MIT FreightLab: Where brokers have the advantage
2.3×
more likely to be accepted by brokers on historically volatile-demand lanes
The research doesn’t say “never use a broker.” On historically volatile-demand lanes, shipments were 2.3× more likely to be accepted by brokers than asset carriers, and unexpected surge shipments were roughly 2× more likely to be accepted by a broker. For consistent-demand lanes, both asset carriers and brokers had high first-tender acceptance rates.
- Researcher
- Dr. Angela “Angi” Acocella
- Affiliation
- MIT FreightLab / MIT Center for Transportation & Logistics
- Published summary
- C.H. Robinson, December 13, 2023
- Dataset
- Shipment transactions 2015–2021, covering dozens of shippers and thousands of contracted, backup and spot asset carriers and brokers
- Dataset supplied by
- TMC, a division of C.H. Robinson
- Research type
- Independent academic research, summarized by C.H. Robinson
This is exactly what makes the argument credible: asset carriers for predictable core freight, broker networks for volatility, exceptions and surges. Different freight belongs with different capacity models.
2.3×
Broker acceptance advantage on volatile-demand lanes
~2×
Broker acceptance advantage on unexpected surge shipments
High for both
First-tender acceptance on consistent-demand lanes, asset carriers and brokers alike
Other research and case studies
All research →How can Goldmax do this for us?
Capabilities, lane evaluation and the one-lane start.