Buyer's Guide Visibility

Supply Chain Visibility & Control Towers

The 2026 Buyer's Guide and Vendor Landscape. A practitioner's guide to evaluating, costing, and selecting real-time visibility and control tower platforms: what they do, how the market and vendors stack up, what they cost, how to run the selection, and how to de-risk the rollout.

Published June 2026 45 min read Supply Chain Research
Section 01

Executive summary

Supply chain visibility software gives shippers and logistics teams real-time insight into where their orders and shipments are once goods leave the warehouse, and increasingly the ability to predict and act on what happens next. The category spans real-time transportation visibility platforms (RTTVP), broader end-to-end and multi-tier visibility, and the control tower, a centralized hub for sensing and responding to disruption. After a decade of rapid growth, the market is consolidating and redefining itself: the question for buyers in 2026 is no longer whether to have visibility, but how much of it to buy as a standalone capability versus as part of an execution or decision platform.

This guide is written for supply chain, logistics, and transportation leaders evaluating a visibility investment, and the teams who must integrate and operate it. It is deliberately vendor-neutral: we accept no payment from the vendors covered, and we name no single best platform, because the right choice depends on your modes, carrier base, geography, and whether you need sensing alone or sensing plus action. The pages that follow define the category, size the market honestly across its very different definitions, profile the vendors and the pivotal shift underway among them, lay out an evaluation framework, and explain why carrier connectivity, not software features, usually decides success.

$2.5–8B
Range of 2025 market estimates, depending on whether the category is drawn as RTTVP or broad visibility software
14 to 6
Vendors in the Gartner RTTVP Magic Quadrant, 2021 to 2025, as the market consolidated
~40%
North America share of the supply chain visibility software market
What the evidence says
  • The category boundary drives a 3x spread in market size. Real-time transportation visibility is sized at roughly $4B to $8B, broad supply chain visibility software at about $2.5B to $3.5B, and the multimodal subset near $1B. Always check which is being measured.
  • The pure-play field is consolidating fast. The Gartner RTTVP Magic Quadrant shrank from 14 vendors in 2021 to 6 in 2025, and FourKites withdrew from the 2025 evaluation entirely to pursue an AI-first strategy.
  • project44 is the dominant remaining pure-play leader. It sat highest on execution and furthest on vision in both the 2024 and 2025 Gartner Magic Quadrants, with Shippeo also a Leader and the only vendor offering contractual data-quality SLAs.
  • Visibility is dissolving into decision and execution. Leading vendors are repositioning from standalone tracking toward control towers, AI exception management, and integrated execution, prompting talk of the "end of visibility" as a separate category.
  • Carrier connectivity, not features, decides ROI. A platform delivers value only if your carriers actually connect and the data is clean; coverage and data quality are the make-or-break variables, and the buyer owns much of that work.
Section 02

What supply chain visibility is

Visibility is the sensing layer of the supply chain. It collects and normalizes location and status data, then turns it into predicted arrival times, alerts, and increasingly recommended actions. It is distinct from the systems that decide and execute: a transportation management system plans and tenders freight, an order management system orchestrates fulfillment, and planning systems decide what to make and move. Visibility tells those systems, and the people running them, what is actually happening in the physical network. Getting the sub-categories right is the first step to buying the right thing.

Three layers of visibility

  • Real-time transportation visibility (RTTVP): third-party platforms that track in-transit shipments, predominantly over road, by integrating with carrier systems, telematics, and driver mobile apps to produce live location and predictive ETAs.
  • End-to-end and multi-tier visibility: a wider view across modes (ocean, air, rail, parcel) and, at the leading edge, across multiple supplier tiers (N-tier and sub-tier) to surface upstream risk before it reaches you.
  • The control tower: a centralized hub that aggregates visibility data and supports coordinated response to disruption, increasingly evolving from a monitoring dashboard into a decision and action platform.

