Introduction: Cloud Cost Commitments and ROI

One of the biggest questions that cloud finance teams face is whether reserved instances or savings plans deliver the best long-term ROI. Both models are designed to reduce cloud bills by trading flexibility for commitment, but each works differently. For organizations practicing FinOps, selecting the right commitment model is crucial for optimizing spend and striking a balance between flexibility and cost efficiency.

Reserved Instances (RIs) offer significant discounts compared to on-demand pricing, but they require locking into a specific instance family, size, and region for one or three years. Savings Plans, in contrast, provide more flexibility by applying discounts on compute services in exchange for committing to consistent hourly spend.

The decision is not just financial, it’s strategic. Finance leaders must weigh predictability against flexibility, while engineers must ensure commitments don’t restrict innovation. Poorly chosen commitments can trap organizations in inefficient models, leading to stranded costs and wasted discounts. On the other hand, when commitments are well aligned, they not only cut costs but also provide predictability that strengthens forecasting and financial governance.

For FinOps teams, the challenge lies in striking a balance between cloud cost savings and agility. Should a company choose RIs for maximum discounts but higher rigidity, or Savings Plans for adaptability but slightly lower savings potential? And more importantly, how can enterprises design a hybrid approach that combines both models for maximum ROI?

In this blog, we’ll compare AWS Savings Plans vs. RI, explore how companies evaluate ROI, and share a case study showing how the right choice can reduce waste, improve planning, and deliver measurable business value.

Understanding Reserved Instances

Reserved Instances (RIs) are one of the earliest and most widely used commitment models in the cloud computing industry. They allow organizations to trade flexibility for significant cloud cost savings, with discounts of up to 72% compared to on-demand pricing. By committing to specific instance families, sizes, and regions for one or three years, enterprises can bring predictability to their cloud budgets.

Key features of Reserved Instances include:

• Commitment to instance type, size, and region
• Term length: one or three years
• Payment options: all upfront, partial upfront, or no upfront
• Capacity reservation benefits in specific scenarios

Advantages:

• Provides the steepest discounts for stable workloads
• Guarantees capacity, especially in regions with high demand
• Simplifies budgeting for long-lived, predictable applications

Disadvantages:

• Inflexible, unused RIs cannot easily be applied elsewhere
• Mismatched commitments can lead to stranded spend
• Management complexity grows across multiple regions and accounts

In practice, RIs deliver a strong ROI for workloads that are predictable and long-lasting, such as production databases, virtual machines for ERP systems, or large analytics platforms. However, they are less suitable for workloads that are experimental, seasonal, or prone to scaling up and down.

For FinOps practitioners, Reserved Instances also present operational challenges. Monitoring utilization, tracking expirations, and reallocating commitments across accounts can become resource intensive without strong governance or automation. Enterprises that neglect this often find that a portion of their RIs go unused, diluting potential ROI.

Another factor is payment flexibility. While all upfront options maximize discounts, they require substantial capital commitments that may not align with every organization’s cash flow strategy. No upfront or partial upfront options reduce financial pressure, but they result in slightly lower overall savings. Aligning RI payment models with corporate finance policies is an essential consideration for maximizing value.

Ultimately, RIs are best leveraged as part of a broader FinOps commitment strategy. They are most effective when reserved for the “always on” portion of workloads that are unlikely to change soon. Pairing RIs with dynamic models, such as Savings Plans, creates balance, ensuring that enterprises secure deep discounts without sacrificing flexibility.

‍

‍

Understanding Savings Plans

Savings Plans were introduced to address many of the limitations of Reserved Instances by offering flexibility without completely sacrificing discounts. Instead of locking into a specific instance family, organizations commit to a consistent hourly dollar spend for one or three years. In return, they receive discounts of up to 66% compared to on-demand pricing, applied automatically across eligible compute services.

