Transportation Robots · Part of The Humanoid Group

AGV or AMR?

Automated guided vehicles and autonomous mobile robots both move loads inside buildings, but they make decisions differently. This guide compares how each is controlled, how they cope with change, which safety standards apply and how to size a fleet.

By Chloe Dubois · Updated

Understand where each makes decisions

The main difference lies in where decisions sit. A literature review by Fragapane, de Koster, Sgarbossa and Strandhagen in the European Journal of Operational Research explains that traditional AGV systems rely on a central unit for scheduling, routing and dispatching, while autonomous mobile robots can communicate and negotiate with machines and systems themselves and so decentralise decision-making. In practice, central control gives you predictable, repeatable moves that are easy to plan, and a decentralised fleet can adapt when an aisle is blocked or demand shifts. Neither is better in general, and the right choice depends on how stable your material flows are.

Match the vehicle to route stability

Stable, high-volume flows on fixed paths, such as feeding a production line from one store, play to a guided vehicle's strengths, since the routes rarely change and timing matters more than flexibility. Variable flows across a busy floor, with frequent layout changes or seasonal reconfiguration, suit vehicles that plan their own paths. Write down how often you expect to move racks, add stations or change shifts over the next few years, and who will reprogramme routes each time. Ask makers such as AGILOX or Kollmorgen, both listed on this site, to demonstrate how a route change is made, how long it takes and whether your own staff can do it.

Check which safety standard each follows

Which safety standard applies depends on the vehicle's design and the market you operate in. ANSI/ITSDF B56.5-2024 covers driverless automatic guided industrial vehicles that are not mechanically restrained, and also vehicles first built for manned use and later converted to run in an unmanned automatic mode. ISO 3691-4:2023, the international standard for driverless industrial trucks and their systems, names AGVs and AMRs alike within its scope. Ask each maker which standard its vehicle was verified against for your market, and request the evidence. Your own risk assessment for routes, crossings and transfer points builds on that documentation, whichever type you choose.

Compare total cost per move

Price per vehicle says little until you know how many vehicles each approach needs. A guided system may need fewer vehicles on a short, well-planned loop, while a decentralised fleet may need extra units to cover congestion, or fewer if it can reroute around blockages. Ask each maker to simulate your flows and state the fleet size, chargers and infrastructure, such as reflectors, floor markers or wireless upgrades, needed to deliver your busiest hour. Add software licences and the staff time spent changing routes. Then divide the full system cost by the moves it will deliver over its life, so that you compare like with like.

Sources and further reading

Common questions

Can AGVs and AMRs share the same floor?

They can, but traffic rules at junctions, doors and lifts must be agreed, and each fleet manager needs to know where the other's vehicles are. Ask makers how they exchange position and task data, and test shared areas before going live.

Do AMRs need any infrastructure?

Usually less than guided vehicles, but never none. They still need reliable wireless coverage, charging points, floors kept clear of obstacles and sometimes markers at docking stations where precise positioning matters. Check each maker's site requirements before installation.

Visit The Humanoid Group

People also search for agv vs amr, automated guided vehicle vs autonomous mobile robot, difference between agv and amr, amr or agv for factory, agv safety standard and b56.5 guided vehicles.