Velocity Dashboard
The Velocity Dashboard provides a one-stop-shop into your software development lifecycle helping you and your teams understand any bottlenecks in your process. Get a clear view of PR cycle time to identify bottlenecks and spot inefficiencies, compare pull request size against commit activity, and visualize your team’s success rate across the entire review process — all in one place.

Using the Velocity Dashboard
To view the dashboard, click Eng Intelligence > Velocity Dashboard in the main nav.
Adjust the time range
By default, the dashboard displays data from the last 7 days. To change the date range, click Last 7 days and select a new date.
Apply a filter option
You can apply filters across for team, owner, repository, user label, and more to narrow down the set of data you are reviewing. To select filters, click Filter in the upper right corner of a graph.
Drill down
For each metric, click on the card to drill down into the data for further analysis. After clicking into the card, you can segment the data and drill down further to view a list of data points:

Cycle time breakdown
Cycle time measures the complete journey of a pull request from first commit to merge into your main branch. Understanding this end-to-end process is crucial for identifying bottlenecks and optimizing your development workflow.
Note: This metric is not supported for Azure DevOps.
The four stages of cycle time:
Time to open: Development phase: First commit to PR creation
Time to approve: Review process: First review to final approval
Time to first review: Waiting period: PR opened to initial reviewer engagement
Time to merge: Merge process: Approval to successful merge

Key insight
Most teams discover that one of these four areas makes up 50-60% of their overall cycle time, providing a clear picture of a focus area to improve overall velocity.
Cycle time best practices
Set SLA targets for each stage (e.g., first review within 1 business day)
Implement automated code review assignments to eliminate reviewer uncertainty
Use draft PRs for work-in-progress to separate development time from review time
Track P95 metrics to identify and address outlier PRs that skew team performance
Visualization options
Choose from multiple statistical views (average, sum, max, min, P95, median) to analyze your data. The default average view provides a balanced perspective, while P95 highlights outliers that might indicate systemic issues.
Cycle time x PR size
Pull request size directly impacts development velocity. Larger PRs consistently correlate with longer cycle times across every stage of the development process - from initial review to final merge. This visualization helps you understand how PR size affects efficiency throughout your development lifecycle.
Compare your pull request size to:
Time to open
Time to first review
Time to approve
Time to merge
Overall cycle time

Key insight
Smaller PRs move faster. They're easier to review, less likely to introduce conflicts, and require fewer revision cycles. Teams that maintain smaller, focused PRs typically see 2-3x faster cycle times and higher code quality.
PR size best practices
Aim for PRs under 400 lines of code. Break larger features into smaller, logical chunks that can be reviewed and merged independently.
Visualization options
Outliers are excluded by default. To include them, toggle on the Show outliers option.
PR success rate
PR success rate measures the percentage of pull requests that successfully make it from creation to merge, providing critical insight into development efficiency and process waste. A high success rate indicates focused development work, while a low rate suggests potential issues with planning, scope creep, or unclear requirements.

Key insights
A sudden drop in success rate often correlates with rushed feature development, unclear requirements, or experimental work that should happen in separate branches. High-performing teams maintain consistent success rates even during periods of increased PR volume.
PR success best practices
Target a PR success rate above 80% for optimal efficiency
Review closed (unmerged) PRs weekly to identify patterns and root causes
Implement clearer definition-of-done criteria before starting development
Use draft PRs for experimental work to separate exploration from production-ready code
Track success rate alongside cycle time - both metrics together reveal process health
Consider feature flags for risky changes instead of abandoning PRs
Visualization options
Switch between viewing open, closed or merged PRs against success rate.
Last updated
Was this helpful?