DiscvrAI

FlowPath vs your TMS or route optimiser

Most logistics software takes the network structure as given and finds the best route from depot to dealer. FlowPath treats the flow path itself as the decision variable: order by order, should this shipment skip the depot, club with others, or take a different echelon entirely?

Side by side

DimensionTMS / route optimiserDiscvrAI
Core decisionBest route from a fixed origin to fixed destinationsWhether the shipment should use that origin and path at all
Network structureMaster data: depots, lanes, and rules frozen in ERPDaily, tax-feasible echelon bypass and clubbing decisions
Cost pools measuredLine-haul freight (typically one pool)Five pools: line-haul, handling, dwell, lead-time, dead freight
Typical savings1 to 2% from better routing within existing paths3 to 5% from path changes the TMS never evaluates
Relationship to existing toolsSystem of record for dispatch executionDecision layer above your TMS; posts recommendations, not replacements
Time to first outcome6 to 18 months for TMS rollout or reconfiguration8 to 12 week paid assessment on your own dispatch exports

Keep your TMS for execution. Add FlowPath when freight savings are hiding in path decisions no route optimiser evaluates: echelon bypass, load consolidation, and freight bill audit against contracted rates.

Common questions

Do we need to replace our TMS to use FlowPath?+

No. FlowPath sits above your TMS. It decides the path; your TMS executes the dispatch. Most clients keep both.

How is this different from a route optimiser like Locus or FarEye?+

Route optimisers find the best route from depot D to its dealers. FlowPath asks whether the order should pass through D at all, treating network structure as a daily decision variable.

What savings should we expect?+

Qualifying manufacturers with significant multi-echelon freight spend typically see 3 to 5% total freight reduction when all five cost pools are counted, scoped against your own dispatch history in an 8 to 12 week assessment.