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
| Dimension | TMS / route optimiser | DiscvrAI |
|---|---|---|
| Core decision | Best route from a fixed origin to fixed destinations | Whether the shipment should use that origin and path at all |
| Network structure | Master data: depots, lanes, and rules frozen in ERP | Daily, tax-feasible echelon bypass and clubbing decisions |
| Cost pools measured | Line-haul freight (typically one pool) | Five pools: line-haul, handling, dwell, lead-time, dead freight |
| Typical savings | 1 to 2% from better routing within existing paths | 3 to 5% from path changes the TMS never evaluates |
| Relationship to existing tools | System of record for dispatch execution | Decision layer above your TMS; posts recommendations, not replacements |
| Time to first outcome | 6 to 18 months for TMS rollout or reconfiguration | 8 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
No. FlowPath sits above your TMS. It decides the path; your TMS executes the dispatch. Most clients keep both.
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.
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.