How visibility differs from adjacent systems

SystemPrimary jobRelationship to visibility
Visibility / RTTVPSense location and status; predict ETAsThe data and sensing layer
TMSPlan, tender, and settle freightConsumes visibility data to act
OMSOrchestrate orders and fulfillmentUses visibility for delivery promises
PlanningDecide what to make and moveUses visibility signals for risk
Control towerCoordinate response to disruptionSits on top of visibility data

Why connectivity is the hard part

A visibility platform is only as good as the data flowing into it, and that data comes from thousands of carriers through a patchwork of APIs, EDI feeds, telematics integrations, and driver apps. The leading networks have spent years building these connections: project44 reports connectivity to roughly 140,000 carriers, and Transporeon's network spans more than 150,000 carriers and 1,400 shippers. Network breadth and data quality, not the dashboard, are what separate platforms in practice, which is why onboarding your specific carriers is the central implementation challenge.

Section 03

The visibility market in 2026

Visibility is a large and growing market, but its size depends entirely on where you draw the boundary. Real-time transportation visibility, broad supply chain visibility software, and the multimodal subset are sized very differently, and conflating them is the most common source of confusion. Treat the figures as directional and check the definition before comparing.

Figure 1
2025 market size by category (USD billions) $0 $2B $4B $6B $8B $10B RTTVP, WiseGuy $6.12B RTTVP, MarketIntelo $4.2B Visibility, GMI $3.3B Visibility, FMI $3.1B Visibility, Market.us $2.5B E2E Multimodal, FMI $1.0B

Published 2025 estimates by category. RTTVP, broad visibility software, and the multimodal subset are not the same market. Bars in lime show network and software sizing; purple highlights the narrow multimodal subset.

Market sizing

Category and firm2025 sizeForecastCAGR
RTTVP, WiseGuy Reports$6.12B$12.0B / 20356.9%
RTTVP, MarketIntelo$4.2B (2024)$18.7B / 203317.8%
Visibility software, Global Market Insights$3.3B$10.9B / 203413.4%
Visibility software, Future Market Insights$3.1B$10.4B / 203513.0%
Visibility software, Market.us$2.5B$12.6B / 203517.6%
E2E multimodal subset, FMI$1.0B$1.2B / 202613.7%
Figure 2
Supply chain visibility software, 2025 to 2034 (USD billions) $12B $9B $6B $3B $0 $3.3B $10.9B 2025 2027 2029 2031 2033 2034

A representative trajectory for broad supply chain visibility software at 13.4% CAGR (Global Market Insights). Other firms forecast similar shapes at different absolute levels.

Why the estimates diverge

The spread is a definition problem. Some firms count only third-party RTTVP software, some the broader visibility-software market including suite and network modules, and some a narrow multimodal subset. North America is consistently the largest region at roughly 40 to 43 percent, cloud deployment dominates at about 58 to 66 percent, and Asia-Pacific is the fastest-growing region. For planning, treat the broad visibility-software figures (about $2.5B to $3.5B in 2025, growing in the low-to-mid teens) as the most consistent baseline, and the higher RTTVP numbers as a wider definition.

A market consolidating in plain sight

The clearest signal of where the market is heading is the shrinking field of pure-play vendors. The Gartner RTTVP Magic Quadrant evaluated 14 vendors in 2021, 7 in 2024, and only 6 in 2025. The market has effectively bifurcated into smaller standalone vendors too narrow to be captured by the analysis and larger players whose platforms now extend well beyond what a visibility evaluation measures.

Figure 3
Gartner RTTVP Magic Quadrant vendor count, 2021 to 2025 16 12 8 4 0 14 2021 12 2022 9 2023 7 2024 6 2025

Vendors evaluated in the Gartner RTTVP Magic Quadrant, 2021 to 2025. FourKites withdrew from the 2025 edition (highlighted in purple) to pursue an AI-first strategy as a standalone control tower.

What's driving demand

Demand is pulled by customer expectations for live tracking and accurate delivery promises, by supply chain volatility and the need to manage disruption, by detention and dwell costs that visibility can reduce, and by sustainability reporting that requires shipment-level emissions data. The countervailing force is disillusionment: after years of inflated expectations, some buyers found that real-time tracking alone did not deliver the value promised, which is precisely why the category is shifting toward prediction and action.

