Enterprise comparison brief
FTM vs MercuryGate:
Enterprise TMS
Architecture Review
This comparison is for transportation leaders evaluating two different platform models: a dedicated enterprise transportation suite and a Salesforce-native transportation operating layer. MercuryGate is now part of Infios Transportation Management. FTM runs inside Salesforce, connecting freight operations with customer, carrier, workflow, financial, and reporting data in one environment.
Naming note: MercuryGate is now Infios Transportation Management. This page uses MercuryGate where buyers still recognize the product name, while treating Infios as the current product context.
Evaluation Brief
FTM vs MercuryGate
Architecture
Native to Salesforce
Salesforce fit
FTM advantage
Operational visibility
Model choice
Reporting
Salesforce dashboards
Implementation
Scope-led
Scalability
Evaluate fit
Executive Summary
Where Each Platform Fits
The evaluation is less about feature count and more about operating model. MercuryGate, now Infios Transportation Management, fits buyers evaluating a dedicated transportation management suite. FTM fits teams that want transportation workflows, customer context, financial visibility, automation, and executive reporting to live inside Salesforce.
FTM
FTM is a strong fit when transportation must connect to the business operating layer
You want transportation operations inside Salesforce, unified with customer, carrier, and financial data. Organizations new to Salesforce can deploy FTM with Salesforce included as part of the solution
You run broker, carrier, shipper, or mixed operations and want one platform across all three rather than a transportation-only system
Salesforce-native security, automation, and reporting are part of your technology strategy, now or as a future direction
You want operational and financial visibility across departments rather than a transportation-only reporting environment
You want customer, carrier, and transportation data living in one platform rather than a standalone TMS connected through integrations
Implementation speed and a clear, structured deployment timeline are relevant evaluation criteria for your team
MercuryGate
MercuryGate may be worth evaluating when a dedicated transportation suite fits the operating model
Your organization manages multimodal transportation including ocean, air, rail, and parcel alongside truckload and LTL
Your organization is an enterprise shipper or 3PL managing multimodal transportation across a broad network
Your evaluation prioritizes deep transportation planning, procurement, and optimization capability over Salesforce alignment
Your organization needs to evaluate client-specific rating, billing, reporting, and network requirements in a dedicated TMS environment
You are prepared to evaluate implementation scope, services model, timeline, and total ownership cost with the vendor
You want to compare multiple dedicated TMS platforms before making a selection
Side-by-Side Evaluation
Transportation Platform Evaluation Framework
Organized around the criteria transportation executives, operations leaders, and technology buyers typically use when evaluating a TMS investment.
| Evaluation Area | FTM | MercuryGate | Buyer Consideration |
|---|---|---|---|
| Salesforce requirement | No existing Salesforce deployment required. FTM can be deployed into an existing Salesforce environment or launched with Salesforce provisioned as part of the implementation | Standalone enterprise platform. No Salesforce dependency | Determine whether Salesforce alignment is strategically valuable for your organization now or in the future |
| Architecture | Salesforce-native: loads, carriers, quotes, invoices, and customer records live as native Salesforce objects in a single data environment | Dedicated transportation management suite now operating as Infios Transportation Management. Review how transportation data connects with CRM, ERP, finance, and analytics systems | Evaluate where transportation data should live relative to your broader business systems and reporting strategy |
| Transportation data model | Customer, carrier, load, quote, and invoice data share one Salesforce data model with no synchronization layer | Purpose-built multimodal transportation data model. Review connector options, API approach, and system-of-record strategy with the vendor | Evaluate whether your organization needs transportation data unified with business data, or values a dedicated transportation data model with external connectivity |
| Customer and carrier visibility | Customer Portal and Carrier Portal built on Salesforce Experience Cloud, connected directly to the same records used internally | Control tower visibility and tracking across multimodal shipments. Review portal and customer-facing capability with vendor | Evaluate whether visibility tools need to connect to your CRM and customer account data or operate as a standalone tracking layer |
