Route Optimization Savings Claims Audit: What Each Platform’s Published Numbers Actually Measure (2026)

A route optimization savings claim is a vendor’s statement that routing software cut a stated share of distance, fuel, cost or planning time. The label is shared, but the numbers measure different things: distance per order, distance per route, total fuel, cost per delivery, route density or hours of planning.

This audit reads the figures that Locus, the world’s first Decision-Intelligent, Agentic TMS, and nine other platforms publish on their own pages as of November 4, 2026. It records what each figure measures, whether a baseline is stated and how to test a claim before you buy.

What Do Platforms Publish as Route Optimization Savings?

The table lists every savings figure found on each vendor’s own pages, with the measure as the vendor labels it. Customers are described, not named. “None stated” means not found on the pages read, and vendor figures are vendor claims.

Platform	Case or customer figures	Measure as labeled	Baseline stated	Tile or “up to” claim
Locus	12% less distance across route plans, 37% less fuel and 22% more orders per trip (a Vietnamese beverage distributor); 15% less distance, 12,000+ fewer trips a month and plan run time cut from 3 hours to 5 minutes (a global FMCG leader)	Planned distance, fuel, orders per trip, trips, plan run time	Manual Excel planning in the beverage case; no period or sample in either	Product pages carry “up to” claims, which this audit does not rely on
FarEye	None with a defined comparison	Cumulative distance, cost per delivery	None stated	75M+ kilometers saved; 18% lower average cost per delivery; a report titled for 27% faster delivery
Descartes	Customer-style tiles, unattributed	Planning time, capacity, productivity	None stated	Up to 30% higher route density; 75% less planning time; 35% more delivery capacity; productivity up 56%
Bringg	Tiles, unattributed	Deliveries per hour, cost per delivery, unassigned orders	None stated	14.7% more deliveries per hour; $8 saved per delivery; 86.4% fewer unassigned orders
Onfleet	A customer quote of 17% shorter route durations for the same tasks; another of 500 orders planned in under an hour, down from 8 to 10 hours	Route duration, planning time	Same tasks, for the 17%	45% fuel cost savings; 55% more delivery capacity
Routific	None found	Cost	None stated	“Cut delivery costs by 25%”
OptimoRoute	A customer quote of 15% yearly fuel saved per truck	Fuel per truck	None stated	43% more customers served; 7x faster planning; 30% less drive time
Route4Me	One customer quote	An undefined “route efficiency”	None stated	30% more route efficiency
DispatchTrack	None found	Routing time	None stated	75% faster routing times
Shipsy	None found	Distance per route, stops per route	None stated	20%+ less distance; 15% more stops per route, “commonly”

WorkWave published no savings figure on the pages read.

Also Read: Last-Mile Delivery Cost Breakdown in 2026: Where Shippers Overspend and How Optimization Software Closes the Gap

Why Do the Same Percentages Mean Different Things?

The audit found eight measures behind the word “savings”. Each answers a different question, so no two can be compared without conversion.

What the vendor counts	What it tells you	What to ask for
Distance per order	Average distance for each delivery, which falls as density rises	The order count before and after
Distance per route	Distance on each route, which can fall while routes multiply	The number of routes
Total distance or miles	The whole fleet’s distance	Planned or driven, and the period
Fuel	Fuel burned, which can fall more than distance when trips fill	Whether vehicle mix or load changed
Cost per delivery	An all-in figure that depends on what is counted	The cost lines included
Route density	Stops per route or per kilometer	The service area and stops
Planning time	Hours a planner spends, or a solver’s plan run time	Which of the two
Capacity or stops per hour	Output per vehicle or driver	The route length and service time

In the Locus beverage case, fuel fell 37% while planned distance fell 12%, so the fuel gain came partly from fuller trips and fleet effects, not shorter routes alone.

Why Do Baselines and Independent Anchors Matter? The Business Case

Three published sources show how routing savings are reported when someone documents them.