Section 04

The vendor landscape

The field spans pure-play real-time visibility leaders, network and suite providers, and IoT sensor-tracking specialists, with the largest players now repositioning around control towers and AI. This section profiles the vendors that matter in 2026, grouped by role, with strengths and limitations for each, and pays close attention to the most important shift in the category.

What the analysts say

  • The Gartner RTTVP Magic Quadrant named three Leaders for the first time in its 2024 edition (project44, FourKites, and Shippeo) with project44 positioned highest on execution and furthest on vision. project44 held that position again in the 2025 edition.
  • FourKites withdrew from the 2025 Magic Quadrant on the day it published, on 24 February 2025, saying it was pivoting to an AI-first strategy and an Intelligent Control Tower rather than competing as a standalone visibility platform. This is the pivotal market signal of the year.
  • Gartner retired the broader network Magic Quadrant. The Magic Quadrant for Multienterprise Supply Chain Business Networks was discontinued and replaced by a lighter Market Guide for Multienterprise Collaboration Networks, and there is no standalone Gartner control-tower Magic Quadrant. An inaugural Gartner Magic Quadrant for Fourth-Party Logistics arrived in 2025.
Figure 4
Visibility vendor positioning, SCR interpretation CHALLENGERS LEADERS NICHE PLAYERS VISIONARIES Completeness of Vision → Ability to Execute → project44 Shippeo FourKites* Transporeon e2open Descartes Tive Roambee Overhaul Pure-play RTTVP Network / suite IoT sensor *Withdrew from 2025 MQ

A landscape view of the field. project44 sits highest and furthest in the Gartner RTTVP analysis; FourKites withdrew in 2025 (dotted). SCR interpretation, not analyst coordinates.

Pure-play visibility leaders

project44

The dominant pure-play, project44 connects roughly 1.5 billion shipments a year for more than 1,000 brands across a network of about 140,000 carriers, and has built out its Movement platform and a Decision Intelligence layer with AI agents and multi-agent orchestration. It has grown partly by acquisition, absorbing Ocean Insights, ClearMetal, Convey (last-mile, for $255M), Synfioo, and LunaPath, and reported 34 percent new ARR growth in 2026. Funding is variously reported between $818M and $912M, at a $2.2B valuation. The strengths are the largest network, the broadest modal coverage, and the highest analyst placement; the limitations are that it has historically not been profitable, some Gartner clients have cited shipment-tracking data-quality issues, and it navigated executive turnover and layoffs around its IPO preparations.

FourKites

The category pioneer, FourKites tracks more than 3.2 million shipments a day and connects over half of the Fortune 500, and has reached positive cash flow. In 2025 it repositioned decisively around an AI-first strategy, an Intelligent Control Tower, and a Digital Workforce of AI agents, and withdrew from the Gartner Magic Quadrant to signal that it no longer sees itself as a standalone visibility vendor. The strengths are scale, a strong AI vision, and end-to-end reach; the limitations are reduced analyst comparability now that it has left the Magic Quadrant, historically slower growth, and service and support concerns noted by Gartner in 2024.

Shippeo

The leading European pure-play, Shippeo was promoted to Leader in 2024 and is the only vendor offering contractual service-level agreements on ETA accuracy, tracking accuracy, and carrier onboarding, backed by the highest Gartner Peer Insights score. It tracks more than 90 million shipments a year across 150-plus countries and raised about $140M in total, including a 2025 round led by Toyota's Woven Capital. The strengths are data-quality commitments and European depth; the limitations are a smaller revenue and customer base and concentration in Europe.

Network, suite, and adjacent providers

Beyond the pure-plays sit Transporeon (acquired by Trimble for 1.88 billion euros in 2023, with a network of more than 150,000 carriers), e2open, Descartes MacroPoint, and the ERP and suite control towers from SAP, Oracle, Blue Yonder, Kinaxis, Infor Nexus, and One Network. These are most relevant where visibility is bought as part of a broader execution or network platform rather than as a standalone tool.

