Press Release QNX Research Finds Automotive Developers Spend More than a Third of Their Time on Software "Plumbing" Slowing SDV Innovation

A global survey of 1,100 automotive software developers found that 35% of developer effort goes to software integration below the vehicle application layer, and 75% say the lack of a common, reusable software foundation slows software-defined vehicle development. Security is developers’ top future concern (48%), while 83% expect SDVs to become a major cyberattack target within three years. AI expectations are more practical: 25% see it as transformational, down from 36%, while 62% see it as significant and integrated into workflows.

Analysis

The report points to a value-capture problem, not proof of a near-term software revenue inflection: OEM engineering effort remains tied up in integration rather than customer-facing features. If that persists, it can delay differentiation and returns on SDV investment. The likely relative beneficiaries are suppliers that can sell reusable middleware, integration/testing tools, and automotive-qualified security across multiple programs; the counter-risk is that a common foundation commoditizes software layers and shifts bargaining power toward OEMs. The survey does not identify vendors or quantify budgets, so it is not evidence of specific contract wins.

Security is a credible multi-year cost and procurement priority, but a stated threat expectation is not equivalent to realized spend. Auto qualification, long design cycles, and fleet deployment mean cybersecurity vendors may see a slower monetization path than general enterprise-security narratives imply. AI sentiment also argues against paying for a near-term transformation premium: practical workflow adoption could improve developer productivity, but may initially reduce labor intensity rather than create new software revenue.

Near term (days), the survey alone is a weak catalyst. Over 1–3 months, watch OEM and supplier disclosures for software R&D, integration timelines, security awards, and SDV launch delays. Over 6–18 months, reusable platforms could improve development economics, but only if adoption reduces duplicated work without creating costly vendor lock-in. The findings are self-reported and should be treated as directional, not a forecast.

Key Decisions for Investors

• No immediate directional trade from the survey alone. Avoid adding to broad SDV exposure solely on the basis of developer sentiment; the report supplies no company-level spending or revenue evidence.
• Set an alert on automotive-qualified software platform and cybersecurity suppliers, including BlackBerry QNX and Aptiv, for disclosed OEM awards, program expansions, or measurable recurring software revenue. Treat these as watch items, not recommendations absent valuation and contract data.
• For a 1–3 month catalyst check, compare OEM guidance on software development expense and SDV launch timing with supplier commentary on integration demand. A worsening delay or rising spend without feature launches would reinforce the view that integration is eroding returns.
• Falsification: upgrade the software economics thesis if OEMs report shorter development cycles, reuse across vehicle programs, or improved software monetization; downgrade the security-spend thesis if procurement remains limited to pilots or does not appear in supplier bookings and guidance over coming quarters.