Is this consulting that ends in a deck, or something we can act on?

It ends in decisions with owners and sequencing, not a slide library. Every engagement produces a prioritised plan where each item states what changes, roughly what it costs, what breaks if you skip it, and who owns it. We also state what we would not do, because a roadmap without exclusions is a wish list. If a recommendation cannot be acted on next quarter, it does not belong at the top.

Do you recommend work you would then sell us?

It is a fair question and the honest answer is that we sometimes could. So we separate them: the assessment is priced and delivered independently, the plan is yours regardless, and we are explicit where a recommendation is something another party could do better or cheaper. Several assessments have concluded that the client should keep the system they have and spend the money elsewhere.

What does a technical due diligence cover?

Code quality and test coverage, architecture and scalability limits, security posture, dependency and licence risk, infrastructure cost trajectory, team structure and key-person risk, and the gap between what the roadmap promises and what the codebase can support. We produce a risk register with severity and remediation cost so it can be used in a valuation conversation, not just an engineering one.

How long does an assessment take?

Two to four weeks for most mid-market estates - one week if it is a focused question like a single build-versus-buy decision. Anything longer usually means the scope was not clear at the start. We would rather run a tight assessment and extend if there is a specific reason than bill discovery time that produces no decision.

Can you help us decide whether to rebuild or refactor?

Yes, and we approach it sceptically because the instinct to rebuild is usually wrong. The existing system encodes years of fixes for real problems, most of which exist nowhere else. We assess what the current system actually costs you - in delivery speed, incidents and hiring - against a realistic rebuild estimate including the discovery you would repeat. Incremental replacement wins more often than teams expect.

SyncTrix

/

Service · Technology Consulting

Decisions with owners, not a slide library.

Architecture assessment, technical due diligence, modernization roadmaps and build-versus-buy calls - delivered as a prioritised plan you can act on next quarter, including what we would not do.

Book a strategy call See capabilities

2-4 week assessmentsDue diligenceIndependent of delivery

2-4 wks

Typical assessment for a mid-market estate

1 week

Focused single-decision engagements

100%

Assessments priced independently of delivery

Owners

Every recommendation has one, or it is not shipped

Capabilities

What we actually deliver.

Architecture assessment

Where the current architecture limits delivery speed, reliability or cost - and which constraints are actually worth spending money to remove.

Scalability and failure-mode analysis
Delivery bottleneck identification
Cost trajectory under growth

Technical due diligence

A risk register with severity and remediation cost, usable in a valuation conversation rather than only an engineering one.

Code quality, tests and dependency risk
Security posture and licence exposure
Key-person risk and team structure

Modernization roadmaps

Sequenced modernization where each step ships value on its own, rather than a two-year programme that only pays out at the end.

Incremental sequencing with early value
Risk and dependency ordering
Realistic cost and duration ranges

Build vs buy vs compose

An honest assessment of what is genuinely differentiating and what is undifferentiated work you are paying to rebuild.

Total cost including maintenance
Vendor lock-in and exit cost
Differentiation analysis

Compliance readiness

What SOC 2, HIPAA, GDPR or DORA actually require of the architecture - before an auditor tells you at the least convenient moment.

Control mapping to architecture
Evidence-generation design
Gap analysis with remediation cost

Engineering effectiveness

Why delivery is slower than headcount suggests - usually process and feedback loops rather than the technology everyone blames.

DORA metric baseline
Team topology and ownership review
Feedback-loop and toil analysis

How we engage

A sequence that de-risks delivery.

Frame the actual question

Most engagements start with a stated question and a different real one. We agree what decision this needs to unblock before looking at anything.

Look at the evidence

Code, infrastructure, metrics, incidents and the people doing the work. Opinions about a system rarely match what the system shows.

Test the options

Cost, risk and time for each realistic path - including doing nothing, which is a legitimate option we price rather than dismiss.

Hand over decisions

A prioritised plan with owners, sequencing and explicit exclusions. Yours to execute with anyone, including your own team.

Outcomes

What clients measure afterwards.

Decisions unblocked

The call that has been deferred for two quarters, made with evidence.

Rebuilds avoided

Several assessments concluded the client should keep the system and spend elsewhere.

Costed roadmap

Sequenced work with realistic ranges, usable in a budget conversation.

Risk made explicit

A register with severity and remediation cost rather than a list of concerns.

Proof

Work we have actually delivered.

IT infrastructure & security

Global Connect: locked-down infrastructure that passes security review.

p=reject: DMARC, strict alignment
2048-bit: DKIM signing

Read the case study

SEO platform & programmatic pages

Built an online CA platform that ranks for 300+ search terms.

300+: Indexable pages
162: SEO articles shipped

Read the case study

Stack

Tools we work fluently in.

Assessment

DORA metrics
Architecture decision records
Threat modelling
C4 modelling

Code & quality

SonarQube
CodeScene
Dependency-track
Semgrep

Cloud & cost

AWS
Azure
GCP
Infracost
Cost attribution

Compliance

SOC 2
HIPAA
GDPR
DORA
ISO 27001

Why SyncTrix

Senior engineers, accountable outcomes.

Assessments priced independently

The plan is yours regardless of whether we deliver it. We are explicit where another party would do the work better or cheaper.

We say what not to do

A roadmap without exclusions is a wish list. Every plan states what we would deliberately leave alone, and why.

Sceptical about rebuilds

The existing system encodes years of fixes nobody documented. Incremental replacement wins more often than teams expect, and we say so.

Practitioners, not career consultants

The people assessing your architecture still build and operate systems. They have been on call for decisions like the ones they are reviewing.

FAQ

Questions, answered.

The questions CTOs, boards and investors ask us most often before commissioning an assessment or a due diligence.

It ends in decisions with owners and sequencing, not a slide library. Every engagement produces a prioritised plan where each item states what changes, roughly what it costs, what breaks if you skip it, and who owns it. We also state what we would not do, because a roadmap without exclusions is a wish list. If a recommendation cannot be acted on next quarter, it does not belong at the top.

Next step

Book a consulting call - leave with a decision.

A 45-minute session with a senior architect. We frame the decision you are actually trying to make and identify what evidence would settle it - and you leave with that framing, whether you engage us or not.

Book the call Explore all servicesAssessment · Due diligence · Roadmap

Contact

Tell us about your project.

Briefs, NDAs, architecture reviews, anything goes. A senior engineer responds within 24 hours.

Email
[email protected]
Phone
+91 99228 74956
Locations
Hyderabad · Pune · Bangalore

What happens next

1 · A senior engineer reviews your brief within 24 hours.
2 · We schedule a 30-minute discovery call.
3 · You receive a written proposal in 48-72 hours.