AMR vs AGV: what is the difference?
Understanding the distinction and choosing the right technology for your operation.
6 min read · Vendor-agnostic
The short answer
AGVs follow fixed, predefined paths. AMRs navigate autonomously using sensors and maps. Both move goods through a warehouse, but the operating model, flexibility, and infrastructure requirements are fundamentally different.
The distinction matters because it directly affects installation cost, flexibility, and which operations each technology suits.
Automated Guided Vehicles (AGV)
AGVs navigate using physical infrastructure: typically magnetic tape, floor markers, or laser reflectors mounted at fixed positions. They follow predefined routes and cannot deviate from them.
Where AGVs work well
- High-volume, repetitive point-to-point transport on fixed routes
- Operations where route predictability is more important than flexibility
- Environments with controlled access and minimal pedestrian traffic
- Heavy load transport (pallet-level movements)
Limitations of AGVs
- Layout changes require physical modification of guidance infrastructure
- Cannot adapt to unexpected obstacles, stopping and waiting for operator intervention
- Route addition requires new infrastructure installation
- Less suited to dynamic environments with changing workflows
Autonomous Mobile Robots (AMR)
AMRs use onboard sensors (LIDAR, cameras) and real-time mapping to navigate without fixed infrastructure. They build a map of the warehouse, plan their own routes, and adapt to obstacles.
Where AMRs work well
- Mixed environments with pedestrians and variable traffic patterns
- Operations where layout flexibility is important
- Multi-purpose transport tasks across changing routes
- Faster deployment (no floor modification required)
Limitations of AMRs
- Higher unit cost than comparable AGVs
- Route efficiency depends on map quality and environment stability
- Integration with WMS requires more sophisticated fleet management software
- Battery management and charging logistics require planning in multi-shift operations
Key differences at a glance
| Factor | AGV | AMR |
|---|---|---|
| Navigation | Fixed paths (tape, laser, magnets) | Autonomous (LIDAR, mapping) |
| Infrastructure required | Yes (floor modification) | Minimal (map and go) |
| Flexibility | Low | High |
| Typical deployment time | Weeks to months | Days to weeks |
| Load capacity | Heavy (pallet-level) | Light to medium |
| Unit cost | Lower | Higher |
| WMS integration | Simpler | Requires fleet management layer |
Which should you evaluate?
For most warehouse operators evaluating internal transport automation for the first time, AMRs are the more practical starting point. The absence of fixed infrastructure requirements reduces installation risk, and the flexibility to reconfigure routes as operations evolve is a significant operational benefit.
AGVs remain the preferred choice for high-volume, fixed-route pallet transport in manufacturing environments where route stability is expected and load weights are substantial.
The right choice depends on your specific operation. Route patterns, load types, floor plan flexibility, and WMS maturity are the primary decision factors.
Find out which fits your operation
The assessment identifies which automation areas are worth evaluating for your specific warehouse profile.
Start Free Assessment