Senior-only · Code audit · Tech due diligence · EU
An independent senior view of your code, architecture and infrastructure before an investment, an acquisition, a change of vendor or a push to scale. You get concrete findings, recommendations ranked by priority and an impact estimate, written for the board and the engineering team alike.
Software, not property
Our technical due diligence is an independent, senior-led assessment of a software product: its source code, architecture, infrastructure and the way the team builds and ships it. This is not the property, construction or energy kind of due diligence, nor a financial audit or a software licence compliance check. We tell you whether the system is maintainable, secure and ready to grow, what further development will realistically cost, and where the risks are that nobody has mentioned yet.
We work in three situations. Investors, private equity funds and acquirers need tech due diligence for M&A or a funding round, and founders want to be ready before the investor's review starts. Owners and CTOs want a code audit or a software architecture assessment after taking over from a vendor, before scaling, or after a fast AI-assisted MVP. Companies running an ageing system want a legacy system assessment and a modernisation roadmap that does not mean stopping operations.
Audits are carried out by senior engineers, not by a tool that generates a report. Megu is a senior-only software company based in Košice, Slovakia: every engineer has 10+ years of production experience, and the company has 15+ years, 100+ production projects and its own products running in production. We use static analysis, but what matters is what the findings mean for your business. After the audit, the same people can fix the issues and deliver the roadmap, so the report does not end up in a drawer.
Audit types
We scope every engagement around the decision you need to make. Each audit type ends with the same core deliverables: concrete findings, priorities, an impact and effort estimate, and an executive summary.
We go through the codebase module by module: readability, duplication, complexity, error handling, test coverage and quality, documentation and consistency. Static analysis is combined with manual reading of critical paths such as payments, permissions and calculations. The result shows how easily and safely the code can be developed further.
We look at how systems are split, how they communicate and where the bottlenecks are: the database, synchronous calls, queues, caching or a single server everything depends on. We also check the cloud setup, CI/CD, observability and backups, and tell you whether the architecture can cope with several times today's load and what must change if not.
A buy-side review for VCs, private equity and acquirers: code quality and ownership, technical debt, security, open-source licences, key-person risk and the investment needed after the deal. You get red flags with their likely impact as input for negotiations. For founders, we run a sell-side readiness review before investors start theirs.
We map the ageing system: unsupported technologies, dependencies, data, integrations and knowledge that lives in one person's head. For each part we recommend whether to keep, refactor, migrate incrementally or rewrite it, and build a staged modernisation roadmap that keeps operations running.
Products built fast with AI assistants often work in a demo but hide duplicated logic, missing tests and authorisation checks, secrets in the repository and an architecture that will not survive growth. We establish what can safely stay, what needs fixing and what should be rebuilt before paying customers or investors arrive.
Sample report structure: 1. executive summary with a risk traffic light, 2. findings by area with evidence from the code, 3. severity, business impact and effort to fix, 4. prioritised recommendations, 5. a roadmap of next steps. For deals we add a separate red-flag list. We then walk you through the results on a call.
When to order an audit
Typical situations where an independent audit leads to a better decision. These are common scenarios, not stories about specific clients.
Investors and M&A
A fund or strategic buyer is considering a company whose value rests on its software. We check whether the product matches the pitch deck: code quality and ownership, scalability, security, licences and key-person risk. The red-flag list and an estimate of post-deal investment are delivered on a schedule agreed around the deal timeline.
Vendor change
The agency relationship has ended or stalled, and a new team is about to inherit a system nobody can fully describe. We check whether the code is complete and can be built and deployed, where documentation and tests are missing and which risks come with the handover, so you can decide whether to continue with the existing codebase.
Logistics and transport
Dispatch, shipment tracking and carrier integrations run on an ageing system where every change takes weeks. We know the domain from our own transport management platform, so we assess not just the code but whether the system fits how dispatch really works. The outcome is an incremental migration roadmap that keeps operations running.
E-commerce
Before expanding abroad or launching a major campaign, you want to know whether the platform can handle more load, extra currencies and languages, and new integrations. We review the architecture, database, payment and warehouse integrations, performance and CI/CD, then rank what must change before launch and what can wait.
SaaS and startups
The first version was built fast, partly with AI tools, and now paying customers and investor conversations are arriving. An audit of the AI-generated code shows what will hold up in the investor's technical review, where the security gaps are and what to rebuild before further growth. We can follow up with the fixes or a rapid rebuild.
Finance and accounting
A company wants to connect a long-running invoicing or client-data system to its bank, online shop or a client portal, but is unsure whether its architecture and security can take it. We review the data model, calculations, integrations, access rights and audit logs, name the risks of errors and sensitive-data leaks, and recommend whether to extend, refactor or gradually replace the system, with GDPR in mind.
Process
Five steps, each with a clear output. Access to your systems is read-only, and you know the scope and timing before the audit starts.
We go through your system, the decision ahead of you and the questions the audit needs to answer. You get a reply to your enquiry within 24 hours. If you do not need an audit, or a smaller scope will do, we will say so.