| Reporting and executive visibility | Native Salesforce Reports and Dashboards combining operational, carrier, customer, and financial data in one environment | Interactive analytics dashboards for transportation KPIs. Review whether reporting extends to CRM, financial, or cross-departmental data | Assess whether executive reporting needs to combine transportation data with financial and customer data in one view |
| Workflow coverage | Broker, carrier, shipper, and mixed operations in one Salesforce environment | Multimodal planning, execution, tendering, dock scheduling, and freight settlement for shippers, 3PLs, and carriers | Map your required workflows. MercuryGate has deep multimodal planning depth; FTM unifies broker, carrier, and shipper workflows inside Salesforce |
| Document and financial management | Native document generation and invoicing within Salesforce load records, connected to the same customer and financial data used elsewhere | Freight audit, payment, and settlement capabilities should be evaluated against your volume, modes, and finance requirements | Evaluate whether financial visibility needs to connect to broader business systems or operate within a dedicated transportation billing environment |
| Customization and admin flexibility | Configurable through Salesforce: fields, workflows, automation, and reporting adjustable by internal admin without vendor involvement | Configuration approach should be reviewed with the vendor, including what internal teams can manage and what requires services support | Evaluate how much configuration your internal team can manage versus what requires ongoing vendor or partner support |
| Multi-entity and 3PL operations | Supported through Salesforce architecture and FTM configuration flexibility | Review multi-client, multi-entity, rating, billing, and reporting requirements directly with the vendor | 3PLs managing many distinct client environments should evaluate MercuryGate’s multi-client depth against FTM’s Salesforce-native configurability |
| Integration strategy | Salesforce-native; extends through Salesforce APIs, AppExchange, and standard transportation integrations | Review available connectors, APIs, middleware needs, and custom integration requirements during technical discovery | Map required integrations and verify native versus custom-development connectivity for each platform |
| Implementation approach | Structured rapid deployment; core workflows live in approximately 14 days when scope is aligned | Review implementation methodology, services requirements, timeline, and internal resource needs with the vendor | Weigh implementation timeline and professional services dependency against your internal resourcing and go-live requirements |
| Scalability | Scales with Salesforce infrastructure. Workflow, data, reporting, and user capacity expand without platform migration | Review enterprise scale, shipment volume, user model, services needs, and total cost of ownership as usage grows | Both platforms scale. Evaluate cost structure, configuration ownership, and reporting unification at your projected three-year volume |
| Best-fit buyer profile | Brokers, carriers, shippers, and mixed operations seeking transportation, customer, and financial data unified inside Salesforce | Enterprise shippers, 3PLs, and transportation organizations evaluating a dedicated multimodal transportation management suite | Match platform architecture to your operational scope, modal complexity, and how central Salesforce is to your broader technology strategy |
| Ready to evaluate FTM? | Book Executive Demo → | ||
MercuryGate data is provided as general buyer context based on public product positioning. MercuryGate now operates as Infios Transportation Management. Review capabilities, services scope, pricing, and implementation requirements directly with each vendor during evaluation.
Architecture Difference
Two Valid TMS Models, Different Control Points
The strategic decision is where transportation data should live. A dedicated enterprise TMS can centralize transportation planning and execution. A Salesforce-native TMS places transportation inside the same operating layer used for customer records, workflows, reporting, permissions, and automation.
FTM operating model
Transportation records become Salesforce records.
Loads, quotes, carriers, customers, invoices, documents, and workflow activity live in Salesforce. Teams can apply Salesforce permissions, Flow, reporting, APIs, Experience Cloud portals, and AppExchange extensions to freight operations without building a separate synchronization layer.
CustomerAccount context
CarrierCompliance and performance
LoadExecution record
InvoiceBilling visibility
PortalExperience Cloud
ReportsNative dashboards
MercuryGate / Infios model
A dedicated transportation suite sits beside the business stack.