IoT sensor-tracking specialists

A distinct group tracks high-value and temperature-sensitive freight with physical IoT sensors rather than carrier integrations: Tive (which raised $20M in late 2025), Roambee (rebranded to Decklar in 2025, with cold-chain and pharma strength), and Overhaul (high-value and pharmaceutical security and monitoring). These complement, rather than replace, network-based RTTVP, and are the right tool when the cargo itself must be sensed.

Vendor summary

VendorTypeBest fitNotes
project44Pure-play RTTVPBroad multimodal networksHighest and furthest in Gartner MQ; ~140K carriers
FourKitesRTTVP / control towerAI-first, end-to-endWithdrew from 2025 MQ; 3.2M+ shipments/day
ShippeoPure-play RTTVPEuropean road freightOnly vendor with contractual data SLAs
Transporeon (Trimble)Network / platformCarrier sourcing + visibility150K+ carrier network
e2open / DescartesNetwork / suiteVisibility within a suiteBought as part of broader execution
Tive / Roambee / OverhaulIoT sensorHigh-value, cold chain, pharmaSense the cargo itself
Section 05

How to evaluate a visibility platform

Because a visibility platform lives or dies on the data flowing into it, evaluation should start with your own carrier base and modes, not a feature list. Score candidates against the same defined dimensions, weighted for your network. A regional road shipper and a global multimodal manufacturer should reach different answers.

Five evaluation dimensions

  1. Network coverage on your lanes. Confirm the platform already connects your specific carriers, modes, and regions at high coverage; this is the single most important and most overlooked test.
  2. Data quality and accuracy. Assess ETA accuracy, tracking completeness, and how the vendor handles gaps; Shippeo is notable for contractual SLAs, and Gartner has flagged data-quality variation across vendors.
  3. Modal and geographic fit. Match the platform to your mix of road, ocean, air, rail, and parcel, and to the regions you ship in; some vendors are strongest in a single mode or continent.
  4. Prediction, AI, and action. Weigh predictive ETAs, exception management, and whether the platform is moving toward a control tower that recommends or takes action, not just displays status.
  5. Integration and viability. Evaluate integration with your TMS, OMS, and ERP, and the vendor's financial stability and roadmap in a consolidating market.
The carrier-connectivity threshold

One test overrides the others: if your carriers cannot or will not connect through the platform at high coverage on your key lanes, no amount of software sophistication will deliver value. Before committing, validate connectivity for your actual carrier list, because onboarding carriers who are not already on the network is slow and is largely your responsibility, not the vendor's.

A selection process that works

  1. Inventory your carriers, modes, and lanes and the disruptions you most need to see.
  2. Shortlist platforms by network fit, checking pre-existing connectivity to your carriers.
  3. Pilot on your real lanes and measure ETA accuracy and tracking completeness, not demo polish.
  4. Plan integration and onboarding with your TMS and OMS before committing.
  5. Weigh viability and roadmap, favoring vendors whose direction matches yours as the category shifts toward action.
Section 06

Cost and pricing

Visibility platforms are usually priced on volume and network access rather than a simple seat count, and the total cost depends heavily on how many of your carriers must be onboarded. The table summarizes the broad shape; validate every figure with vendor quotes on your own volumes.

Pricing elementTypical basisNotes
SubscriptionAnnual platform feeOften tiered by volume and modules
Per-shipment / per-loadVolume-basedScales with tracked shipments
Network / carrier feesConnectivity-basedOnboarding non-networked carriers adds cost and time
IoT sensors (where used)Per-monitored shipmentRoambee cites under 2% of transportation cost

What drives the cost

The largest hidden cost is carrier onboarding: a platform that already connects your carriers is far cheaper to run than one that must integrate them from scratch. Volume drives the per-shipment component, modal and geographic breadth can add modules, and IoT sensor tracking carries its own per-shipment hardware and connectivity cost where the cargo itself must be monitored. Model the all-in cost over a realistic ramp, including the internal effort to reach high carrier coverage.

Confirm pricing and, above all, real carrier coverage with vendor quotes on your own lanes; published figures and network claims should be validated against your actual carrier list.

SCR methodology note

SCR does not collect pricing through vendor demonstrations alone. The ranges above reflect cross-referenced anonymized buyer disclosures, public RFP documents, and analyst commentary. Treat them as directional only.