Key features of Savings Plans include:

• Commitment to a dollar-per-hour spend level, not specific instances
• Coverage across EC2, AWS Fargate, and Lambda
• Flexible term lengths: one or three years
• Payment options: all upfront, partial upfront, or no upfront

Advantages:

• Flexibility to shift workloads across instance families, sizes, and regions
• Easier management across large multi-account environments
• Strong savings potential for dynamic and evolving workloads

Disadvantages:

• Maximum discounts are slightly lower than RIs
• Overcommitment to hourly spend can still create stranded costs
• Requires accurate forecasting to set spend baselines

Savings Plans shine in environments with diverse or rapidly changing workloads. For example, an enterprise moving workloads from EC2 instances to containers or serverless functions benefits from the flexibility of applying discounts across services. They are also ideal for companies undergoing modernization projects, where workload types may shift over time.

From a FinOps perspective, Savings Plans reduce operational overhead. Unlike RIs, there is no need to manage capacity reservations or swap commitments between accounts. Instead, the focus shifts to accurate forecasting of baseline spend and monitoring utilization rates. When paired with dashboards, Savings Plans enable finance and engineering teams to collaborate on budgeting while maintaining flexibility for innovation.

Enterprises often find that a hybrid model, utilizing RIs for stable workloads and Savings Plans for dynamic environments, delivers the strongest ROI. This approach strikes a balance between predictability and adaptability, aligning with FinOps principles of accountability, transparency, and cost efficiency.

‍

‍

Reserved Instances vs Savings Plans: ROI Comparison

When evaluating reserved instances vs savings plans, the ROI depends heavily on workload predictability, organizational maturity, and the balance between cost efficiency and flexibility. Both models significantly reduce cloud bills, but each has distinct trade-offs.

 

Case Study: Choosing the Right Model for ROI

A global media and entertainment company was scaling rapidly, serving millions of customers across multiple regions. With growth came soaring cloud bills, which quickly became one of the largest line items in IT spending. The finance team demanded predictability, while engineering wanted flexibility to experiment with new workloads. The question of reserved instances vs savings plans became central to their FinOps strategy.

The Challenge

Initially, the company leaned heavily on Reserved Instances (RIs). On paper, this looked like the right choice: RIs promised the deepest discounts, and finance was keen to lock in savings. However, the rigid structure of RIs quickly created problems.

• 20% of RIs went unused due to workload migration from virtual machines to containers and serverless platforms.
• Forecasting errors led to overcommitments, leaving stranded capacity that could not be reassigned.
• Finance lacked transparency, with no clear view of underutilized commitments across regions.
• Engineers felt constrained, unable to pivot infrastructure decisions without triggering wasted spend.

The misalignment created cultural tension. Finance accused engineering of mismanaging commitments, while engineering argued that business needs were evolving faster than financial models could keep up.

The Turning Point

Recognizing the need for a more balanced approach, the company restructured its cloud strategy by introducing AWS Savings Plans alongside RIs.

Steps taken included:

1. Hybrid model adoption - Stable workloads like relational databases remained on RIs, while flexible and container-based workloads shifted to Savings Plans.
2. Forecasting with FinOps practices - The company began forecasting based on historical trends, seasonality, and growth projections, rather than relying on static assumptions.
3. Dashboard integration - Real-time dashboards were deployed to display RI utilization rates, Savings Plan coverage, and ROI comparisons.
4. Governance automation - Automated alerts notify teams when utilization drops below thresholds, allowing for proactive adjustments.

The Results

The shift delivered measurable business impact within 12 months:

• Waste reduction: Underutilized commitments fell by 40%, freeing resources that were previously stranded.
• Improved forecast accuracy: Predictions became 25% more accurate, resulting in reduced budget overruns and fewer surprises.
• Annual savings: The hybrid model generated $1.2 million in annual savings compared to their previous all-RI approach.
• Cultural alignment: Finance gained confidence through predictable reporting, while engineering enjoyed the flexibility to scale workloads without fear of wasted commitments.

Lessons Learned

This case highlights an important reality: ROI is not about choosing one model over the other. Reserved Instances offer unmatched discounts for predictable workloads, but their rigidity can lead to waste in dynamic environments. Savings Plans provide flexibility, covering diverse workloads, but offer slightly smaller discounts.

