GITNUXSOFTWARE ADVICE
Construction InfrastructureTop 10 Best Warehouse Design Services of 2026
Compare warehouse design services for logistics teams, with tradeoffs and fit considerations across Fortna, St. Onge Company, and TGW Logistics Group.
How we ranked these tools
Vendors set the topic, but our editors set the inclusion criteria and the evaluation framework before research starts.
Search agents gather the source set and the review record, including transcriptions of video reviews and podcasts.
Framework: Features 40% · Ease 30% · Value 30%
Gitnux may earn a commission through links on this page — this does not influence rankings. Editorial policy
Fortna is the best choice for complex warehouse programs that need coordinated layout, workflow, and WMS integration decisions because it ties material-flow simulation assumptions to automation routing concepts while informing throughput and labor modeling. TGW Logistics Group is a strong fit when automation scope and throughput targets must be engineered together since it develops the warehouse and material-handling concept in one workflow model.
Editor’s top 3 picks
Three quick recommendations before you dive into the full comparison below — each one leads on a different dimension.
Fortna
Fortna connects material flow simulation assumptions directly to layout, automation routing concepts, and WMS integration requirements.
Best for: Fits when complex warehouse programs need coordinated layout, workflow, and systems integration decisions.
St. Onge Company
Editor pickWarehouse designs that link material flow decisions to throughput and labor implications across the end-to-end process.
Best for: Fits when operations teams need workflow-driven warehouse layouts that remain buildable through compliance and MEP coordination.
TGW Logistics Group
Editor pickUnified warehouse-and-material-handling concept development that ties aisle, docks, and automation interfaces to the same workflow model.
Best for: Fits when throughput targets and automation scope must be engineered together from concept.
Comparison Table
Fortna
specialistConsulting and engineering firm focused on distribution center design, automation strategy, and operational improvements.
Fortna connects material flow simulation assumptions directly to layout, automation routing concepts, and WMS integration requirements.
Fortna’s core strength shows up in warehouse master planning that links facility layout choices to receiving, storage, and fulfillment process design. Deliverables typically cover aisle and dock geometry implications, automation routing concepts, and throughput and labor assumptions that shape decisions before the design locks. A key fit signal is the way Fortna’s design outputs tie into downstream warehouse management system and automation integration planning.
A practical tradeoff is that Fortna’s work depth requires strong input on order profiles, service levels, and constraints so the models reflect real operating conditions. Fortna fits best when a warehouse program needs coordinated changes across layout, MEP considerations, and process flow, such as a fulfillment expansion that must preserve existing operations.
- +Process-to-layout linkage that keeps material flow assumptions consistent
- +Throughput and labor modeling that informs automation and staffing design
- +Clear design handoffs for warehouse management system integration planning
- +Strong fit for compliance-driven warehouse buildouts and upgrades
- –Requires detailed operational inputs to keep modeling assumptions grounded
- –Integration planning workload shifts to client teams when data is incomplete
- –Change iterations can extend timelines when scope expands midstream
- –Less suitable for teams seeking quick, drawing-only deliverables
Logistics operations leaders
Fulfillment expansion with constrained space
Higher throughput with planned staffing
Supply chain engineering teams
Automation rollout planning and handoffs
Reduced integration rework
Show 2 more scenarios
Warehouse program managers
Multi-phase retrofit while operating
Staged moves with continuity
Fortna sequences process and layout changes to minimize disruption to daily order fulfillment.
IT and operations stakeholders
Warehouse management system integration planning
Consistent execution workflows
Fortna coordinates operational workflows with WMS integration requirements for storage and picking areas.
Best for: Fits when complex warehouse programs need coordinated layout, workflow, and systems integration decisions.
St. Onge Company
specialistSupply chain engineering and logistics consulting firm specializing in warehouse design and distribution network optimization.
Warehouse designs that link material flow decisions to throughput and labor implications across the end-to-end process.
St. Onge Company fits teams that need warehouse layout planning tied to picking and flow logic, including dock-to-storage sequencing and aisle width and circulation tradeoffs. The strongest fit appears when operational volumes and order profiles must drive decisions on storage media selection and rack and aisle configuration. Delivery is oriented around producing design artifacts that stakeholders can review for constructability and operational fit, which reduces rework when MEP and compliance inputs are introduced.
A practical tradeoff is that deeper workflow modeling and throughput-driven layout iterations require earlier clarity on process assumptions, or subsequent revisions shift schedule. St. Onge works best when a project can provide usable data for inventory movement patterns and target service levels so the layout can be validated against those constraints.
- +Layout outputs stay anchored to receiving, storage, and outbound flow logic
- +Rack and aisle decisions follow operational assumptions instead of space-first design
- +Design deliverables support cross-discipline review for MEP and safety inputs
- +Good fit for facility plans that need upgrade paths across process phases
- –Throughput-driven iterations depend on timely process and volume assumption inputs
- –Coordination effort rises when stakeholders require rapid changes mid-design
Operations leadership
New warehouse layout driven by flow
Fewer layout reversals later
Facilities engineering
MEP and safety coordination planning
Cleaner coordination handoffs
Show 1 more scenario
Supply chain strategy
Capacity planning for changing demand
Better capacity alignment
It supports phased facility planning that aligns storage choices and dock-to-floor routing with volume shifts.
Best for: Fits when operations teams need workflow-driven warehouse layouts that remain buildable through compliance and MEP coordination.
TGW Logistics Group
enterprise_vendorIntralogistics systems provider specializing in warehouse design and automated fulfillment solutions.
Unified warehouse-and-material-handling concept development that ties aisle, docks, and automation interfaces to the same workflow model.
