Skip to main content
Catalog
A027
AI & Automation

Vibe Coding Quality Collapse

MEDIUM(70%)
·
February 2026
·
3 sources
A027AI & Automation
70% confidence

What people believe

“Vibe coding with AI lets developers ship features 10x faster with acceptable quality.”

What actually happens
+300-500%Feature shipping speed
+200-300%Code churn rate
+40-80%Bug density
InevitableTime to rewrite
3 sources · 3 falsifiability criteria
Context

Developers adopt 'vibe coding' — using AI to generate entire features by describing intent in natural language, accepting output with minimal review. The approach feels magical: describe what you want, get working code. Ship fast. But the codebase accumulates debt at a rate that traditional development never could. Code churn rates double or triple as AI-generated code gets patched, replaced, and rewritten. Developers lose the ability to reason about their own systems because they never understood the generated code in the first place. Within months, the codebase becomes a black box that nobody can maintain.

Hypothesis

What people believe

“Vibe coding with AI lets developers ship features 10x faster with acceptable quality.”

Actual Chain
→
Code volume explodes without proportional understanding(3-5x more code generated per day)
└
Developers can't explain what their own code does
└
Code reviews become impossible at this volume
└
Test coverage drops because tests aren't vibed
→
Technical debt accumulates at unprecedented speed(Debt accrual 5-10x faster)
└
AI generates verbose, non-idiomatic code
└
Duplicate logic across files — AI doesn't know your codebase
└
Security vulnerabilities embedded in generated patterns
→
Debugging becomes nearly impossible
└
Developer didn't write the code, can't reason about it
└
AI-generated fixes often introduce new bugs
└
Stack traces through code nobody understands
→
Codebase becomes unmaintainable within months(Rewrite needed in 6-12 months)
└
New team members can't onboard to AI-generated code
└
Refactoring is harder than rewriting
Impact
MetricBeforeAfterDelta
Feature shipping speedBaseline+300-500%+300-500%
Code churn rate15%/month45-60%/month+200-300%
Bug densityBaseline+40-80%+40-80%
Time to rewriteN/A6-12 monthsInevitable
Navigation

Don't If

  • •You're building anything that needs to be maintained for more than 6 months
  • •You're working in a regulated industry (healthcare, finance)
  • •Your team doesn't have senior engineers who can review AI output critically

If You Must

  • 1.Limit vibe coding to prototypes and throwaway experiments
  • 2.Require human-written tests for all AI-generated code
  • 3.Mandate code review by someone who understands the domain
  • 4.Set a hard rule: if you can't explain it, you can't ship it

Alternatives

  • AI-assisted coding — AI suggests, human decides — line by line, not feature by feature
  • Prototype then rewrite — Vibe code the prototype, then rewrite properly with understanding
  • AI for tests only — Write code manually, use AI to generate test cases
Falsifiability

This analysis is wrong if:

  • Vibe-coded projects consistently maintain quality metrics comparable to traditionally-coded projects over 12 months
  • Code churn rates in vibe-coded projects remain under 20%/month
  • Teams can onboard new developers to vibe-coded codebases in under 2 weeks
Sources
  1. 1.
    GitClear Code Quality Report 2024

    AI-generated code shows 2x higher churn rate

  2. 2.
    Andrej Karpathy — Vibe Coding

    Coined the term, described the workflow

  3. 3.
    OWASP AI Security Guide

    AI-generated code frequently contains known vulnerability patterns

Related
A001A015T010
Tags
aivibe-codingcode-qualitytechnical-debtdeveloper-productivityautomation

This is a mirror — it shows what's already true.

Want to surface the hidden consequences of your AI adoption?

Try Lagbase