AGV vs AMR: what are the differences, and which should you choose for your pallets?
August 18, 2026 · 8 min read
The difference between AGV and AMR comes down to navigation: the AGV (Automated Guided Vehicle) follows fixed paths marked out by an infrastructure (floor wires, laser reflectors, QR codes), while the AMR (Autonomous Mobile Robot) locates itself through SLAM mapping and goes around obstacles on its own, with no building fit-out. This technical choice shapes the cost, the deployment timeline and the flexibility of your automation, particularly for pallet transport.
AGV: definition
An AGV (Automated Guided Vehicle) is a driverless handling machine that moves along predefined circuits. It is guided by an infrastructure installed in the building: wire guidance (a wire embedded in the floor), magnetic strips, floor QR codes or reflectors for laser triangulation.
The AGV always runs the same route, like a train on its rails. Faced with an obstacle, it stops and waits for the path to clear: it cannot improvise a detour. This is the historical technology for automating internal flows.
Its strengths: repeatable trajectories, stable throughput, predictable behaviour, ideal for high-volume, fixed flows.
AMR: definition
An AMR (Autonomous Mobile Robot) is a handling robot that navigates with no guidance infrastructure whatsoever. Thanks to its onboard sensors (LiDAR, cameras) and SLAM mapping (Simultaneous Localization and Mapping), it builds a map of the site, locates itself on it in real time and computes its own routes.
Unlike the AGV, the AMR perceives its environment: it detects people and obstacles, slows down, goes around them or recalculates its route. A change in layout is handled with a software update to the map, not construction work.
Its strengths: deployment with no building modification, adaptation to variable flows, smoother coexistence with pedestrians and driven vehicles.
The AGV vs AMR difference in one comparison table
Here are the eight criteria that concretely separate the two technologies for an automated handling project.
| Criterion | AGV | AMR |
|---|---|---|
| Navigation | Fixed circuits: wire guidance, magnetic strips, QR codes or laser reflectors | SLAM mapping via LiDAR and cameras, routes computed in real time |
| Infrastructure required | Yes: installing wires, reflectors or markings, layout studies | None (or minimal): the robot maps the existing building |
| Facing an obstacle | Stops and waits for the path to clear | Goes around, slows down or recalculates its route |
| Flexibility | Low: any circuit change means construction work and reconfiguration | High: routes and drop-off points changed by software |
| Cost | Machine investment + infrastructure + site engineering | No infrastructure cost; most of the budget goes to the robot and software integration |
| Deployment time | Long: studies, construction work, circuit fine-tuning | Short: site mapping, mission definition, testing |
| Scalability | Costly to extend (a new section means new infrastructure) | Add robots or zones by configuration; fleets run by a central manager |
| Typical use case | Highly repetitive, very high-throughput flows, sites designed for automation | Variable flows, existing buildings, human-machine co-activity |
On the market side, the trend is clear: AMRs are growing faster than AGVs, and logistics remains the leading market for mobile robots, with more than 4 million units expected worldwide by the end of 2027 (source: Interact Analysis). The AMR market alone is expected to reach $9.56 billion by 2030 (source: Research and Markets). In France, AGV sales have been estimated at 500 to 600 machines a year, with average projects of 3 to 4 machines (source: Toyota Material Handling France, Voxlog report).
A blurring line: the hybridisation of the market
The AGV / AMR distinction, very clear on paper, blurs in the field. Three developments explain this hybridisation.
AGV manufacturers are adopting free navigation
Established forklift makers are converging their ranges toward infrastructure-free navigation. Fenwick-Linde offers, with the T-MATIC, an automated pallet truck with optical geo-navigation and no floor installation. STILL unveiled the AXL 15 iGo at LogiMAT 2026, a dock-focused autonomous pallet truck combining 3D visual SLAM and LiDAR. Machines sold as "automated trucks" are therefore incorporating AMR technologies.
AMRs are gaining supervision tools worthy of AGVs
Conversely, AMR manufacturers have developed fleet managers that orchestrate missions and manage traffic, a level of control that used to be the preserve of AGV installations. Some go further: Agilox runs on decentralised "swarm" intelligence, with no central server, and the robot coordinates its fleet even without an external network connection.
Common standards are emerging
The VDA 5050 interoperability standard, adopted by players such as STILL, aims to let AGVs and AMRs from different brands work together under a single supervision system. On safety, the NF EN ISO 3691-4 standard (2023 version) covers "driverless industrial trucks and their systems" indiscriminately, AGV and AMR alike.
Practical takeaway: don't choose a label, choose characteristics. The right questions are: what infrastructure needs to be installed? What does the machine do when something unexpected happens? What does changing the circuit cost?
AGV vs AMR: which option for your warehouse?
The right choice depends less on the technology "in the abstract" than on your site and flow profile. Here is a summary decision matrix.
| Your situation | Recommended direction | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Stable, repetitive, high-throughput flows (e.g. production line to stock) | AGV (or AMR on fixed routes) | Repeatability comes first; the infrastructure pays for itself over a constant volume |
| Variable flows, seasonality, changing SKUs | AMR | Missions are reconfigured by software, with no construction work |
| SME or mid-sized company, no in-house automation team | AMR | Short deployment, no site work, simpler to get up and running |
| Large new site designed for automation | AGV, AMR or a mix | Infrastructure can be built in from the design stage; compare TCOs |
| Leased building or multi-client site (3PL) | AMR | No building modification; reversible at the end of the lease or contract |
| Heavy co-activity with pedestrians and driven vehicles | AMR | Detection and dynamic avoidance of obstacles |
| Need to start small then expand | AMR | Add robots to the fleet with no new infrastructure |
Two complementary benchmarks. French projects often start with 3 to 4 machines, but some fleets reach 30 to 40 units (source: Voxlog report). And with around 15,000 vacant forklift-operator positions in France in 2026, automating repetitive routes also addresses the labour shortage (source: Focusur).
