The correct answer is B because the company has a predictable baseline workload that will run for at least 1 year , plus a temporary 2-week increase in demand during a holiday period. The most cost-effective approach is to use a long-term discount option for the steady-state workload and a flexible pricing model for the short-term burst capacity.

An EC2 Instance Savings Plan is a strong fit for the existing workload because it provides cost savings for committed EC2 usage while matching a stable, predictable application footprint. Since the company is already using EC2 and the workload pattern is known, this is an efficient commitment for the baseline capacity. For the additional temporary holiday demand, On-Demand Instances are appropriate because the extra capacity is needed only for a short duration. This avoids overcommitting to capacity that will not be used after the holiday period ends.

Option A is less cost-effective because it misses the savings opportunity for the predictable baseline workload. Option C is incorrect because the application is described as stateful , which makes Spot Instances a poor fit due to potential interruption. Option D is incorrect because purchasing a 12-month commitment for both the normal workload and the temporary holiday increase would likely result in paying for excess committed usage after the 2-week peak ends.

AWS cost optimization guidance recommends using discounted commitment models for steady-state usage and On-Demand for short-lived, temporary spikes. Therefore, the best answer is to use an EC2 Instance Savings Plan for the baseline and On-Demand Instances for the seasonal increase.