Section 07

Implementation: integration and onboarding

Visibility programs succeed or fail on integration and carrier onboarding, not on the software itself. The most common disappointment comes from assuming coverage that does not materialize, and from underestimating the buyer's own role in data quality.

Why programs struggle

  • Carrier coverage falls short of expectations, because many carriers on your lanes were not already on the network and onboarding them is slow.
  • Data quality is underestimated, and Gartner repeatedly reminds buyers that, as the party with the carrier relationships, they own much of the data-quality work.
  • Visibility is treated as the goal rather than a means, so tracking is delivered but no action or process change follows, and the value never lands.
  • Integration with TMS and OMS is an afterthought, leaving the data stranded in a dashboard rather than driving execution.
Coverage

Validate connectivity to your real carrier list before signing, not after.

Data

The buyer owns much of the data-quality work with carriers.

Action

Tracking only pays off when it changes a decision or process.

Three principles that separate success from failure
  1. 1

    Prove carrier coverage first. Validate real connectivity on your lanes before committing; coverage is the precondition for every other benefit.

  2. 2

    Own the data-quality work. Use your carrier relationships to drive adoption and clean data; the vendor cannot do this for you.

  3. 3

    Connect visibility to action. Wire the data into your TMS, OMS, and exception processes so insight changes outcomes, not just dashboards.

A phased rollout

The lowest-risk pattern starts with your highest-volume lanes and most connected carriers, proves accuracy and value there, then extends to additional modes, regions, and carriers. This sequencing delivers early wins, contains onboarding effort, and gives the operation time to build the exception-management processes that turn visibility into results.

Section 08

Trends shaping 2026

From tracking to AI exception management

The center of gravity is moving from showing where a shipment is to resolving what to do about it. FourKites has built a Digital Workforce of AI agents, and project44 has added multi-agent orchestration, both aimed at detecting and resolving exceptions with limited human effort. Visibility is becoming the trigger for action, not the end product.

Predictive and prescriptive visibility

Predictive ETAs are now table stakes; the frontier is prescriptive guidance that recommends a reroute, a re-tender, or a customer notification. This is the capability that turns a tracking tool into a control tower.

Multi-tier and sub-tier visibility

Leading programs are pushing beyond their own shipments to map and monitor upstream supplier tiers, surfacing risk two or three tiers deep before it reaches the factory or shelf. This is hard to achieve but increasingly demanded after years of upstream disruption.

Control towers becoming decision towers

The control tower is evolving from a monitoring dashboard into a decision and action hub, and most major vendors are repositioning accordingly. The distinction that matters to buyers is whether a platform merely displays status or actually coordinates a response.

The end of visibility as a separate category

The most consequential trend is structural: visibility is being absorbed into broader orchestration, execution, and decision platforms. FourKites has stepped away from the standalone visibility label, project44 is building toward intelligent execution, and an essay by a Transporeon and Trimble product leader in early 2025 captured the mood with its title about "the death of supply chain visibility" as a category. The practical implication is that buyers should increasingly weigh whether to buy visibility on its own or as part of a platform that also acts.

Section 09

Segment-specific guidance

The right visibility approach depends on your network. The table summarizes what tends to dominate the decision; the notes add detail.

Operating profileWhat matters mostApproaches that fit
Regional road shipperCarrier coverage, ETA accuracyPure-play RTTVP (project44, Shippeo)
Global multimodalOcean, air, rail, road breadthBroad RTTVP or suite control tower
High-value / pharma / cold chainCondition and security of cargoIoT sensor tracking (Tive, Roambee, Overhaul)
Retail / e-commerceLast-mile and customer ETAsRTTVP with last-mile and delivery experience
3PL / 4PLMulti-client, network breadthNetwork platforms and control towers

Regional road shippers should prioritize pure-play RTTVP coverage on their carriers and lanes. Global multimodal operations need broad modal coverage and increasingly a control tower that spans ocean, air, rail, and road. High-value, pharmaceutical, and cold-chain shippers should add IoT sensor tracking to monitor the cargo itself, alongside network visibility. Retail and e-commerce operations weight last-mile and customer-facing ETAs, and 3PLs and 4PLs need the network breadth to serve many clients. The unifying rule is to match the platform to your carriers, modes, and the action you intend to take.

