No mid-market enterprise has produced a documented +240% ROI in 90 days from agentic AI under audited conditions. Read against McKinsey State of AI 2025 (n=1,993; 23% scaling, 17% EBIT-attribution at 12-month horizon), MIT NANDA GenAI Divide (95% of pilots produce no measurable P&L impact, 67% buy vs 22% build success spread), and Stanford Digital Economy Lab Enterprise AI Playbook (12/88 bimodal ROI distribution at 12-18 months), the realistic 90-day mid-market ROI band for the highest-discipline 12% cohort is 20-40% operator-time savings on bounded use cases plus a working pilot pattern that scales into 12-18-month measurable ROI — not the 240% ROI in 90 days the vendor pitch frames it as. The four-artefact 90-day deliverable (documented baseline, bounded production deployment, per-class action error budget, scaling-vs-stop decision) is what the 12% cohort actually produces.
Re-review 10 Jun 2026: the Stanford DEL read-against leg failed primary-source verification — the playbook contains no 12/88 distribution and no 12-18-month ROI measurement point (see correction below and AM-029). The claim's core negative finding (no documented audited +240% ROI in 90 days) is unaffected and continues to hold on the McKinsey and MIT NANDA legs. History: URL-equity restoration of /achieve-240-roi-in-90-days-with-ai-agents-for-mid-market/ — previously retired, but Bing Webmaster AI Performance data 2026-04-21 → 2026-05-02 showed 32 citations on this URL across 12 days (third-highest cited URL); restored per Peter's Option A decision 2026-05-04 with the slug warning (clickbait-metric '240') accepted as the AI-citation preservation trade-off. Sister claims: AM-053 (McKinsey 17% EBIT), AM-128 (MIT 95% pilot-failure), AM-029 (Not holding 10 Jun 2026 — Stanford 12/88 attribution failed verification). Follow-up review after the article body is restated. Trigger conditions: any audited mid-market 90-day +240% ROI case study landing in trade press; vendor pricing changes that reshape the 67%-vs-22% MIT NANDA build-vs-buy economics.
Correction log
- 10 Jun 2026One of three read-against anchors unanchored on re-review. The claim text cites 'Stanford Digital Economy Lab Enterprise AI Playbook (12/88 bimodal ROI distribution at 12-18 months)' and frames the realistic ROI band around 'the highest-discipline 12% cohort'. Full-text verification on 10 Jun 2026 found the playbook contains no 12/88 distribution, no bimodal ROI shape, and no 12-18-month ROI measurement point (full finding at AM-029, correction of 10 Jun 2026). The claim's core negative finding — no mid-market enterprise has produced a documented +240% ROI in 90 days under audited conditions — is unaffected; the McKinsey State of AI 2025 and MIT NANDA legs verify and continue to support it. The '12% cohort' framing has no verifiable referent. The only verified figure carrying the 12/88 numerals is IDC's pilot-graduation finding (roughly 88% of AI proof-of-concepts never reach production; via CIO.com, Mar 2025), a different metric. Status Up -> Partial.
/holding/AM-129/Embed this claimiframe + oEmbed
The card auto-updates when the claim's status, last-reviewed date, or correction log changes. Embedders never need to refresh — the card is rendered live from the canonical record.
Email-me when AM-129's status, next review date, or correction log changes. One email per change. No newsletter subscription, no other mail.
The claim: No mid-market enterprise has produced a documented +240% ROI in 90 days from agentic AI under audited conditions. Read against McKinsey State of AI 2025 (n=1,993; 23% scaling, 17% EBIT-attribution at 12-month horizon), MIT NANDA GenAI Divide (95% of pilots produce no measurable P&L impact, 67% buy vs 22% build success spread), and Stanford Digital Economy Lab Enterprise AI Playbook (12/88 bimodal ROI distribution at 12-18 months), the realistic 90-day mid-market ROI band for the highest-discipline 12% cohort is 20-40% operator-time savings on bounded use cases plus a working pilot pattern that scales into 12-18-month measurable ROI — not the 240% ROI in 90 days the vendor pitch frames it as. The four-artefact 90-day deliverable (documented baseline, bounded production deployment, per-class action error budget, scaling-vs-stop decision) is what the 12% cohort actually produces.
About this register
The Reporting register tracks claims published from articles addressed to senior enterprise IT leaders — CIOs, IT directors, heads of platform. Claims are reviewed on a 30–90 day cadence; each review either reaffirms the claim, marks one substantive part as Partial, or marks it Not holding once the underlying evidence has been overtaken.
Recent corrections in Reporting
- AM-008 · Partial · 17 Jun 2026
Source-text figure re-review: Google's 2024 Environmental Report reports a 28% year-over-year increase to 8.1 billion gallons, not the 33% (from a 6.1 billion 2023 base) asserted at publish. The 8.1B 2024 figure and the Microsoft WUE 0.30 L/kWh / 39%-improvement figure are unchanged and verified. Article corrected to 28% and the unsupported 6.1B base removed; the claim text retains the original figure with this correction per the Holding-up protocol.
- AM-132 · Partial · 10 Jun 2026
One of four legs unanchored on re-review. The claim text attributes '12% of deployments clearing 300%+ ROI with 88% at or below break-even at 12-18 months' to the Stanford DEL 2026 Enterprise AI Playbook. Full-text verification on 10 Jun 2026 found no such figure in that source: the playbook (Pereira, Graylin, Brynjolfsson, Apr 2026) studies 51 successful deployments by design and contains no ROI distribution, no 300%-plus cohort, and no break-even measurement point (full finding at AM-029, correction of 10 Jun 2026). The only verified figure carrying the same 12/88 numerals is IDC research with Lenovo (via CIO.com, Mar 2025): roughly 88% of AI proof-of-concepts never reach production and roughly 12% graduate — a pilot-to-production graduation metric, not an ROI distribution. The Gartner 28%, McKinsey 23%/17%, and MIT NANDA 95% legs verify; they support a small high-performing tail and a large struggling body, but none documents the two-peak bimodal shape the claim asserts. Status Up -> Partial.
- AM-201 · Partial · 10 Jun 2026
One of four named datasets unanchored on review. The claim text names 'Stanford DEL's 12% clearing 300%+ ROI vs 88% at or below break-even' as one of four independent datasets. Full-text verification on 10 Jun 2026 found the Stanford DEL Enterprise AI Playbook contains no such distribution — it studies 51 successful deployments by design and carries no ROI-realisation failure data (full finding at AM-029, correction of 10 Jun 2026). The McKinsey (23% scaling, 17% EBIT-attribution), Gartner (28% fully paying off), and MIT NANDA (95% no measurable P&L impact) datasets verify; the claim's spine stands on three datasets rather than four. The only verified figure carrying the 12/88 numerals is IDC's pilot-graduation finding (roughly 88% of AI proof-of-concepts never reach production; via CIO.com, Mar 2025), a different metric from an ROI distribution. Status Up -> Partial.
Reviews coming up in Reporting
- AM-063 · Holding · next +9d (27 Jun 2026)
AI agents executing financial transactions need a four-control bundle (action-approval gates by blast radius, kill-swit…
- AM-061 · Holding · next +9d (27 Jun 2026)
Production agentic-AI costs at scale routinely run multiples of POC projections, and a layered optimisation programme c…
- AM-003 · Partial · next +9d (27 Jun 2026)
GPT-5 Pro's tiered-subscription model forces enterprises to classify problems by computational difficulty — $200/month…