.png)
Cloudability supports a broad FinOps operating model, including areas such as cost allocation, reporting, forecasting, rightsizing, anomaly management, and commitment optimization. Usage.ai is more focused on cloud commitment optimization and management.
That means the migration can be scoped around the commitment workflow rather than forcing a broader platform change. You can move commitment management to Usage.ai where it makes economic and operational sense, while keeping, replacing, or integrating the other FinOps workflows your organization still relies on.
A safe migration follows a simple sequence:
Decide what you are actually migrating
Start by documenting which Cloudability workflows your organization relies on today. Commitment management may be only one part of the setup.You may also use Cloudability for allocation, Business Mappings, showback or chargeback, budgeting, forecasting, rightsizing, anomaly management, reporting, exports, integrations, or access controls.
Then decide what happens to each workflow after the migration.
| Cloudability workflow | Migration approach |
|---|---|
| Commitment management | Move to Usage.ai |
| Cost allocation and Business Mappings | Retain or rehome |
| Budgets and forecasting | Retain or rehome |
| Rightsizing | Retain or rehome |
| Anomaly management | Retain or rehome |
| Reporting and dashboards | Retain, rehome, or retire |
| Exports and integrations | Reconnect where needed |
Pay particular attention to Cloudability Business Mappings. They can contain important allocation and reporting logic, so document those rules before changing or retiring the workflows that depend on them.
When does moving from Cloudability to Usage.ai make sense?
Cloudability can make sense when your organization wants broad FinOps capabilities across cost visibility, allocation, reporting, forecasting, and commitment management.Usage.ai takes a more specialized approach, focused on improving commitment economics while reducing the operational effort and downside risk associated with long-term cloud commitments.
| Consideration | Cloudability | Usage.ai |
|---|---|---|
| Existing commitments | Remain under existing cloud-provider terms | Accounted for when evaluating new opportunities |
| Commitment optimization | Portfolio analysis, recommendations, and monitoring | Savings Test and managed recommendations |
| New commitments | Customer-managed purchasing workflow | Approved Flex Commitment workflow |
| Commercial model | Existing platform agreement | Savings-based pricing |
| Downside protection | Depends on your commitment strategy | Cashback for eligible Flex Commitments under applicable terms |
| Operating model | Broad FinOps platform | Specialized commitment optimization and management |
It is which operating model delivers the stronger combination of net savings, risk protection, control, and operational efficiency for your commitment portfolio.
Also read: IBM Cloudability Reviews: Is It Worth It in 2026?
Freeze your Cloudability baseline
Before changing integrations, permissions, or purchasing authority, capture your current position.Record:
Monthly cloud spend
Commitment coverage and utilization
Existing commitment inventory
Purchase and expiration dates
Current realized savings
Active recommendations
Important reports and dashboards
Business Mappings
Cost-allocation rules
Scheduled exports
API and BI integrations
Current approval and purchasing workflows
Capture those workflows and the current savings baseline before cutover. That gives you a fair point of comparison after the migration.
Otherwise, changes in savings can be misleading. Seasonality, workload growth, architecture changes, or commitments expiring around the same time can all affect the result, even if the migration itself is working as expected.
Reconcile commitments with the cloud provider
Use the cloud provider as the source of record for commitments already in place.For each commitment, capture the details you will need to reconcile it after migration:
Cloud account, subscription, or project
Commitment type
Service and region, where applicable
Purchase and expiration dates
Term and payment option
Commitment amount
Coverage and utilization
Sharing or scope configuration
Remaining economic exposure
This inventory gives you a clean provider-side baseline and helps ensure that existing commitments are not lost, duplicated, or misclassified during the transition.
Existing commitments stay with the cloud provider
Existing commitments do not transfer from Cloudability to Usage.ai. The underlying commitment remains with the cloud provider.For example, AWS defines Savings Plans as a commitment to a consistent amount of usage over a set term. Changing the platform used to manage that commitment does not create a new Savings Plan or move the existing one.
Instead, Usage.ai can account for commitments already active in your cloud environment when evaluating whether additional coverage makes sense.
You are changing how the commitment portfolio is managed, not moving the original commitments themselves.
Preserve the Cloudability workflows you still need
Before decommissioning Cloudability, identify the workflows and downstream systems that still depend on it.That may include:
Business Mappings and allocation rules
Finance and executive reporting
Data exports and API integrations
BI or warehouse pipelines
Budgeting and forecasting
Rightsizing recommendations
Alerts and anomaly workflows
Internal processes that rely on Cloudability data
Preserve anything you may need to reproduce later.
You also do not need to rebuild every workflow inside Usage.ai. Keep useful processes in Cloudability during the transition, move them elsewhere, or retire them if they are no longer needed.
Review the economics before cutover
Commercial review should happen before purchasing authority changes.Start by checking your Cloudability agreement for renewal dates, notice periods, termination requirements, data-retention terms, and any offboarding obligations.
Then compare the full economics of your current commitment-management approach with the expected economics under Usage.ai.
Our pricing documentation explains how Usage.ai fees are calculated based on realized savings generated through the applicable commitment program.
Do not compare only the Cloudability subscription with the Usage.ai fee. Include:
- Current realized savings
- Platform and service fees
- Internal FinOps effort
- Unused-commitment exposure
- Incremental savings opportunity
- Usage.ai fees
- Applicable protection or cashback
- Expected utilization
- Downside if demand falls
Also read: IBM Cloudability Pricing, Hidden Costs, and Contract Terms
Test more than one usage scenario
Cloud demand rarely follows a perfect forecast, so test the economics under at least three conditions:- Expected demand
- Moderate contraction
- Significant contraction
Run the Usage.ai Savings Test before production
Do not start by granting production purchasing access.Begin with the Usage.ai Savings Test, which can use read-only access to evaluate your cloud environment without allowing commitment purchases.