Section 10

ROI and the business case

Visibility ROI comes from fewer manual check calls, lower detention and dwell, better on-time performance, and a stronger customer experience. The figures vendors cite should be validated against your own baseline, and the honest lesson of the past few years is that tracking alone underdelivers unless it changes a decision.

Fewer calls
Automating track-and-trace removes manual check calls to carriers, freeing transportation labor.
Detention
Earlier warning reduces detention, dwell, and expedite costs that compound across a network.
OTIF
Accurate ETAs improve on-time, in-full delivery and customer trust, protecting revenue.

The value levers

A credible business case rests on several levers that compound. Labor savings come from eliminating the manual check calls and status chasing that consume transportation teams. Detention, dwell, and expedite costs fall when problems are seen early enough to act. On-time, in-full performance improves when ETAs are accurate, which protects revenue and customer relationships. And customer experience improves when shippers can give their own customers reliable delivery promises. The candid caveat, voiced by independent practitioners, is that real-time visibility was oversold in its first wave and left some buyers disillusioned, so the value is real but conditional: it materializes only when the data is trusted and wired into action. Build the case on your own check-call volume, detention spend, and service baseline, and use vendor figures only to size the opportunity.

Section 11

Frequently asked questions

What is a real-time transportation visibility platform (RTTVP)?

A third-party platform that tracks in-transit shipments, predominantly over road, by integrating with carrier systems, telematics, and driver apps to provide live location and predictive ETAs. It is the sensing layer that feeds TMS, OMS, and planning.

How is visibility different from a control tower?

Visibility senses location and status; a control tower aggregates that data and coordinates a response to disruption. Control towers are increasingly evolving from monitoring dashboards into decision and action hubs.

Why did FourKites leave the Gartner Magic Quadrant?

FourKites withdrew from the 2025 RTTVP Magic Quadrant on the day it published, saying it was pivoting to an AI-first strategy and an Intelligent Control Tower rather than competing as a standalone visibility vendor.

Who are the leading vendors?

project44 sits highest and furthest in the Gartner RTTVP analysis, Shippeo is a Leader and the only vendor with contractual data SLAs, and FourKites remains a major player despite leaving the Magic Quadrant. Transporeon, e2open, and Descartes serve the network and suite segment.

How big is the market?

It depends on the definition. Real-time transportation visibility is sized at roughly $4B to $8B, broad supply chain visibility software at about $2.5B to $3.5B in 2025 growing in the low-to-mid teens, and the multimodal subset near $1B.

What is the hardest part of implementation?

Carrier onboarding and data quality. A platform delivers value only if your carriers actually connect at high coverage on your lanes, and the buyer owns much of that work because the carrier relationships are theirs.

What does it cost?

Pricing is usually based on subscription plus volume and network access rather than seats, with extra cost and time to onboard carriers not already on the network. IoT sensor tracking adds a per-shipment hardware cost where used.

Does visibility actually deliver ROI?

It can, through fewer check calls, lower detention and dwell, better on-time performance, and customer experience, but only when the data is trusted and wired into action. Tracking alone underdelivered in its first wave.

What about IoT sensor tracking?

Sensor-based tracking from vendors like Tive, Roambee, and Overhaul monitors the cargo itself, which is essential for high-value, pharmaceutical, and cold-chain freight, and complements rather than replaces network-based RTTVP.

How should I start?

Inventory your carriers, modes, and lanes; shortlist platforms by pre-existing connectivity to your carriers; pilot on real lanes and measure ETA accuracy; and plan integration with your TMS and OMS before committing.

Section 12

Recommendations

Five recommendations for visibility buyers in 2026
  1. 1

    Choose on network coverage, not features. Shortlist platforms that already connect your specific carriers, modes, and lanes at high coverage; this single test predicts success better than any feature comparison.

