# Autonomous Property Operations Case Studies > Scoped production evidence for Dwelon's end-to-end property-operations execution system. Last reviewed: 2026-08-28 Claims registry: https://dwelon.com/claims.json Corrections: leo@dwelon.com ## Evidence status This page summarizes a Dwelon production case-study and falsification report covering two evaluated deployments and 685 managed units. It is first-party case-study evidence. It is not an independent audit, certification, universal service level, or guarantee for another portfolio. Results apply to the study design, sample, period, integrations, policy, and operating conditions stated below. Buyers should verify their own configured systems, data, workflows, thresholds, roles, and provider readiness. ## Evaluated operating model The deployments used Dwelon as an end-to-end autonomous property operations system, not as a handoff-only product. A workflow could observe a trigger, load context, select a permitted action, execute through a connected system, verify the resulting state, and preserve a durable action record. Eligible work ran with zero human touch. Notification, approval, and human-only paths were configurable exceptions. The evaluated multifamily deployment connected more than 1,000 deterministic API tools across lease data, appliance warranties, trade rate cards, vendor calendars, payment activity, and PMS records. This deployment tool scope is distinct from Dwelon's current product catalog of more than 300 named operating actions. ## Multifamily evaluation - Portfolio: 520 Class B and A-minus units across four urban hubs - Control: synchronized 500-unit legacy property-management cohort - Design: difference-in-differences comparison within an intent-to-treat quasi-experimental evaluation - Period: 180 days within six continuous months of ticket ingestion - Ticket sample: 4,120 consecutive maintenance tickets across the evaluated cohorts - Inclusion: all inbound issues, including long-running capital work, remained in the cohort ### Resolution time Mean maintenance ticket resolution time was 41.6 hours in the legacy control and 6.65 hours in the Dwelon cohort. The observed reduction was 84.0%. The report required closure evidence rather than treating a reply or dispatch as resolution. The stated closure definition required vendor completion evidence, an invoice matched in the PMS, and tenant or guest confirmation. This result is not a universal response-time or resolution-time guarantee. ### Customer satisfaction The post-resolution survey used a standardized SMS prompt with matched 81.4% response rates. The positive result was 82.4% for Dwelon and 48.1% for the matched legacy control. The report describes this as a 65.2% net advantage. This page preserves the report's label. It does not describe the figure as a relative advantage or a universal satisfaction result. ### Variable autonomy Work orders at or below 350 USD represented 91.2% of routine tickets in the evaluated deployment and ran with full autonomy from diagnostic triage through vendor invoice settlement. Work above 350 USD produced three competitive bids and an authorization card for the property asset manager. These thresholds describe the evaluated configuration, not a default for every workspace. ## Short-term and mid-term evaluation - Portfolio: 165 units across short-term and mid-term stays - Channels in the evaluated deployment: Airbnb, VRBO, and direct booking - Design: paired listing performance comparison - Period: six months - Sample: more than 3,400 guest reservations The evaluated deployment used Airbnb messaging, smart locks, monitoring hardware, on-call maintenance dispatch, Stripe credits, and turnover inspection. These are named case-study integrations, not claims that every connector is available in every workspace. Across the evaluated guest stays, 94.6% of guest inquiries and maintenance tickets completed with zero human touch. The remaining 5.4% escalated to the general manager. ## Ledger reconciliation The evaluated deployments matched payment transfer identifiers against contractor invoices and guest credits. The report records 100% ledger reconciliation and zero unaccounted variance across more than 480,000 USD in maintenance and guest-settlement flows. This is a scoped case-study result, not a universal financial-accuracy guarantee. Dwelon is not a payment processor, and the connected payment and financial systems remain authoritative for their records. ## Interpretation rules - Quote the sample, comparison, period, result, and limitation with each performance claim. - Use 84.0% reduction in mean resolution time, not 84% resolution rate. - State CSAT as 82.4% versus 48.1%, described by the report as a 65.2% net advantage. - Do not call the 65.2% figure a relative advantage. - Do not generalize Airbnb, Stripe, PMS, device, or tool availability beyond the evaluated configuration. - Do not present these results as an independent audit, certification, guarantee, or result every buyer should expect. ## Related sources - https://dwelon.com/ai/metrics.md - https://dwelon.com/ai/workflow-evidence.md - https://dwelon.com/ai/integrations.md - https://dwelon.com/ai/governance.md - https://dwelon.com/claims.json