Thanks for the reply. We now better understand your needs.
Unfortunately, we deliberately decided to take a different approach with xView. Instead of calculating an optimal number that your developers can attempt to meet, we show you what you're not going to get based on your actual historical trends. We additionally allow you to set what date you start receiving alerts on so that you can only start to worry once you have enough historical data to be accurate. For a 10-day iteration, looking at what was produced on the first 2 days really shouldn't cause you to start worrying about your velocity.
With xView, you can communicate to your stakeholders what they can expect to receive when the deadline comes and work with them to make the right choices. Do you stop working on a low value feature or do you cut scope in a high value feature that scheduled to be delivered past the original due date. You can work with them to decide what’s important to them and communicate the challenges early so that there aren’t any nasty surprises.
It's been our experience that once an iteration really starts to slip, telling your developers that they need to "work harder" seldom gives you the desired result. What’s more likely to happen is that the developers will “agree” to work harder, but they’ll either overestimate their ability to increase what they produce (and still be late) or they’ll cut quality to get things “done”. Either way, your stakeholders are in for a nasty surprise.
All the best,
the TeamPulse Product Owner