Two models, one extra layer
Direct with an asset carrier
You are contracting directly with the company operating the trucks, trailers, drivers, dispatch, maintenance and capacity.
Through a broker / non-asset 3PL
Brokers bring flexibility and network reach, but introduce another layer between you and the physical capacity.
The question isn't whether carriers or brokers are universally better. The question is which model is better suited for the freight being moved.
What the research measured
5×
More likely to stick to contract-priced loads
MIT research found asset-based primary carriers were approximately five times more likely than non-asset providers to remain with contract-priced freight under the conditions studied.
Source: Acocella, Caplice & Sheffi, MIT Center for Transportation & Logistics, 2022.
+9–12% / +23–35%
Backup-carrier and spot-market premiums
MIT research found backup-carrier prices roughly 9–12% above contract and spot rates roughly 23–35% above contract. Routing-guide failure can turn a cheap contracted rate into expensive transportation.
Source: Aemireddy & Yuan, MIT CTL, 2019; cited in Acocella, Caplice & Sheffi, Transportation Research Part E, 2020.
Capacity commitment
Relationships can influence whether carriers commit assets
Research involving The Hershey Company found closer shipper-carrier relationships were associated with greater willingness to commit assets and accept freight in constrained markets.
Source: Zsidisin, Voss & Schlosser, Transportation Journal, 2007.
Why recurring lanes belong on an asset carrier
01
Physical capacity
The company you contract with controls the equipment moving the freight.
02
Fewer layers
Direct communication between the shipper and the carrier actually executing the shipment.
03
Better network planning
Recurring freight allows trucks, trailers, drivers and schedules to be planned around anticipated volume.
04
Tender reliability
Carrier and broker behavior can differ when market conditions and spot prices change.
05
Accountability
The company contracted to move the shipment is also the company responsible for executing it.
The better strategy isn't carrier or broker.
Carrier and broker, used for different jobs.
Direct asset carriers
- Consistent lanes
- Repeatable volume
- Predictable demand
- Strategic capacity
- Long-term relationships
Broker / 3PL networks
- Unexpected volume
- One-off shipments
- New markets
- Surges
- Recovery freight
Use direct carriers to build the foundation of the transportation network. Use brokerage capacity to provide flexibility around it.
Ask a different question
Instead of only “Who has the lowest rate?”, ask:
- 01Who actually owns the equipment?
- 02Who physically moves the load?
- 03What percentage of tenders does the provider accept?
- 04What happens when the market tightens?
- 05Is the provider purchasing capacity after receiving my tender?
- 06How often does freight fall through the routing guide?
- 07What did routing-guide failure cost us last year?
- 08Which lanes are predictable enough to place directly with a carrier?
- 09Which freight genuinely benefits from brokerage flexibility?
The objective isn't to eliminate your 3PLs.
It's to stop using brokerage capacity where direct carrier capacity makes more sense.
Have consistent freight?
See whether your recurring lanes are a fit for direct asset capacity.