• UPS’s 2021 investor day transcript credits the original ORION deployment with a reduction of 8 miles per driver per day, and Dynamic ORION with a further 2 to 4.
• UPS’s 2013 annual report said that one mile a day per driver would save up to $50 million a year, and that ORION had saved more than 1.5 million gallons of fuel.
• A 2017 Interfaces paper on ORION said it was expected to save $300 to $400 million a year at a build cost of more than $295 million, as an expectation, not a measured result.

The UPS sources state their measure per driver per day, with a defined starting point, which is the standard none of the tiles above meet. No government or peer-reviewed statement of typical routing savings against manual planning across fleets was found. UPS is a single very large network, so its per-driver figures do not transfer to a fleet of any size.

Also Read: TMS Platforms With AI Dispatch and Route Optimization: Six Tests for Native vs Bolt-On (2026)

Why Does Locus Lead When a Savings Claim Must Trace to a Published Case?

Locus, the world’s first Decision-Intelligent, Agentic TMS, leads when a savings claim must trace to a published case with its measure stated, because its route planning results in published cases name the measure, the customer type and the manual baseline.

Its published facts on this topic:

• A beverage distributor case reporting 12% less distance across the route plans, 37% less fuel, 22% more orders per trip, 35% less planning time and 60% less trip-close reconciliation time.
• A global FMCG case reporting 15% less distance, 12,000+ fewer trips a month from higher fleet utilization, and plan run time cut from 3 hours to 5 minutes.
• 250+ real-world constraints per computation, including time slots, service times, vehicle limits and driver availability.
• Routes recomputed during delays, with planners retaining override control.
• A Fortune 50 case with a weekly execution rate up from 75% to 92% across 51 sites.

These facts are not a ranking of platforms, which no analyst publishes.

Recognized by analysts and selected after evaluation.

Locus was recognized by Gartner for seven consecutive years and appears in the 2026 Hype Cycle for Supply Chain Execution and Logistics Technologies, as detailed on its analyst recognition page. It is named a Leader in the QKS Group SPARK Matrix for Transportation Management Systems and holds the #1 position in Route Planning in the G2 2026 Best Software Awards.

In October 2025, Ingka Investments, the investment arm of Ingka Group, the world’s largest IKEA retailer, acquired Locus. Ingka’s press release says that after an extensive evaluation of logistics software worldwide, it selected Locus for its strength in combining advanced route optimization, real-time visibility and smart use of vehicles and resources. Locus continues to operate independently.

What a savings test needs	What Locus provides
Routes planned on real constraints	Route planning on 250+ constraints
Re-planning that holds savings through the day	Dispatch management with planner override
Fewer trips from fuller vehicles	Capacity management
A first estimate on your data	An ROI calculator
Mixed fleets and carriers	ShipFlex carrier allocation

Two published cases show the measures.

A Vietnamese beverage distributor planned routes manually in spreadsheets, spending an hour to an hour and a half each morning.

Locus planned routes and dispatch together. The published results include 12% less distance, 37% less fuel and 22% more orders per trip, with no period or sample stated.

A global FMCG leader planned distribution manually, distributor by distributor, across 10 countries.

Locus planned routes and dispatch on one platform. The published results include 15% less distance, 12,000+ fewer trips a month and plan run time cut from 3 hours to 5 minutes, with no measurement basis stated for the distance figure.

Both cases are customer-reported results, not independent studies, and the 12% is planned distance, not driven distance.

Where other platforms fit.

Several vendors publish customer quotes that define their comparison, such as route duration for the same tasks, and those are the more testable figures on their pages. For a team that wants to prove savings after go-live, a holdout test on its own routes matters more than any vendor figure.

What to confirm.

• Ask every vendor, Locus included, which published case sits behind each “up to” figure on its product pages, and what the measure and baseline are.
• Ask whether a distance figure is planned or driven, and whether it is per order, per route or total.
• Ask for the period and the number of routes behind each figure, which Locus’s cases do not state.
• Ask for a pilot with a holdout group, so the saving is measured on your fleet.