Infios describes MercuryGate’s TMS as Infios Transportation Management, built to orchestrate complex transportation moves across mode, geography, and industry. For buyers evaluating MercuryGate, the review should focus on how transportation data connects to CRM, ERP, finance, analytics, portals, and governance requirements.
Transportation suitePlanning and execution
ERP / financeIntegration review
CRMData connection
AnalyticsReporting model
Data ownership
Decide whether transportation data should be governed inside Salesforce or managed first in a dedicated transportation platform.
Reporting ownership
Clarify whether leadership dashboards need native Salesforce data or transportation analytics that connect outward to other systems.
Change ownership
Evaluate who will manage fields, automations, user roles, workflows, and reporting changes after implementation.
Workflow Coverage
Transportation Operations Need More Than Execution
Transportation planning, execution, visibility, billing, and customer communication all create business data. FTM supports broker, carrier, shipper, and mixed operations as native Salesforce functionality, so each workflow updates the same operating record rather than creating another data handoff.
Brokerage Operations
Quote-to-load conversion, carrier sourcing, dispatch, billing, and customer reporting inside Salesforce without switching systems.
Carrier Operations
Driver and fleet management, load tracking, POD capture, settlement reporting, and compliance tracking inside Salesforce.
Shipper Operations
Order management, shipment planning, carrier collaboration, and delivery visibility for shipping and logistics teams.
Mixed Operations
Organizations running broker, carrier, and shipper workflows in the same Salesforce environment without separate platforms or integrations.
Dispatch Console
Real-time dispatch board with load assignment, status tracking, milestone management, and carrier communication inside Salesforce.
AutoFill
AI document automation that reads incoming freight documents, matches them to the correct FTM records, and stages financial records for human review.
Customer Portal
Salesforce Experience Cloud portal giving customers live shipment visibility, document access, and self-service tracking without separate logins.
Carrier and Driver App
Mobile app for drivers to receive loads, update shipment status, and capture POD. All activity syncs to Salesforce in real time.
Implementation and Change Management
What Transportation Leaders Should Plan For
Implementation scope and change management are among the most consequential decisions in a TMS evaluation. The questions below apply regardless of which platform your team selects.
1
Workflow mapping
Document your current dispatch, billing, carrier onboarding, and reporting workflows before beginning any implementation. This determines scope and surfaces gaps early.
2
Salesforce environment review
For organizations with an existing Salesforce environment, assess the org configuration, object model, and permission sets. For organizations new to Salesforce, FTM can be deployed with a Salesforce environment provisioned as part of the implementation.
3
Integration requirements
Identify which systems need to connect: accounting, ELD, load boards, customer portals, factoring, and data sources. Integration scope is one of the most significant variables in implementation timeline.
4
Data model and migration planning
Define which historical data needs to move, which records require validation, and how carrier, customer, and load data will be structured in the new environment.
5
User roles, training, and go-live planning
Define user roles, permission requirements, and training scope per team. Dispatcher, billing, and management roles typically have different access and training needs. Go-live sequencing affects operational continuity.
6
Executive alignment and success criteria
Define success metrics before implementation begins. Operational KPIs, reporting requirements, and adoption benchmarks should be agreed upon before go-live, not after.
FTM core workflows can go live in approximately 14 days.
When implementation scope is defined, Salesforce environment is ready, and integration requirements are aligned in advance, FTM core operations workflows can be live and operational in approximately 14 days. Implementation timelines extend when scope, integrations, or data migration requirements are more complex.
Setup and Implementation →
14
Days to go live (core workflows, aligned scope)
Timeline varies based on integration scope, data migration requirements, and Salesforce environment readiness.
Future State Evaluation
Evaluate the Operating Model You Are Building Toward
A mature TMS evaluation should account for the way your business will govern data, users, workflows, and reporting after growth. Use this section as an executive planning lens, not a vendor scorecard.
