Technical debt has emerged as one of the most consequential challenges in enterprise software engineering, with industry estimates suggesting that organizations allocate between 20 and 40 percent of their technology budgets to servicing accumulated debt rather than advancing innovation. Despite the growing recognition of technical debt as a strategic concern, existing quantification approaches remain fragmented, and the empirical relationship between measurable debt indicators and downstream delivery performance is insufficiently understood. This study presents a cost-benefit analysis framework that integrates compound interest modeling of technical debt accumulation with the DORA DevOps metrics and the SPACE developer productivity framework. Using a mixed-methods design combining quantitative analysis of 89 enterprise software projects drawn from DevOps toolchain telemetry (Jira, GitHub, SonarQube) with survey data from 412 software engineering leaders across North American enterprises, this research establishes statistically significant relationships between technical debt density and degradation in deployment frequency (beta = -0.41, p < .001), lead time for changes (beta = 0.38, p < .001), and change failure rate (beta = 0.33, p < .01). The proposed Technical Debt Impact Model (TDIM) demonstrates that a one-standard-deviation increase in the debt-to-code ratio corresponds to a 23 percent reduction in delivery velocity and a 31 percent increase in defect density. Cost-benefit analysis reveals that systematic remediation programs targeting architectural and design debt yield a median return on investment of 287 percent over a 24-month horizon, with a break-even period of 4.7 months. These findings provide engineering leaders and technology executives with an empirically grounded decision framework for prioritizing debt remediation investments within constrained resource environments.