Fractional CTO alternative for AI-built software
A fractional CTO quickly costs several thousand euros a month and solves strategy, roadmap and hiring. But if you mainly want to know whether your AI-built code holds, Veriploy is the leaner alternative: ongoing technical oversight of repo, CVEs and infrastructure instead of a broad leadership mandate.
- Oversight from 990 €/mo
- No leadership mandate needed
- Repo + CVE + infrastructure
- Timo as your contact
Direct point of contact
Timo Wevelsiep
Software engineer, cloud architect, founder & managing director
I review code, security and infrastructure and surface what is technically risky before launch, customer use or due diligence.
I have delivered production software, infrastructure and cloud systems for clients worldwide, including Europe, the UAE, Asia, Australia and the Americas: from automated multi-location platforms and cloud migrations to remote access systems for industrial plants.
For questions like:
- Is this release production-ready?
- Which CVEs are really critical?
- Are auth, data access and tenant isolation clean?
When a fractional CTO makes sense
A fractional CTO makes sense when your bottleneck is not the code but technical leadership. Typical situations where this model fits:
- You need a technology and product roadmap across several quarters
- A developer team has to be built, led or restructured
- Technical hiring is due: role profiles, interviews, salary bands
- Before a funding round you need a credible tech story
- Architecture and make-or-buy decisions with a long time horizon
- Leadership needs a technical sparring partner as an equal
When Veriploy is enough
Often the question is not strategic but concrete: does the code that was just built hold? In these cases technical oversight is enough, without a leadership mandate:
- The app was built with AI and you want to know if it is production ready
- You need ongoing technical control, not a quarterly setup
- Dependencies and CVEs should be watched, without an in-house security team
- Before releases you want a human judgement instead of a score
- The budget for a fractional CTO is not there (yet) or not justified
- You already have a team and just need an independent second opinion
Fractional CTO vs. Veriploy: the difference
Both models complement each other but solve different problems. A fractional CTO works on strategy and organisation, Veriploy on the ongoing technical substance of your code.
| Area | Fractional CTO | Veriploy |
|---|---|---|
| Focus | Strategy, roadmap, organisation | Repo, CVEs, infrastructure, code substance |
| Team | Building, leading, hiring developers | No team leadership, independent review |
| Mandate | Broad leadership mandate over months | Fixed package with a clear scope |
| Way of working | Embedded in leadership and decisions | Async sparring, reviews, prioritisation |
| Result | Tech vision and execution plan | Risk dashboard, CVE monitoring, technical judgement |
| Cost | Higher monthly mandate | Oversight from 990 €/mo, Guard 1.950 €, Launch 3.900 € |
Moving to Wevelsiep Advisory when strategy is needed
Veriploy is deliberately narrow: ongoing technical oversight of repo, CVEs and infrastructure, fixed packages, human prioritisation. If it turns out during the work that the real need is more strategic, for example roadmap, team building or architecture decisions with a long horizon, that is a different mandate.
For that case there is a clear path: as a track record, Wevelsiep Advisory accompanies exactly those strategic and execution topics. Behind Veriploy stands the same contact, Timo, who knows this bridge and can judge whether an extended mandate even makes sense.
So you do not have to choose between a lean review and a full leadership mandate from day one. You start with the technical oversight you need today and keep the option to scale up strategically later, once the need becomes real.
Getting started: review once, then accompany continuously
Instead of a monthly mandate you start with a one-off review and then decide whether ongoing oversight makes sense. Prices are fixed and transparent.
| Baseline 790 € | Plan from 990 €/mo | |
|---|---|---|
| Scope | Deep initial baseline: repo, architecture, dependencies, config | Recurring reviews based on the baseline |
| Result | Risk dashboard, CVE baseline, secrets check, plan recommendation | Recurring reports with fix prioritisation |
| Support | One-off, with a recommendation for the right plan | Async sparring and a direct channel by plan |
| Best for | Clean starting point before any plan | Products that keep evolving |
How the technical oversight review works
- 01
01 Fit check
A free first call to clarify whether ongoing technical oversight is the right model at all, or whether a broader mandate would make more sense. No commitment.
- 02
02 Scope & access
Together we define which repo, which infrastructure and which risk areas are in focus. Read-only access and context are provided, while the scope stays clearly defined.