The strongest ROI comes from blending both models within a FinOps framework, supported by accurate forecasting, continuous monitoring, and automated governance. By aligning financial strategies with engineering realities, the company turned commitment models from a source of conflict into a driver of collaboration and savings.

‍

‍

FinOps Commitment Models: Best Practices

Deciding between reserved instances vs savings plans is only the first step. To maximize ROI, enterprises must adopt a structured approach to commitment management that combines forecasting, governance, and ongoing optimization. This is where FinOps commitment models provide the framework for aligning finance and engineering.

1. Forecast with Accuracy

Forecasting is the foundation of commitment planning. Analyze historical consumption data, seasonal usage patterns, and projected growth to set realistic commitment levels. Avoid relying on static assumptions, cloud usage is dynamic, and forecasts must reflect that reality.

Tip: Pair quantitative data with input from engineering leaders to capture upcoming migrations, new projects, or modernization efforts.

2. Balance Flexibility with Discounts

No single model covers every scenario. Reserved Instances (RIs) deliver maximum savings for stable workloads, while Savings Plans offer flexibility for evolving services. A hybrid strategy often delivers the best balance, locking in discounts without overcommitting to rigid infrastructure.

Tip: Treat RIs as the foundation layer for “always on” workloads, while using Savings Plans to cover variable or uncertain usage.

3. Monitor Utilization Continuously

Commitments should never be “set and forget.” Implement dashboards that track RI utilization rates, Savings Plan coverage, and commitment ROI in real time. Early detection of underutilization prevents stranded costs and ensures commitments remain aligned with actual usage.

Tip: Set utilization thresholds and trigger alerts when commitments are not being met.

4. Automate Governance

Manual management of hundreds of RIs and Savings Plans is not sustainable. Automation ensures policies are applied consistently, alerts are triggered automatically, and renewals or adjustments happen proactively. It reduces operational overhead and ensures reliable governance.

Tip: Automate allocation tagging so finance can see exactly which business units benefit from commitments.

5. Reassess Commitments Regularly

Cloud usage evolves with every project launch, migration, or scaling initiative. Review commitments quarterly to avoid overcommitment or underutilization. Treat commitment planning as an ongoing FinOps cycle rather than a one-time procurement decision.

Tip: Revisit payment terms (all upfront vs. partial upfront) to align with your business's cash flow strategies.

CloudNuro simplifies commitment management by automating coverage analysis and ensuring both RIs and Savings Plans deliver measurable ROI.

‍

Lessons Learned: Reserved Instances vs Savings Plans

The comparison of reserved instances vs savings plans reveals that both models can deliver significant ROI, but only when aligned with workload realities and supported by strong FinOps practices. Organizations that approach these commitments without a strategy often end up with stranded costs, while those that blend financial discipline with engineering insight unlock meaningful savings.

Key lessons include:

• RIs maximize savings but demand predictability
  Reserved Instances offer the steepest discounts, often up to 72%, making them an attractive option for finance teams under pressure to reduce cloud bills. However, these savings only materialize when workloads are predictable and long lived. RIs lock enterprises into specific instance families and regions, meaning misforecasted or shifting workloads can result in unused commitments. The ROI of RIs depends on workload stability and strong forecasting discipline. Without these, organizations risk stranded capacity and sunk costs that negate their initial savings goals.

• Savings Plans thrive in diverse environments
  Savings Plans offer slightly lower maximum discounts, up to 66%, but their flexibility makes them ideal for environments undergoing rapid change. They apply automatically across services like EC2, Fargate, and Lambda, meaning commitments remain valuable even as teams modernize their infrastructure or experiment with new architectures. This flexibility reduces the risk of stranded spend and helps organizations maintain cost coverage in uncertain environments. For enterprises adopting containers, serverless, or multi-service strategies, Savings Plans deliver ROI by protecting against variability.

