Raft vs Logentic — which AI layer for freight forwarders?

Raft fits global enterprise forwarders (50+ FTE, multi-country). Logentic is built for Dutch and continental-European mid-market forwarders (15–200 FTE) that want to add AI to their existing TMS quickly, without a lengthy enterprise implementation, and with deep NL customs integration (Portbase, AGS, DMS, NCTS).

What are Raft and Logentic, exactly?

Both products are AI-layer platforms for freight forwarders. They do not replace your TMS, they sit on top of it. They read incoming emails and attachments (bookings, packing lists, Bills of Lading, CMRs, invoices), extract structured data, and enter it automatically into your existing TMS — CargoWise, Softpak, Descartes, Riege Scope, or another system.

Raft (formerly Vector.ai, launched 2017, HQ London) built its position in the upper mid-market and enterprise segment. As of 2026: 50+ forwarder customers, 10,000+ active users, around 5 million shipments processed through the platform per year. Notable case studies cite $2.1 million in annual savings and a 93% efficiency improvement at larger customers.

Logentic (launched 2025, HQ Rotterdam) is built for the Dutch and European mid-market: 15–200 FTE forwarders and customs brokers. The focus is on fast implementation (4–6 weeks), low operational complexity, and deep integration with the Dutch customs ecosystem (Portbase, AGS, DMS, NCTS). Like Raft, TMS-agnostic.

Side-by-side comparison

Where Raft is stronger

• Scale and trust signals. 5 million shipments per year through the platform is substantial. For an enterprise buyer minimising risk, proven scale is a real factor.
• UK customs (CHIEF/CDS). Through its UK origin, Raft has deep integration with UK customs workflows. For freight forwarders with significant UK volume — the post-Brexit customs surge — this is an advantage.
• Breadth of AP / financial automation. Raft has an AP (accounts payable) module that goes beyond invoice matching. For forwarders with complex financial-operations integration this is a genuine extension.
• Global multi-country operations. Raft is built to serve multiple countries and regulatory regimes within one customer at the same time. Logentic's focus is deliberately NL+EU-first.

Where Logentic is stronger

• Dutch customs depth. Logentic is built with Portbase, AGS, DMS and NCTS as first-class integrations. A Rotterdam ocean-freight forwarder gets workflows out of the box that Raft does not. For the 800+ NL freight forwarders in our ICP, this is a tangible advantage.
• Implementation speed. 4–6 weeks vs 3–6 months. For a 20–60 FTE forwarder whose CEO has to defend a decision today, fast ROI delivery beats enterprise feature breadth.
• Pricing transparency. Logentic charges a flat monthly fee. Raft uses custom enterprise contracts. For mid-market buyers without a budget line for "licensing to be negotiated," predictability is a real factor.
• Dutch-language support and documentation. For NL forwarder operations teams, native-language onboarding, support and documentation are practical — especially for inducting junior operations staff.
• Direct contact with the founder. At 15–80 FTE forwarders, a software vendor is often judged on "can we reach them when something goes wrong?" With Logentic that's a yes. With Raft you go through a customer-success team.

Honest warning — both have weaknesses

Raft's weaknesses for the NL mid-market: enterprise-leaning, longer procurement, more expensive, less NL customs depth, English-primary.

Logentic's weaknesses: younger install base (no 5M-shipment track record), more limited multi-country coverage outside the EU, fewer enterprise features such as extensive AP-workflow configuration, currently NL-heavy customer base.

If you were evaluating 10 AI-layer solutions side by side today: Raft's enterprise maturity and Logentic's NL-specific depth are complementary strengths. It depends on who you are.

Which platform fits which forwarder?

Practical: what to ask in a demo

Whether you're evaluating Raft, Logentic or another AI layer — ask the same five things in every demo:

1. "Run it on our real mail." Send 10–20 representative inbound emails from your customers. Watch the system process them. Include odd formats, messy scans, multilingual attachments.
2. "How do you integrate with [my TMS]?" Not "we have APIs" — specifically: which fields do you map automatically, which need configuring, what happens on a mismatch?
3. "Show the configuration interface." Who on my team can change rules? Does it have to go through your support? Can an operations manager do this themselves?
4. "How does your team handle errors?" If the system enters something incorrectly, how does my team know? How do we recover? What does the system learn from the correction?
5. "What do I pay in month 1 and what do I pay in month 24?" All components including onboarding, support tiers, per-transaction costs, escalation costs, contract renewal.

Conclusion

Raft and Logentic both serve the growing demand for AI automation in freight forwarding, but from different sides of the market. Raft has the enterprise-scale advantage; Logentic has mid-market speed and NL customs depth.

For a 250-FTE globally operating freight forwarder with complex multi-country regulation — choose Raft. For a 40-FTE Rotterdam ocean-freight forwarder that wants measurable ROI within 6 weeks and Dutch customs integration — choose Logentic. For everything in between: evaluate both in a live demo on your own data.

The good news is that 2026 is the first year there are genuinely two serious options for NL mid-market forwarders looking to add AI automation without replacing their TMS. That's progress.

Related

Bill of Lading complete guide · What is freight forwarding · B/L & CMR processing automation

---

Bogdan Ivtsjenko is the founder of Logentic. This comparison is written as honestly as possible based on public information about Raft (website, case studies, G2 reviews, The Loadstar coverage) and internal knowledge of Logentic's product. Reach out on LinkedIn if you have corrections or additions — I'll update the doc.