And for your pallets? Autonomous pallet trucks and stackers
This is the most concrete, and least covered, angle of the AGV vs AMR debate: the pallet. Horizontal pallet transport (dock to stock, line-side) is the warehouse's most repetitive flow and a major contributor to musculoskeletal disorders, which account for more than 80% of recognised occupational diseases in France (source: INRS). It's therefore often the first flow to automate.
On the AGV side: forklift makers' automated pallet trucks
Established manufacturers offer their pallet trucks and stackers in an automated version with reflector-based laser guidance: the Jungheinrich ERE 225a (2,500 kg) or the Toyota BT Levio LAE250 Autopilot (2,500 kg). These machines excel on fixed, high-volume shuttle runs, at the cost of a layout study and reflector installation.
On the AMR side: autonomous pallet trucks with no infrastructure
The new generation navigates with no fit-out at all: the MiR1200 Pallet Jack (1,200 kg, around $65,000 excluding integration), Balyo LOWY stackers (1,600 kg, infrastructure-free geo-guidance), or the EP Equipment EXP15 entry-level model (1,500 kg, around €12,000 excl. VAT). In practice, the autonomous-pallet-truck market runs from roughly €30,000 to €150,000 depending on capacity, navigation and level of integration.
The autonomous pallet truck, launched on August 18, 2026 and distributed in France by Easy to Carry, illustrates the state of the art in AMRs applied to pallets: 2,000 kg capacity, navigation via 3D LiDAR and depth cameras (SLAM), no infrastructure required, forks inserted in around 20 seconds with AI-based pallet recognition, including non-standard pallets, and automatic correction of offsets of up to 15 cm. Its dual autonomous/manual mode lets an operator take back control at any time.
The deciding factor for pallets: the real condition of your site
A poorly placed pallet, a cluttered floor, a blocked aisle: day-to-day warehouse life is full of the unexpected. This is where the AMR approach scores points: detecting misplaced loads, going around obstacles, tolerating placement variance. An AGV, on the other hand, requires the pallet to always be exactly in the right spot.
Common mistakes to avoid
- Choosing by label rather than by criteria. An "AGV" with infrastructure-free geo-navigation can be more flexible than an "AMR" locked onto fixed routes. Compare navigation, infrastructure, behaviour when facing the unexpected, and the cost of change.
- Underestimating integration. Interfacing with the WMS, defining missions, and managing priorities and charging zones matter as much as the machine itself.
- Comparing purchase prices without the full cost. For an AGV, add the infrastructure and site engineering; for all of them, add maintenance, training and start-up support.
- Wanting to automate everything at once. Start with a simple, repetitive flow (a dock-to-stock pallet shuttle), measure the results, then expand the fleet.
- Neglecting safety and training. The reference is the NF EN ISO 3691-4 standard: operating zones, person detection, speeds, signage. The employer must inform and train staff working nearby, validated with your Carsat.
- Forgetting the condition of pallets and floors. Broken pallets, damaged floors or undersized aisles penalise AGVs and AMRs alike: a prior site audit is essential.
FAQ
What is the difference between an AGV, an AMR and an LGV?
An AGV follows fixed circuits defined by a guidance infrastructure; an LGV (Laser Guided Vehicle) is an AGV guided by laser triangulation on wall-mounted reflectors; an AMR navigates freely using SLAM mapping, with no infrastructure, and goes around obstacles on its own. An LGV is therefore a sub-family of AGV, while an AMR relies on a different approach.
Can an AMR move around pedestrians?
Yes, provided it complies with the NF EN ISO 3691-4 standard, which governs driverless industrial trucks: person detection, adapted speeds, operating zones and signage. AMRs detect pedestrians, slow down and stop. The employer must nonetheless assess risks, organise traffic flows and inform the staff concerned.
Do you need a CACES certificate to operate an AGV or an AMR?
The CACES R489 covers ride-on handling trucks; a driverless robot falls outside its scope. The applicable reference is the EN ISO 3691-4 standard, supplemented by the training and authorisation the employer issues to operators. Have your setup validated by your Carsat or the INRS.
How much does an AMR robot cost for pallet transport?
Autonomous pallet trucks generally range from €30,000 to €150,000 depending on capacity, navigation and integration. Public benchmarks: around €12,000 excl. VAT for the EP Equipment EXP15 entry-level model, around $65,000 excluding integration for the MiR1200 Pallet Jack. The robot's price is provided on request.
Related reading
- Autonomous pallet truck: the complete 2026 guide, to go deeper into the AMR technology applied to pallets.
- Autonomous pallet truck: a full overview of the autonomous pallet truck, specs, navigation and use cases for the robot.
- Automating a warehouse with no conveyors or construction work, the infrastructure-free approach in practice.
- Autonomous pallet truck price in 2026, detailed ranges and financing models.
- Do you need a CACES certificate for an electric or autonomous pallet truck?, the full regulatory picture.
Still torn between AGV and AMR for your pallet flows? Easy to Carry distributes the robot in France, a 2,000 kg autonomous pallet truck deployable with no infrastructure work. Discover the autonomous pallet truck or request the free site pre-assessment: your regional contact sends back a written verdict on your flows' feasibility within 48 business hours.
Let's assess your aisles before everyone else does
Distribution opens soon in France. In the meantime, four questions are enough: your regional contact sends back a written verdict on your site, with no price and no date.