Use the evaluation to understand:
Where Usage.ai sees additional savings opportunity
Which workloads and services drive that opportunity
How the recommendations compare with your current strategy
How the economics change if utilization drops
What expected net savings look like after fees
How your existing commitments are reflected in the analysis
You can run Usage.ai alongside Cloudability during the evaluation period while keeping the existing purchasing process in place.
Understand the Flex Commitment model
The Usage.ai Flex Commitment Program gives teams a more flexible way to manage cloud commitments while keeping Usage.ai-managed commitments clearly identifiable from commitments already in the environment.Depending on your setup, your team can approve recommendations or use automation for eligible purchases. Usage.ai then uses the relevant cloud-provider APIs to place and manage those commitments.
A key part of the model is downside protection. Eligible Flex Commitments can qualify for cashback when usage falls below expectations, helping reduce the financial impact of underutilization.
You can review how Usage.ai cashback works and the Flex Commitment eligibility criteria when evaluating the business case.
This lets you compare not only expected savings, but also how the commitment strategy is designed to perform when usage changes.
Also read: Usage.ai vs IBM Cloudability: Platform Scope, Savings, and Risk
Separate evaluation access from production access
Permissions do not need to be all or nothing.A simple progression is:
Our Security and Compliance documentation explains the permissions model, while the AWS integration guide covers the current AWS setup requirements.
Establish one commitment-purchasing authority
Before production management begins, clearly define who owns commitment decisions.Document:
Who approves purchases
Who can execute them
Which accounts are in scope
Purchasing thresholds
Which system is authoritative
How existing commitments are accounted for
How exceptions are handled
Who owns permissions
How savings are reported to Finance
How major workload changes are communicated
Governance is how that context becomes part of the commitment decision.
Use a controlled production cutover
Once the analysis and economics look right, move into production in clear stages.| Stage | What to do |
|---|---|
| Preserve | Save your Cloudability baseline and reconcile existing commitments |
| Evaluate | Run the Usage.ai Savings Test and review the recommendations |
| Prepare | Confirm production scope, permissions, and purchasing authority |
| Cut over | Enable Usage.ai management and verify the first results against your baseline |
Validate the first commitment cycle
Once Usage.ai is live, compare what you see in the platform with what appears at the cloud provider.Check the essentials:
Active commitments
Coverage and utilization
New commitment purchases
Treatment of existing commitments
Effective savings
Usage.ai fees and applicable cashback
Finance reporting
If you keep Cloudability available briefly during the transition, it can also serve as a useful reference while you reconcile the new setup.
Measure the results over time
Do not judge the migration on the first savings number alone.Over the next 30, 60, and 90 days, compare the new setup with the baseline you captured before cutover. Track coverage, utilization, net realized savings, fees, applicable cashback, unused-commitment exposure, and the amount of manual FinOps work required.
The most useful measure is the overall outcome:
Know when to wait before cutover
Sometimes the right next step is to finish the evaluation before moving into production.You may want more time if your existing Cloudability workflows have not been fully mapped, important contract terms are still being reviewed, existing commitments have not been reconciled, or major workload changes are likely to affect near-term usage.
The same applies if the Usage.ai Savings Test has not yet produced a clear business case.
A strong migration decision should be based on clear economics, understood commitments, and a clean operating plan. Once those pieces are in place, you can move forward with much more confidence.
Also read: IBM Cloudability Alternatives: 6 Best FinOps Platforms for 2026
Cloudability to Usage.ai migration checklist
Before switching commitment management, confirm that you have:Inventoried Cloudability reports, dashboards, Business Mappings, and integrations.
Preserved important historical data and configuration.
Reconciled commitments against cloud-provider records.
Captured your coverage, utilization, and savings baseline.
Reviewed Cloudability renewal, notice, and termination terms.
Audited API, automation, and reporting dependencies.
Run the Usage.ai Savings Test.
Compared expected net economics under multiple usage scenarios.
Included Usage.ai fees and applicable cashback in the analysis.
Defined production permissions and scope.
Established one authority for new commitment purchases.
Documented approval and governance rules.
Started with a controlled production scope.
Validated results against the original baseline.
Assigned owners for Cloudability workflows that will remain, move, or retire.
Run a read-only Usage.ai Savings Test against your current environment and compare the opportunity with your existing commitments and savings baseline.
If the economics make sense, you can move into production gradually.
Talk to a Usage.ai expert
Frequently asked questions
Is Usage.ai a replacement for Cloudability?
Not in every sense. Cloudability is a broader FinOps platform covering areas such as cost visibility, allocation, reporting, and commitment management. Usage.ai is more specialized around commitment optimization and managed commitment operations.
If your organization needs Cloudability's broader capabilities, you may still need those workflows after moving commitment management to Usage.ai.
What happens to our existing AWS, Azure, or GCP commitments?
They remain with the relevant cloud provider. Usage.ai does not require you to transfer existing commitments. They should instead be included in the commitment inventory so new recommendations account for existing coverage.
Does Usage.ai require production access immediately?
No. The Savings Test can be conducted with read-only access. Production permissions can be introduced after you've validated the savings opportunity and decided to authorize commitment management.
What happens if a Flex Commitment is underutilized?
For eligible Flex Commitments, Usage.ai calculates applicable losses and provides cashback under the program's terms. The exact eligibility, calculation, and payment timing should be evaluated against the current cashback documentation and your agreement.
If you notice any material information that is incorrect, outdated, or no longer applicable, please contact us at [email protected]. We’ll review the information and update the article where appropriate.
