Warehouse automation vendors often look similar on brochures, but their trade-offs become clear when capacity, integration, cost, and delivery risk are evaluated together. This TOPSIS example shows how a distribution center can rank realistic automation vendors using a weighted decision matrix.
Decision context
The decision is to select the best warehouse automation vendor for a high-volume distribution center. The organization must balance throughput capacity, integration flexibility, annual operating cost, and implementation lead time because the choice affects service levels and total operating risk.
Criteria and alternatives
- Throughput capacity — measures the vendor’s ability to handle peak order volume.
- Integration flexibility — indicates how easily the solution connects with the existing WMS and equipment.
- Annual operating cost — captures recurring cost; this is a negative criterion because lower cost is preferred.
- Implementation lead time — reflects how quickly the warehouse can become operational.
Alternatives: Dematic AGV System, Swisslog AutoStore, Geek+ RoboShuttle, Honeywell Intelligrated, and Vanderlande ADAPTO.
Input data
The decision matrix uses a five-point Likert scale, with 5 representing the strongest performance. Criteria weights sum to 1.00.
| Vendor | Throughput | Integration | Annual cost | Lead time |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dematic AGV System | 5 | 4 | 3 | 2 |
| Swisslog AutoStore | 4 | 5 | 2 | 3 |
| Geek+ RoboShuttle | 3 | 4 | 1 | 4 |
| Honeywell Intelligrated | 4 | 3 | 2 | 5 |
| Vanderlande ADAPTO | 5 | 4 | 2 | 3 |
TOPSIS execution
The example was executed in the TOPSIS software on OnlineOutput using five alternatives and four criteria. The full calculation normalizes the matrix, applies the weights, determines the positive and negative ideal solutions, and ranks each vendor by relative closeness.
Result and interpretation
Geek+ RoboShuttle is the best-ranked alternative with a relative closeness score of 0.623. Honeywell Intelligrated ranks second at 0.541, Vanderlande ADAPTO third at 0.536, Swisslog AutoStore fourth at 0.521, and Dematic AGV System fifth at 0.340.
The result does not mean that Geek+ is universally superior. It means that, under these weights and ratings, its combination of low annual operating cost, strong integration, and short implementation profile is closest to the ideal solution. A change in strategic priorities—especially a higher weight for throughput—could change the ranking.
View the online TOPSIS result · Download Excel · Download Word
Practical takeaway
For similar vendor-selection problems, define benefit and cost criteria before scoring alternatives, then make the weights explicit so stakeholders can challenge the assumptions. Use the ranking as a transparent shortlist—not as a substitute for technical due diligence, contract review, or site testing.
FAQ
Why is annual operating cost a negative criterion?
Because lower recurring cost is preferable; TOPSIS therefore treats increasing cost as reducing desirability.
Why did Geek+ RoboShuttle rank first?
It achieved the highest relative closeness score under the selected weights and Likert ratings, especially because of its low cost and strong implementation profile.
Would different weights change the result?
Yes. TOPSIS is sensitive to decision-maker priorities, so a higher throughput weight or different ratings may produce another ranking.
Can I download the calculation?
Yes. The online result includes Excel and Word download links for review and reuse.
Next step
Run your own vendor or project comparison with the TOPSIS software, and learn the underlying method on the TOPSIS method page.