News / CargoWise and the self-build question: when does a forwarder go it alone?

© Sasinparaksa

As freight forwarders digest the impact of CargoWise’s latest pricing changes, some are asking whether it is finally time to reconsider a long-dismissed option: building their own transport management system.

For most of the industry, the answer is likely no. But among the very largest players, where annual software bills now run into nine figures, the question is no longer entirely hypothetical.

“To compete with CargoWise, you’re talking easily $100m in investment capital,” said Robert Petti, CEO of software company Prompt Global. “And that’s just to get to where they are today.”

Customs functionality alone, he said, would take years to replicate.

“US customs would probably take you three years.”

More fundamentally, Mr Petti warned that self-building required forwarders to reinvent themselves – although he noted one forwarder currently attempting this.

“You’re a forwarding company, you’re not a software company today. You basically have to entirely change how you operate,” he said.

That view explains why, over the past decade, the industry has overwhelmingly chosen to outsource its core platforms. According to Bernstein, 13 of the top 25 global forwarders now run on WiseTech’s CargoWise One, including DSV, DHL, Ceva Logistics, Sinotrans, and Nippon Express.

The cautionary tale remains DHL Global Forwarding’s failed New Forwarding Environment programme, written off publicly at €345m, with industry sources often suggesting the true cost was far higher. The episode cemented CargoWise’s position as the default enterprise TMS.

For a handful of global players, however, the sums involved are now forcing a rethink.

Off the record, several executives estimate that DSV had been paying WiseTech between $100m and $150m a year for CargoWise.

Bernstein analysts yesterday argued that following its acquisition of DB Schenker, DSV’s scale could make a break from its long-standing relationship with WiseTech economically rational. Bernstein estimates DSV’s CargoWise costs at around Dkr500m ($78m) a year, potentially rising above Dkr800m once Schenker volumes are fully migrated.

“That would pay for a lot of engineers to build it yourself,” one executive said.

The analysts believe DSV could ultimately replace CargoWise, using Schenker’s in-house TMS, Tango, generating triple-digit million savings over time.

According to one source, developing and maintaining an in-house TMS at that scale would cost a similar amount annually, between $100m and $150m, but with one critical difference: full control.

“You’re looking at comparable spend,” the executive said, “but you own the platform.”

That control extends to pricing exposure, development priorities, data ownership, and upgrade timing, all issues that have become more sensitive as forwarders complain about unilateral vendor changes.

The cost, of course, will depend on what you need. Estimates from one source suggest just a “couple of million” for a small forwarder to develop its own system, while for a company like DHL – “it would cost the same as building a new CargoWise”.

Several sources argue that while CargoWise’s recent price rises have been more aggressive, they are not out of character.

“WiseTech is playing a smart game,” one source said. “Forwarders depend on them, so they raised the price. They’ve done this every year – just much more aggressively this time.”

One estimate suggests CargoWise’s pricing now implies a cost of roughly $50 per transaction, covering origin, main freight, destination, and customs, excluding additional charges many customers say were not transparent.

“Software is expensive to build,” the source added. “So it’s not strange they’re charging for it now they have market power.”

However, when combined with labour costs, often another $100–200 per transaction, the impact on forwarding margins becomes significant.

Flexport’s technology stack is frequently cited as a potential CargoWise rival that could, in theory, be sold as SaaS.

However, The Loadstar understands that this is not a strategic priority for Flexport, which prefers to focus on directly serving customers rather than commercialising its platform.

Other digital forwarders have tried.

“Companies like Forto have gone this way,” one source said, “but honestly, it’s because they couldn’t make the forwarding economics work and tried to sell the software.”

The lesson, sources say, is that building technology is one challenge; turning it into a sustainable business is another.

For smaller and mid-sized forwarders, self-building is widely seen as unrealistic, but alternatives do exist.

In a letter to members seen by The Loadstar, WCAworld chairman David Yokeum acknowledged the disruption caused by CargoWise’s pricing changes and pointed members towards Freightoscope, WCA’s own platform.

He wrote: “It has recently come to our attention that CargoWise’s latest pricing announcements are causing concern and disruption across the freight forwarding community.

“We understand that these changes are having a negative impact on some of our members, as well as many small to medium-sized freight forwarders throughout the industry.

“Supporting our members through periods of change has always been at the heart of what WCAworld stands for. With that commitment in mind, we’d like to remind you that several years ago WCAworld developed Freightoscope, a modern, flexible freight forwarding platform designed specifically to give WCAworld members and independent forwarders access to top-of-the-range technology, regardless of business size or budget.”

Sripad Bharati, WCA’s CIO, told The Loadstar it had invested millions into Freightoscope, describing it as a modern, SaaS-based platform requiring continuous engineering, security, compliance, and infrastructure investment.

“Development isn’t a one-time effort,” he said. “It’s an ongoing undertaking.”

But for others to self-build, the consensus remains clear: “For everyone else, self-build is unrealistic,” one source said.

For most forwarders, the real choice is not between buying and building, but between optimising what they already have, or finding a new vendor.

Coming up in our series on TMS: How WiseTech has responded to criticism of CargoWise