ends and APIs, not framework demos.

Modernization & cloud

Stranded codebases lifted onto modern stacks — AI is unusually good at reading old code, and we use that to compress migrations. AWS, Vercel, Cloudflare. CI/CD, observability, cost controls.

Monitoring & maintenance

Continuous observability, incident response, periodic model retraining, dependency upgrades, security patching. The unglamorous discipline that keeps systems alive after launch — and the gap most outsourced builds leave behind.

Methodology

The four-step loop, in summary.

AI generates code fast. AI inside a senior-led, spec-driven, test-first, eval-gated loop generates production-grade code at 30–50% lower cost. The discipline is the difference.

1
Spec-driven
A written spec is the source of truth. AI generates code from it; humans iterate the spec, not the keyboard. The artifact persists across sessions and team rotations.
2
Test-first (ATDD)
Given/When/Then before code. AI generates the implementation against the test as a verifiable target — generation against a defined contract, not against a prompt.
3
Senior review
Every AI-generated change goes through a senior engineer. No exceptions. The step that protects stability, security, and architecture.
4
Eval & safety gates
Automated quality, hallucination, and drift checks before merge. The same gating discipline that protects XGAIMS in production protects your code.
What you're comparing it to

The math is simple.

ApproachTypical costCalendar time
Traditional outsourced build$$$ (baseline)6–12+ months
Big-firm consultancy$$$$ (1.5–2x baseline)9–18+ months
XG · AI-native deliveryUs50–70% of baseline½ the calendar time

Comparison ranges are illustrative for a typical mid-market custom-software engagement. Actual quotes vary with stack, scope, and team mix.

Where our numbers fit best

And where they don't.

The 30–50% cost reduction and 2–3x speed claims aren't universal. We'd rather tell you that during scoping than after the contract.

Where the curve is steepest

  • Greenfield builds where we own the spec from day one
  • Modern stacks (Next.js, React, Python, Node, Postgres) with strong tooling and AI training data
  • Vendor systems with documented APIs — Salesforce, HubSpot, Stripe, modern SaaS in general
  • An empowered IT counterpart who can grant access, sign off on architecture, and unblock decisions
  • Clear product-side ownership of scope and acceptance criteria
  • Data that's already accessible, even if messy — we can reshape it; we can't conjure it

Where the curve flattens

  • Home-grown systems with no APIs and no internal expertise on the source code
  • Mainframes, COBOL, and other stacks where AI training data is thin or low-quality
  • IT or security review cycles measured in months — political bottlenecks erode the speed claim more than any technical issue
  • Compliance regimes (FedRAMP, certain healthcare contexts) where the gating cost dominates the build cost
  • Scope that changes weekly — methodology requires a stable target to compress the timeline against
  • Data behind firewalls or contracts we can't reach — extraction can take longer than the build itself

We can still ship in the harder cases — the methodology still pays off — but the acceleration is smaller and the timeline is longer. We'll quote that honestly up front.

The starter offer

First Build · 4 weeks · capped at $20K

One concrete deliverable shipped end-to-end under the full methodology. You get the code, the methodology in action, and a senior team who's already worked with you when you decide to scope something larger.

Pick one
(a) A working dashboard
Real data, real users, real refresh cadence. Connected to your warehouse or operational source.
(b) A production integration
Vendor system or internal-API integration that holds. ETL, webhook, or bidirectional sync that you can rely on.
(c) An agentic bot or AI feature
Customer-support agent, internal assistant, or LLM feature in your product — with eval gates and grounding.
(d) A small custom app slice
A focused full-stack slice — one workflow, one screen, end-to-end — that proves the build pattern for the larger system.
Senior engineering team — same people who would build the larger engagement
Full methodology applied: spec → ATDD → AI generation → senior review → eval gates
Production deployment, observability, and a 30-day support window after go-live
Working code in your repo, your stack, your accounts — never ours
A scope/spec doc you keep, regardless of whether you continue with us
Fixed-price contract, capped at $20K — overruns on us, not you

Anchor: a traditional "discovery + small build" engagement is typically $40–60K and 8–12 weeks. First Build is half that, scoped tightly, fixed-price.

We respond within one business day. No drip campaigns, no auto-nurture sequences.

Want a number to compare against?

Request an estimate.

Send us the scope. We'll come back within one business day with an estimate range, the assumptions behind it, and the team who would build it.

We respond within one business day. No drip campaigns, no auto-nurture sequences.