  2. 2

    Match the tier to your need. Use pure-play RTTVP (project44, Shippeo) for transportation visibility, network and suite control towers where visibility is part of a broader platform, and IoT sensors (Tive, Roambee, Overhaul) for high-value and cold-chain cargo.

  3. 3

    Weigh the shift toward action. Favor vendors moving from tracking to control towers and AI exception management, and decide deliberately whether to buy visibility standalone or as part of a platform that also acts.

  4. 4

    Plan for carrier onboarding and data quality. Budget the internal effort to reach high coverage and clean data, and use your carrier relationships to drive adoption.

  5. 5

    Wire visibility into execution. Integrate with your TMS and OMS and build the exception-management processes that turn tracking into reduced cost and better service.

Section 13

Methodology and caveats

  • Market sizing diverges sharply by category definition (RTTVP-specific roughly $4B to $8B, broad visibility software about $2.5B to $3.5B, multimodal subset near $1B in 2025); all figures are directional, and several come from firms whose methodologies are not public.
  • The analyst picture changed in 2025 and must be read carefully. FourKites withdrew from the Gartner RTTVP Magic Quadrant, the multienterprise network Magic Quadrant was replaced by a lighter Market Guide, and there is no standalone control-tower Magic Quadrant, which limits how much weight buyers can place on quadrant positioning.
  • ROI figures are largely vendor-sourced and, by the candid account of independent practitioners, real-time visibility was oversold in its first wave; validate any benefit against your own baseline.
  • The vendor positioning in Figure 4 is SCR's directional interpretation, anchored on project44's highest-and-furthest placement in the Gartner RTTVP analysis and FourKites' 2025 withdrawal, not exact analyst coordinates.
  • Funding, valuation, and network figures conflict across sources (project44 total funding is cited between $818M and $912M); this is a fast-moving market, so confirm current figures and real carrier coverage directly before relying on them.
Section 14

Sources

  1. project44 / PR Newswire (2024). project44 named a Leader in the 2024 Gartner Magic Quadrant for RTTVP for the fourth consecutive year. prnewswire.com
  2. FourKites (Feb 2025). FourKites advances AI-first supply chain strategy, withdraws from Gartner RTTVP Magic Quadrant. fourkites.com
  3. Business Wire (24 Feb 2025). FourKites advances AI-first supply chain strategy, withdraws from Gartner RTTVP Magic Quadrant. businesswire.com
  4. trans.info (2024). Shippeo the big mover in Gartner's latest Magic Quadrant for RTTVP. trans.info
  5. Talking Logistics (3 Mar 2025). The future (or end) of supply chain visibility. talkinglogistics.com
  6. Global Market Insights (2025). Supply Chain Visibility Software Market. $3.3B (2025), 13.4% CAGR; SAP led with >10% share. gminsights.com
  7. Future Market Insights (2025). Supply Chain Visibility Software / End-to-End Multimodal Shipment Visibility Platforms Market. futuremarketinsights.com
  8. Market.us (2025). Supply Chain Visibility Software Market. $2.5B (2025), 17.6% CAGR; NA ~39.6%. market.us
  9. FreightWaves (2025). What Gartner's new Magic Quadrant tells us about the real-time visibility market. freightwaves.com
  10. project44. project44 named a Leader in the 2024 Gartner Magic Quadrant for RTTVP (Movement, Decision Intelligence). project44.com
  11. Gartner (2024). Magic Quadrant for Real-Time Transportation Visibility Platforms (vendor count and Leaders).
  12. Gartner (2025). Magic Quadrant for Real-Time Transportation Visibility Platforms (six vendors; project44 highest and furthest).

Additional figures drawn from: WiseGuy Reports and MarketIntelo (RTTVP sizing); Trimble and Transporeon (acquisition and network scale); Tracxn and PitchBook (project44, Shippeo, Roambee funding); Toyota Woven Capital (Shippeo investment); and the Journal of Commerce (market bifurcation commentary). Vendor capability, network, and ROI claims are vendor-stated unless otherwise noted.

Supply Chain Research is independent and vendor-neutral. We accept no payment from the vendors covered. All figures should be validated against your own requirements before any purchasing decision.