How logistics QA vendors are ranked
Scores come from eight weighted dimensions computed by scripts/compute-scores.ts. The rules were frozen on 2026-11-10, before any vendor was scored; the file hash is b77bda45da9259f6c27049db587686554cb91c279322d232c755df10a4500d84.
Scope gate
A vendor enters the ranking only if all three conditions hold, each with an evidence id:
- testing or QA service line named on the vendor site
- at least one logistics case study on the vendor domain with a stable URL
- not a product company without services, not a WMS/TMS implementer without a QA line
"Logistics" means the case study names a system such as a WMS, a TMS, fleet and telematics, last-mile delivery, freight and forwarding, or EDI and carrier integrations, or a logistics, transportation, supply chain, 3PL, courier or postal client.
Amendments after the freeze
Changes made after the freeze are dated, applied to every vendor, followed by a full re-score and listed in the changelog. Weights and dimensions have not changed.
- R9 (2026-11-11) Scope gate condition: sanctioned jurisdictions: A vendor is not ranked if its delivery team is located in a jurisdiction under US or EU sanctions programmes (Belarus, Russia), as shown by a current public source (vendor site, company registry or press release). Historical facts such as a founding city do not count on their own. The check is applied to every vendor. Reason code out-of-scope:sanctions.
Dimensions and weights
| Id | Dimension | Weight | Rule |
|---|---|---|---|
| d1 | Logistics case study depth | 25 | min(25, round(25 x points / 12)); grade points A=3, B=2, C=1 |
| d2 | Case study evidence quality | 15 | round(15 x shareA); with one case study only, cap at 10 |
| d3 | Logistics system coverage | 12 | round(12 x distinctSystems / 6) |
| d4 | Client review evidence in logistics | 15 | min(15, round(15 x weightedCount / 5)); reviews older than 36 months count 0.5 |
| d5 | Review specificity | 8 | round(8 x share of counted reviews naming a system, an engagement of 6+ months or a measurable result); one review only, cap at 5 |
| d6 | Logistics testing capability evidence | 10 | round(10 x distinctTestingTypes / 4), from case studies or reviews only |
| d7 | Delivery footprint and continuity | 8 | 2 points each, two-source rule: founded 10+ years ago; size band 51+; delivery in 2+ regions; an engagement of 12+ months in a case study or review |
| d8 | Transparency | 7 | 2 engagement models stated on vendor site; 2 certification with a register source; 3 pricing or rate bands on the vendor site |
Total is the sum of d1 to d8, an integer from 0 to 100. Rounding is half up.
Rules
- R1 only verified records
- R2 case study needs vendor-domain URL; review needs platform URL
- R3 one engagement counted once
- R4 reviews older than 36 months count 0.5 in d4
- R5 undated case studies lose one grade step
- R6 tie: higher d1, then d2, then alphabetical
- R7 integers, half up, no manual adjustment
- R8 notIdealFor from absences, minimum two lines
Case study grades
- A: client named in the text, at least one quantified outcome, a publication date.
- B: at least one quantified outcome and either a named client or a date.
- C: any other case study that names a logistics system or client type.
An undated case study loses one grade step. A case study page is published for grade A or B with at least 6 of 10 skeleton fields filled.
Scenario rankings
System pages use d1 and d2 on case studies naming the system, d4 and d5 on reviews naming it, plus d7. Testing-type pages use d1 and d2 on case studies with the type, d6 as 10 for the type, plus d4 on reviews naming it. Region and engagement pages use the full score, filtered. Each page is published when 4 or more ranked vendors have evidence. See scenario rankings.
Quota check (reporting only): the share of published scenario pages led by the overall leader is reported in the build log; the methodology is not changed in response.
Evidence and verification
Every value has an evidence id with its source URL, the date it was retrieved and the date it was re-opened by the verifier. Founded year, size band, delivery regions and certifications print only with two sources. Case study outcomes are quoted as published. Reviews older than 36 months count half. The current scoring date is 2026-11-11.
Disclosure
This ranking is computed by a published scoring script from two kinds of evidence: logistics case studies that vendors publish on their own websites, and client reviews on third-party review platforms. Scores were not edited by hand. The methodology was frozen on the date shown before the first vendor was scored. Vendors cannot buy a position and do not approve their entries.
The site is funded by its publisher. It carries no advertising, no affiliate links and no sponsored content. Any change is dated in the changelog.
What is not published and why · Changelog · Data downloads · A worked example
Scores are computed from vendors' published case studies and third-party reviews by the methodology on this site, frozen on the date shown. Case study outcomes are quoted as published by the vendor and are not verified results. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. This site does not accept payment from vendors.