- 03
03 Technical oversight
Repo, dependencies, CVEs and infrastructure are reviewed and watched continuously. Instead of a bare score, findings get a human read as sparring, with an eye on substance and production readiness.
- 04
04 Report & recommendations
Findings are presented in priority order: risk dashboard, top risks and concrete recommendations on what to address now, what before the next release and what later.
- 05
05 Next step
The Baseline shows whether ongoing support makes sense. If strategic need appears, the path to Wevelsiep Advisory is available as an option.
Many projects start with a Baseline review. If the product then keeps being developed with AI, I can accompany it continuously.
What I need for the review
- read-only access to the repository
- a short description of stack, tool and goal
- hosting and deployment details
- database and auth context
- notes on sensitive data or user roles
- open questions or concrete concerns
What the review delivers
- an understandable risk dashboard
- top risks at a glance
- prioritised findings
- concrete recommendations for action
- guidance on what to fix now, before launch or plan in later
- an optional recommendation for Oversight, Guard or Launch
What a finding looks like
Several packages with known CVEs and no update path in the build. Recommendation: prioritised upgrade, secure the affected endpoints in the meantime.
Broad leadership mandate or lean oversight?
| Fractional CTO | Veriploy | |
|---|---|---|
| Need | Strategy, roadmap, organisation | Technical substance of code and infrastructure |
| Commitment | Longer monthly mandate | Fixed package, short minimum term |
| Code under watch | Depends on time budget and focus | Repo and CVEs continuously, with alerts |
| Before a release | Depends on availability | Human judgement included in the plan |
| When it gets strategic | Already covered | Path to Wevelsiep Advisory as an option |
Frequently asked questions
Is Veriploy a replacement for a fractional CTO?
Not in every case. If your bottleneck is strategy, roadmap, team building or hiring, you need a leadership mandate. But if the question is whether your AI-built code holds, Veriploy is the leaner alternative: ongoing technical oversight of repo, CVEs and infrastructure instead of a broad mandate.
A fractional CTO is too expensive for me, what does Veriploy offer instead?
Veriploy replaces the broad monthly mandate with fixed, narrowly scoped packages. You start with a one-off Baseline at 790 € and then keep the code under watch with Oversight from 990 € per month, Guard at 1.950 € or Launch at 3.900 € per month. That gives you technical oversight without funding a full leadership mandate.
Do you take over roadmap, hiring or team leadership?
No, that is deliberately not our remit. Veriploy focuses on technical oversight of repo, CVEs and infrastructure. If it becomes clear over time that there is strategic need, there is a path to Wevelsiep Advisory, which accompanies such topics as a separate mandate.
We already have a team, do we still need Veriploy?
It can be worth it. Veriploy is designed as a technical sparring partner for software and as an independent second opinion. Your team keeps building, I review repo and CVEs continuously, prioritise findings by hand and give a judgement before releases, without interfering in your internal leadership.
How does the move to Wevelsiep Advisory work?
Behind Veriploy stands the same contact, Timo, who can judge the need. If it turns out to be about strategy, long-horizon architecture or execution, that can be discussed as an extended mandate through Wevelsiep Advisory. You decide whether and when to scale up, the technical oversight keeps running independently.
What does getting started cost?
The entry point is fixed: Baseline 790 € as a one-off review. Ongoing oversight starts at 990 € per month (Oversight), then Guard at 1.950 € and Launch at 3.900 € per month. Larger setups are covered by Scale on request. All prices net plus VAT. Ongoing packages start with a 3-month minimum term, then cancelable monthly, unless agreed otherwise.
- Repo review subscription, a recurring senior look at code, CVEs and architecture
- AI code audit in Germany: get repo, security, CVEs and infrastructure reviewed
- Get your AI app reviewed, with ongoing technical oversight instead of a one-off gut check
- Launch-readiness review for AI-built products, go or no-go before you deploy
Do you recognize these risks in your own app?
The AI-app risk self-check assesses product status, stack, auth, data access, infrastructure, CVEs and your technical knowledge, and shows whether a review makes sense.
First check whether you really need a leadership mandate.
In the fit check we clarify whether ongoing technical oversight is enough or an extended mandate makes sense.
Check repo fit
Briefly describe the project.
Direct contact with me, no anonymous ticket system. I get back to you with a first assessment and the right entry point.
Timo Wevelsiep
Software engineer, cloud architect, founder & managing director