Total annual exposure is $2.05M.
FUSE / ROI
Annual exposure
$2.05M
Exposure Report

What are AI errors
costing your team?

Estimate the cost of AI errors in your data analysis - and the time spent verifying accuracy.

20%
of AI-generated data analyses produce errors - which compound after the first error occurs.
66%
of people rely on AI output without evaluating its accuracy - despite warnings from LLMs.
40%
of AI time savings are lost fixing mistakes and verifying generated output.
01

Total annual exposure

The modeled cost of misdirected decisions and manual verification.

Total annual exposure
$2.05M
0.27% of annual revenue.
View formula
$1,183,875 decision risk + $865,798 verification tax = $2,049,673
02

Decision risk

At $750M in revenue, Your team directs an estimated $75M growth budget. When decisions rely on chains of AI analysis, errors can compound.

Unverified AI FUSE + Emet
ZERO ERRORS35%YOURS

Probability that every analysis in the chain is correct, at a 10% per-analysis error rate — the rate FUSE measures in production. Errors are modeled as independent. Correlated failures (same connector, same join, same ambiguous question) would make this curve shallower; strict downstream propagation would make it steeper. This is the simplest case, not the worst one.

View chart data
Analyses in chainUnverified AI (Clean %)FUSE + Emet
190.0%100%
281.0%100%
372.9%100%
465.6%100%
559.0%100%
653.1%100%
747.8%100%
843.0%100%
938.7%100%
1034.9%100%
With a chain of 5 analyses, 41% of decision-chains carry at least one flawed analysis.
Materially wrong decisions / year
23.7
Driven by AI output that survived review.
Value lost to misdirection
$1.18M
The penalty on those misdirected dollars.
View formula
$75,000,000 growth budget × 55.00000000000001% AI × 41.0% chain risk × 35% decision-changing × 20% loss = $1,183,875
  • Growth budget: $750M × 10% benchmark.
  • Decisions: 60 people × 5 material decisions/year.
  • 55.00000000000001% AI influence: Share of material decisions informed by AI analysis.
  • 35% decision-changing: Only 35% of flawed analyses are wrong in a way that alters the decision.
  • 20% value lost: The penalty on a misdirected dollar vs correct allocation.
03

Verification tax

Your team of 60 spends an estimated 4.5 hours a week per person checking AI output before acting.

Annual hours lost
12,420
That's 6.0 full-time people's worth of work.
Verification tax
$866K
Payroll burned on manual review.
View formula
60 heads × 4.5 hrs/wk × 46 wks = 12,420 hrs
12,420 hrs × $69.71/hr = $865,798
  • $69.71/hr: Derived from $145K fully loaded cost per person over 2080 paid hours.
  • Loaded cost: Base salary × 1.43 multiplier for benefits and overhead (BLS Employer Costs).
04

Recoverable value

Sources & methodology

  • 01 FUSE platform research on AI data analysis using frontier models.
  • 02 "Trust in AI remains a critical challenge," KPMG and University of Melbourne, April 2025.
  • 03 "Beyond Productivity: Measuring the Real Value of AI," Workday and Hanover Research, January 2026.
  • 04 Brynjolfsson, E., Hitt, L. M., & Kim, H. H. (2011). "Strength in Numbers: How Does Data-Driven Decisionmaking Affect Firm Performance?"
This model uses customizable industry benchmarks and typical production assumptions to estimate exposure. Component outputs are rounded to whole dollars. Projections of future value are not a guarantee of financial return. Emet verifies AI claims against source data; upstream source data quality remains a separate dependency.