Best route optimization APIs for retail & distribution
- September 18, 2026
- 9 mins
Retail places constraints on route optimization that few other sectors combine: receiving slots set by the stores with no room for negotiation, volumes per stop counted in pallets rather than parcels, subcontracting policies to activate only when capacity is exceeded, and multiple rotations between the warehouse and the stores within a single day.
This article compares eleven route optimization APIs (Kardinal, LogisticsOS, Solvice, HERE, NextBillion AI, Google, GraphHopper, Timefold, Verso, Routific, Mapbox) on their ability to handle the specific constraints of retail delivery and store distribution.
Key takeaways
What makes retail distribution genuinely complex
Receiving slots are contractual and strict
A store sets its receiving slots to a 30-minute precision, sometimes 15. A truck arriving outside its slot is turned away, with an immediate contractual penalty. Those slots are usually set by the retailer with no room for negotiation: the optimizer has to adapt to them, not the other way round.
Volumes per stop counted in pallets
Unlike parcel delivery, every retail stop means several pallets and 30 to 90 minutes of unloading. That variable is decisive for route balancing: a route of 4 hypermarkets can take up a driver's whole day.
Multiple rotations between warehouse and stores
A limited fleet often has to chain several routes a day, coming back to reload at the warehouse between two delivery sequences to the stores.
Subcontracting triggered by excess capacity
Many retailers call on third-party carriers only once their own fleet is saturated, with a priority order defined in advance across several providers. The optimizer must respect that hierarchy rather than arbitrate freely.
Access conditioned on vehicle or driver
Some stores accept a delivery outside the standard slot only for a specifically accredited vehicle or driver: access to a reserved dock, a badge, a local logistics agreement. The optimizer then has to widen the time window for that resource alone.
The critical constraints for a retail distribution API
Three levels of requirement structure the market: the classic baseline everyone covers, the intermediate constraints that are indispensable in practice, and the advanced constraints that genuinely make the difference in distribution.
Strict time windows
30-minute receiving windows, sometimes 15, set by the retailer.
Covered by: Every vendor, with varying levels of granularity.
Vehicle capacity by weight and volume
Fitting a palletised load into the assigned vehicle.
Covered by: Every vendor.
Pickup and delivery within the route
The core movement of the business.
Covered by: Every vendor.
Several trips a day from the warehouse
Chaining deliveries with a reload stop in between.
Covered by: Every vendor except Routific and Timefold.
Predictive traffic
Forecast traffic is built in before optimization, not patched afterwards.
Covered by: Kardinal, NextBillion AI, Solvice, GraphHopper, Google, HERE and Mapbox.
Truck speed profile
Routing a rigid or an articulated truck according to its real dimensions.
Covered by: Kardinal, NextBillion AI, GraphHopper and HERE. Partial elsewhere.
Subcontracting on excess capacity
Activating third-party carriers in a predefined priority order.
Covered by: Kardinal and Solvice. Partial at NextBillion AI, Google, HERE, Verso and LogisticsOS.
Time windows specific to the assigned vehicle or driver
Widening the delivery window when the assigned resource has accredited access.
Covered by: Kardinal only, out of the 11 solutions tested.
Time-of-day-dependent hourly cost
Modelling a premium on early-morning or night slots. A niche need, rare in the sector's rate structures.
Covered by: Solvice only, ahead of Kardinal on this one.
Service time dependent on the driver
Adapting unloading time to the driver's experience or familiarity with the store.
Covered by: Kardinal, Solvice, Google, HERE, Verso and LogisticsOS.
Lexicographic optimization
First meeting every dock slot, then minimising kilometres, with no weights to calibrate between the two.
Covered by: Kardinal and HERE only.
The retail distribution APIs compared
Kardinal
97% coverage · 1st/11Kardinal is the most complete solution for retail distribution. It is the only vendor that varies a time window according to the assigned vehicle or driver, a constraint that matters as soon as a store conditions out-of-slot access on an accredited resource.
Its only gap in this sector concerns a very niche need: time-of-day-dependent hourly cost, available only from Solvice.
LogisticsOS
82% coverage · 2nd/11LogisticsOS comes in second, carried by its cost modelling (flat-rate thresholds, combined invoice between own fleet and subcontractors) and by route compactness.
Its limit: subcontracting in a predefined priority order is only partially covered.
Solvice
78% coverage · 3rd/11Solvice fully covers tiered subcontracting fallback, on a par with Kardinal. It also has one exclusive: it is the only solution in the panel, Kardinal included, to model hourly cost by time of day, useful for early-morning or night deliveries in urban areas.
Its limit: no lexicographic optimization. With a model that rich, balancing several objectives means setting a weight on each criterion, and the configuration quickly becomes a heavy machine to fine-tune.
HERE
72% coverage · 4th/11HERE is the only solution besides Kardinal to offer lexicographic optimization. It covers truck profiles and predictive traffic well, but handles neither time windows per assigned resource, nor differentiated hourly cost, nor workload balancing across routes.
NextBillion AI and Google
70% coverage · 5th/11, tiedNextBillion AI and Google finish tied. Both cover predictive traffic and multiple rotations well, but neither models time windows per assigned resource nor differentiated hourly cost. Google does not balance working time across routes either.
GraphHopper, Timefold, Verso, Routific and Mapbox
53% → 31%- GraphHopper (53%) covers truck profiles and predictive traffic, but lacks the advanced cost and conditioned-access constraints. It remains suited to small volumes.
- Timefold (46%) and Verso (46%) lag on the sector's fundamentals.
- Routific (41%) and Mapbox (31%) are not designed for professional retail distribution.
Summary table
Our verdict
Fleet size is not what should drive the choice. What matters is how much of your operation goes beyond the classic constraints. Start from the six solutions at 70% and above on retail, then narrow the list according to your needs.
