32.8 weeks
“CodeRabbit has saved reviewers the equivalent of 32.8 weeks of reviewer time in the last six months”
As published on coderabbit.ai. Captured by usedby on Oct 8, 2026.
What happened
freee uses CodeRabbit for automated AI code review on pull requests, so developers can work through its suggestions before requesting human review. This lets human reviewers focus on architecture, intent, and design.
Summary written by usedby from the source page, in English. The figures are those of CodeRabbit and freee, not ours.
- 48.5%“Across freee's use of CodeRabbit, the platform achieved an overall acceptance rate of 48.5%, meaning nearly half of CodeRabbit's suggestions were accepted by developers.”
- 570 seats“freee began with about 30 users, tested CodeRabbit for roughly a month, and then expanded the rollout to 570 seats, to "everyone who writes code," Yuhei said.”
- 285 repositories“Today, the platform is active across 285 repositories, giving the company broad review coverage across its engineering environment.”
- 84%“On an internal survey, the average satisfaction score was four out of five, about 84% of freee's engineers said they were satisfied with CodeRabbit and roughly 70% said CodeRabbit had reduced their review burden.”
CodeRabbit has saved reviewers the equivalent of 32.8 weeks of reviewer time in the last six months, helping teams absorb higher pull request volume without asking humans to shoulder the full burden alone.
I think it's one of the absolutely necessary parts in the AI coding era,
What the story claims, and what we checked
We compared the story with its live page on Oct 8, 2026.
- The figure: 32.8 weeksCheckedPrinted word for word on the page, near the name of freee.
- The passage quoted aboveCheckedCopied word for word from the page, near the name of freee.
- freee uses CodeRabbitCheckedConfirmed line. Latest check across sources: Oct 8, 2026.
- The result itselfNot checkedWe quote it; we did not measure it.