Planning lens
Future State
The right platform should match the operating model leadership wants to run, not only the workflows teams run today.
System of record
Decide whether Salesforce should hold transportation data natively, or whether transportation remains in a separate suite connected to Salesforce and finance.
Workflow ownership
Clarify whether internal admins should adjust workflows, fields, approvals, and reporting, or whether changes should route through a vendor-led services model.
Executive visibility
Define how leadership will review margin, service, customer activity, carrier performance, exceptions, and receivables across teams.
Customer experience
Assess how customer portals, carrier portals, document access, and status visibility should connect to customer records and account management.
Entity growth
Plan for new branches, acquisitions, business units, and operating models before selecting the data structure that will govern them.
Automation roadmap
Evaluate how document automation, exception handling, approvals, alerts, and reporting workflows will evolve as volume grows.
Commercial Evaluation
Questions to Ask Any Vendor
Platform fit and commercial fit are separate decisions. Use these questions during any vendor evaluation, regardless of which platform you are considering.
Licensing Model
What is included in the base license and what requires additional fees?
How does pricing scale as load volume, users, or entities grow?
Implementation Scope
What is the total implementation cost, including professional services and data migration?
What is the expected timeline to go live for your scope and team size?
Integration Costs
Which integrations are included and which carry additional fees or third-party costs?
What is the ongoing maintenance cost for integrations as systems change?
Portal Access
Are customer portal and carrier portal users included in the license or priced separately?
How does portal access pricing scale as your customer or carrier base grows?
Support Model
What support is included post-implementation and what is the response time commitment?
How are product updates, configuration changes, and training handled over time?
Scalability Costs
What configuration changes require vendor involvement versus internal admin capability?
How does the cost structure change as the operation grows in volume, entities, or complexity?
Platform Fit Summary
When Each Option Makes Sense
Use this summary alongside a hands-on vendor evaluation. Platform fit depends on your operating model, technology environment, team structure, and implementation priorities. No comparison page replaces a direct product review.
FTM
FTM may be the stronger fit if your team wants transportation unified with the rest of the business
✓
Transportation, customer, and financial data unified in one Salesforce environment. Organizations new to Salesforce can deploy FTM with Salesforce included✓
Operational, customer, and financial reporting that combines in one environment without exports or middleware✓
Configurable broker, carrier, and shipper workflows managed by internal admins without ongoing vendor dependency✓
Executive reporting that combines transportation operations, customer activity, and financial data in one Salesforce dashboard✓
Salesforce security, workflow automation, and API extensibility applied directly to transportation operations✓
A structured implementation path where core workflows can go live in as little as 14 days when scope is alignedMercuryGate
MercuryGate may be worth evaluating for enterprise shippers and 3PLs with complex multimodal requirements
✓
Your organization needs a dedicated transportation suite for complex multimodal planning and execution✓
You need to evaluate client-specific rating, billing, reporting, and governance in a dedicated TMS environment✓
Deep transportation procurement, optimization, and planning capability is your primary evaluation criterion✓
You are prepared to evaluate implementation services, internal resource needs, timeline, and total cost with the vendor✓
Salesforce alignment is not a strategic priority compared to standalone transportation depth✓
You want to evaluate multiple enterprise multimodal platforms before selecting one for your network
Customer Perspective
AppExchange signal
FTM is evaluated by teams that want transportation work to stay close to Salesforce data.
Customer feedback on Salesforce AppExchange commonly centers on the value of running transportation workflows, documents, integrations, and reporting inside the Salesforce environment. For enterprise buyers comparing FTM with a dedicated TMS, that is the core question: should transportation remain a separate operating system, or become part of the Salesforce operating layer?
Ready to Evaluate
Map your TMS architecture before you choose a platform.
Book an executive review to compare Salesforce-native transportation workflows, integration scope, reporting ownership, implementation path, and platform fit for your operation.