We sign an NDA on request and agree scope, timing and contacts. We need read-only access to the repository and documentation and, depending on scope, to the cloud account and CI/CD. We do not need production personal data.
Static analysis and dependency and licence checks are combined with manual reading of the critical parts of the code. Where useful, we hold short interviews with developers and check how the system is built, deployed and operated.
Findings with evidence, severity, impact and effort estimates, prioritised recommendations and an executive summary. For due diligence, also a red-flag list and an estimate of the investment needed after closing.
We walk through the report with management and the engineering team and answer their questions. Then you revoke our access, or the same senior engineers fix the findings and deliver the roadmap.
Why Megu
Your system is assessed by seniors who have watched software age, grow and fail under load. No juniors, no anonymous subcontractors. The company has 15+ years and 100+ production projects behind it, and we work in English, German or Slovak.
The same senior engineers can fix the findings, deliver the modernisation roadmap, strengthen your team or verify security with a penetration test. The report is still written so that anyone can act on it, not to lock you in.
NDA on request, with read-only access granted only for the duration of the audit. We are a software company based in Košice, Slovakia, working under EU jurisdiction and handling data in line with GDPR.
We develop and run our own products, a transport management platform and a subscription SaaS with a mobile app, so we judge technical decisions as the people who live with their consequences. For every finding we assess not only the code but what its state means for future development cost, delivery speed and growth.
Technology
We audit the technologies we have used in production for years. If your system runs on a different language or framework, we will tell you honestly on the first call whether we can assess it in depth.
FAQ
Technical due diligence for software, also called tech or software due diligence, is an independent review of a product's code, architecture, infrastructure and engineering team before an investment, acquisition or other major decision. It tells investors and management what they are really buying: how maintainable and scalable the system is, how much technical debt it carries, where the security and licence risks sit and how dependent it is on a few key people. It complements financial and legal due diligence, which we do not provide.
A technical due diligence report includes an executive summary, findings with evidence, their severity and business impact, an effort estimate and prioritised recommendations. Ours follow a set structure: 1. executive summary with a risk traffic light, 2. findings on architecture, code, technical debt, security, dependencies and licences, infrastructure, testing and team, 3. severity, impact and effort per finding, 4. prioritised recommendations, 5. a roadmap. For investors we add a red-flag list and an estimate of post-deal investment, and we walk you through it on a call.
A focused code audit of one application typically takes from several days to a few weeks, while technical due diligence covering several systems, infrastructure and team interviews takes longer. The price depends on codebase size, the number of systems, review depth and the deal timeline, so we do not publish a price list. After a free first call and a brief look at the repository, you receive a written estimate of scope, price and timing. If the deal has a fixed deadline, we propose a scope that fits it and state clearly what stays out.
A startup should prepare by making sure it can answer what investors typically ask: what the product is built on, who owns the code, how it is deployed, how secure it is and what happens if a key engineer leaves. In practice that means repositories owned by the company, an up-to-date list of open-source dependencies and their licences, basic architecture and deployment documentation, automated tests and CI/CD, clean access management and an honest list of known technical debt with a plan. Our sell-side readiness review covers the same areas, so you can fix the worst issues first.
A code review checks individual changes before they are merged and is part of a team's daily routine, whereas a code audit assesses the whole codebase at a point in time. An audit also covers architecture, technical debt, dependencies, testing and delivery, and ends with prioritised findings and an impact estimate. An architecture assessment focuses on system design and scalability rather than code detail, while a security audit or penetration test looks specifically for exploitable vulnerabilities, which we also offer as a separate service. The decision you face determines which combination you need.
Yes, we audit codebases written largely with AI assistants or through vibe coding. Such code often works in a demo but typically shows repeated logic, inconsistent patterns, missing authorisation and input validation, hard-coded secrets, unnecessary dependencies and few meaningful tests. We identify which parts can stay, which need fixing and which are cheaper to rebuild, with security issues ranked first. We use AI-assisted development ourselves under senior review, so we know where these tools help and where they tend to fail.
We build it from an assessment of each part of the system, deciding for each one whether to keep it, refactor it, migrate it incrementally or rewrite it. The inputs are business priorities, technical risk such as unsupported technology, missing tests or knowledge held by one person, dependencies between modules and data, and how much downtime is acceptable. Incremental migration, where new services gradually replace parts of the old system while it keeps running, is often the safest route, because a big-bang rewrite carries the highest risk. Each stage gets a clear goal, an effort estimate and a rollback option.
Yes, the same senior engineers who ran the audit can fix the findings and deliver the refactor, rewrite or incremental-migration roadmap while operations keep running. We can take on the fixes ourselves, embed dedicated senior engineers in your team or oversee the work of your current vendor. Security findings can be verified in depth with a penetration test, and a weak MVP can be followed by a rapid rebuild. The report is written so anyone can act on it, so the choice of who implements it stays with you.
Contact
Tell us what system you have and what decision is coming up. We reply within 24 hours and, on a free first call, propose an audit scope and explain what you can expect from it.