• Hybrid strategies deliver the best ROI
  Few organizations operate workloads that are either 100% static or 100% dynamic. This is why the strongest ROI often comes from blending both commitment models. RIs are used for workloads that will not change, such as core databases or ERP systems, while Savings Plans cover evolving or unpredictable usage patterns. This hybrid approach ensures that organizations capture maximum discounts without losing flexibility. It also spreads financial risk, creating a balanced strategy that aligns with both finance priorities and engineering realities.

• FinOps governance is critical
  One of the most significant lessons is that commitments are not straightforward procurement decisions. They are ongoing financial instruments that require constant monitoring, governance, and iteration. Without automation and visibility, organizations may miss utilization drops or overcommit to workloads that no longer exist. FinOps practices, such as real-time dashboards, automated alerts, and cross-functional ownership, ensure that RIs and Savings Plans remain aligned with business needs. Governance transforms commitments from a static contract into a dynamic practice that drives ongoing accountability and savings.

In the end, ROI isn’t about which model is “better.” It's about which model is better for your workloads, culture, and financial maturity. Enterprises that adopt FinOps commitment models as a living practice, regularly forecasting, monitoring, and evolving, achieve the most significant savings while maintaining the flexibility to innovate.

CloudNuro provides visibility and automation to ensure both RIs and Savings Plans deliver lasting ROI, rather than wasted commitments.

FAQs: Reserved Instances vs Savings Plans

1. What are Reserved Instances (RIs)?
Reserved Instances are AWS pricing models that offer discounts of up to 72% compared to on-demand rates. They require committing to a specific instance family, size, and region for one or three years.

2. What are Savings Plans?
Savings Plans are flexible pricing models offering up to 66% discounts. Instead of locking into a specific instance type, organizations commit to a consistent hourly spend across services like EC2, Fargate, and Lambda.

3. Which delivers better ROI: Reserved Instances vs Savings Plans?
RIs deliver better ROI for predictable, long-running workloads, such as databases. Savings Plans offer a higher ROI for dynamic, evolving workloads, such as containers or serverless environments. A hybrid approach often delivers the best balance between savings and flexibility.

4. What are FinOps commitment model best practices?
Best practices include accurately forecasting, blending RIs with Savings Plans, continuously monitoring utilization, automating governance, and reassessing commitments quarterly. These steps minimize waste and maximize cloud cost savings.

5. Can Reserved Instances and Savings Plans be combined?
Yes. Many enterprises use RIs for stable workloads and Savings Plans for variable usage. This hybrid strategy strikes a balance between maximum savings and flexibility, and is widely recommended in FinOps commitment models.

6. What risks exist with Reserved Instances?
The main risks are overcommitment and stranded costs. If workloads shift or are misforecasted, unused RIs create wasted spend. Strong forecasting and monitoring are required to protect ROI.

7. How does CloudNuro help optimize commitments?
CloudNuro automates RI and Savings Plan coverage analysis, provides real-time dashboards, and ensures commitments are aligned with actual usage. This reduces waste, increases forecasting accuracy, and ensures consistent cloud cost savings.

‍

‍

Conclusion: Which Model Truly Delivers Better ROI?

The debate over reserved instances vs savings plans has no single answer. Both deliver significant cloud cost savings when matched to the right workload profiles and supported by FinOps discipline. RIs shine in stable, long-lived environments where predictability drives maximum discounts. Savings Plans, meanwhile, thrive in dynamic ecosystems, offering flexibility as workloads shift toward containers, serverless, or multi-region deployments.

The key lesson is that ROI comes not from choosing one model exclusively but from aligning each model with business realities. For most enterprises, the best results are achieved through a hybrid strategy that utilizes RIs for steady-state workloads and Savings Plans for variable usage. Coupled with accurate forecasting, automated governance, and transparent dashboards, this approach ensures commitments are not wasted but become strategic financial tools.

Enterprises that treat commitments as living financial instruments, continuously monitored and adjusted, achieve both cost efficiency and agility. In short, the commitment model itself is less important than the governance that surrounds it.

‍

Testimonial