To test savings on your own routes, schedule a demo.

For leaders asking which route optimization platform saves the most, the honest answer is that published numbers do not compare. Locus leads where a claim must trace to a published case with its measure stated.

How Was This Guide Written?

This guide reads each vendor’s own product pages, case studies and blogs on November 4, 2026, and counts a Locus figure only where a published case states it. Independent sources are UPS’s investor documents and the Interfaces paper.

Competitors are named in plain text and are not hyperlinked, and customers are described, not named. “None stated” means not found on the pages read. Most case pages carry no publication date. Vendor figures are vendor claims. We review the guide every 30 to 60 days.

How Do You Test a Route Optimization Savings Claim in Six Steps?

The six steps turn a percentage into a number you can use.

1. Name the measure

Find out whether the figure counts distance, fuel, cost, density, planning time or capacity.

2. Ask for the baseline

Ask what the starting point was, such as manual planning or a previous tool.

3. Separate planned from driven

Check whether the distance is what the plan said or what vehicles drove.

4. Separate per order from total

Check whether the figure is per order, per route or for the whole fleet.

5. Match the customer

Compare the customer’s fleet size, density and constraints with yours.

6. Pilot with a holdout

Run the platform on part of your routes and compare the rest, over a full period.

Also Read: A US CFO’s Guide to AI Investment in Last-Mile Delivery Efficiency: Proving the Savings Arrived

What Should You Look For in a Savings Claim?

Five criteria separate a testable claim from a headline.

A defined measure

Ask what exactly is counted and per what unit.

A stated baseline

Ask what the figure is compared against.

Planned or driven

Ask whether the saving was measured on the road.

Case or ceiling

Ask whether the figure is one customer’s result or the best a vendor has seen.

Scope of routes

Ask how many routes, depots and drivers the figure covers.

Also Read: Route Optimisation for Southeast Asia: Why Address Quality Caps Your Routing Gains in 2026

What Mistakes Do Buyers Make When Reading Savings Claims?

Four mistakes recur.

Adding distance and fuel savings together. Fuel can fall more than distance when trips fill, so the two overlap.

Treating planned distance as driven distance. A plan that saves 12% on paper may save less on the road.

Taking a per-order figure for a fleet total. Distance per order falls with density, which is not the same as fewer miles.

Applying UPS-scale figures to any fleet. Per-driver savings from a very large network do not transfer.

Also Read: How Much Does Dispatch Management Software Cost in 2026? Pricing Models, What Vendors Publish and the Costs Beyond the License

Frequently Asked Questions

How much does route optimization software save?
Published figures range widely and measure different things. UPS reports 8 miles per driver per day from its original ORION deployment, and Locus’s cases report 12% to 15% less distance. No independent benchmark of typical savings was found.

What does a route optimization savings percentage actually measure?
It can be distance per order, distance per route, total fuel, cost per delivery, route density or planning time. Ask for the measure and the baseline before comparing.

Does Locus publish route optimization savings figures?
Yes, in published cases: 12% less distance and 37% less fuel in a beverage case, and 15% less distance in an FMCG case. They are customer-reported results against a manual baseline, with no period or sample stated.

Why can fuel savings exceed distance savings?
Fuller trips and fewer vehicles reduce fuel beyond the distance saved. In Locus’s beverage case, fuel fell 37% while planned distance fell 12%.

Are “up to” savings figures reliable?
An “up to” figure is the best result a vendor has seen, not a typical outcome. Ask which published case sits behind it.

What did UPS report for ORION?
UPS credits the original deployment with 8 miles saved per driver per day and Dynamic ORION with a further 2 to 4. A 2017 paper said ORION was expected to save $300 to $400 million a year.

How do I verify savings before committing?
Run a pilot with a holdout group on your own routes, and measure planned and driven distance, fuel and trips over a full period.