TGW Logistics Group is a strong fit when warehouse throughput targets and process constraints must drive aisle geometry, dock planning, and the timing of material movement decisions. Its design delivery fits best for projects where rack configuration, picking strategy, and automation interfaces must be synchronized to reduce rework between layout and systems teams. The firm’s engagement pattern suits organizations that need a single engineering owner for both the warehouse plan and the automation execution package.
A key tradeoff is that projects with shifting product profiles or late changes to automation scope can trigger cost and schedule churn because layout and handling system decisions remain coupled. TGW Logistics Group is most useful when operational assumptions like order profiles, travel distances, and staging rules are available early enough to lock a concept design.
- +Integrates warehouse layout and automation handling concepts in one engineering stream
- +Connects process flow decisions to dock and staging planning
- +Design package supports coordination with building MEP and compliance needs
- +Clear documentation of interfaces between handling systems and operational workflows
- –Design scope coupling can increase rework risk when automation requirements change
- –Requires early operational inputs to avoid midstream facility geometry revisions
Operations and supply-chain leaders
Automated fulfillment center concept design
Reduced late design changes
Warehouse engineering teams
Conveyor and sortation route definition
Higher modeled throughput consistency
Show 1 more scenario
Program management organizations
MEP coordination for warehouse expansion
Fewer cross-discipline conflicts
Facility layout and system equipment placement are engineered to support coordination with building services needs.
Best for: Fits when throughput targets and automation scope must be engineered together from concept.
Swisslog
enterprise_vendorWarehouse automation and logistics design specialist operating under the Körber Group.
Automation-aware facility layout planning that ties material flow decisions to warehouse control and management integration points.
Swisslog pairs warehouse design consulting with execution in automation-heavy facilities, which is reflected in its focus on end-to-end material flow and layout decisions. The service typically covers facility layout, picking strategy, and automation integration planning for goods-to-person systems and related conveyors.
- +Coordinated warehouse layout decisions with goods-to-person automation integration constraints
- +Thorough inbound-to-outbound handoff planning for dock and receiving flows
- +Strong planning for throughput and labor impacts from rack and aisle choices
- +Engineering-led documentation that supports downstream implementation reviews
- –Best fit tilts toward automation programs rather than low-tech redesigns
- –Automation scope assumptions can reduce flexibility for later layout changes
- –Extensive integration coordination can slow early design iterations
- –Requires clear scope boundaries between design packages and software integration
Best for: Fits when automation-backed warehouse expansions need layout, workflow, and system integration aligned.
Knapp
enterprise_vendorWarehouse automation and logistics software company offering distribution center design services.
Knapp ties facility layout decisions to automation routing logic so equipment placement supports throughput goals across the whole process.
Knapp delivers warehouse design services focused on facility layout, material flow planning, and integrated automation interfaces. The work typically connects layout decisions like aisle and dock relationships to equipment selections such as racking and conveyor or sortation routing.
- +Designs facility layouts around end-to-end material flow, not isolated zones
- +Produces automation-ready routing inputs for conveyor and sortation schemes
- +Connects storage and staging choices to operational picking and receiving realities
- +Engages compliance and fire protection considerations during the engineering design
- –Needs detailed operational inputs early to avoid layout rework later
- –Governance over change control can slow mid-design scope shifts
- –Less suited for teams wanting conceptual layouts without system integration
- –MEP and building constraints can narrow feasible equipment options late
Best for: Fits when mid-sized to large projects need layout and automation interfaces designed together.
Kenco Group
enterprise_vendorThird-party logistics provider offering warehouse design, engineering, and integrated supply chain management.
Workflow routing translation that connects receiving, storage access, and picking flow into one coherent facility plan.
Kenco Group delivers warehouse design services focused on translating operational requirements into workable facility layouts, handling flows, and technical plans. The firm’s core output typically targets space planning, material movement routing, and constraint-driven design work tied to real site and process conditions.
- +Design deliverables built around real receiving and picking process constraints
- +Clear focus on layout practicality tied to building and operations considerations
- +Converts operational assumptions into traceable workflow movement diagrams
- +Supports compliance-oriented design thinking for regulated warehouse environments
- –Limited evidence of a deep automation system engineering scope beyond layout
- –Workflow assumptions can require strong client input to finalize throughput targets
- –Automation and WMS integration planning may need specialist partners
- –Turnaround quality depends on how quickly site data and process inputs are supplied
Best for: Fits when mid-sized warehouse projects need constraint-driven layout and workflow design coordination.
Dematic
enterprise_vendorGlobal supplier of integrated warehouse automation, material handling systems, and warehouse design engineering services.
Design packages that connect layout and material handling equipment engineering to warehouse control system integration, not just spatial planning.
Dematic combines warehouse design delivery with automation engineering depth, which differentiates it from consultancies that stop at concept layout. Dematic supports facility layout planning and workflow design that align with its goods-to-person automation options, rather than treating automation as an add-on.
- +Automation-first design alignment reduces rework between layout and equipment specs
- +Throughput modeling inputs support concrete decisions on flow and staging areas
- +Warehouse control system integration planning fits complex multi-system deployments
- +Implementation packages translate workflow diagrams into build-ready interfaces
- –Best results depend on early commitment to automation scope and constraints
- –Design flexibility can narrow when equipment configuration choices drive the layout
- –Tooling for order-profile and labor planning requires strong internal data availability
- –Governance across multiple stakeholders can feel documentation-heavy on large programs
Best for: Fits when a single vendor-led program needs layout and automation engineering tied to warehouse control integration.
Tompkins International
specialistSupply chain consulting firm providing warehouse design, automation integration, and operational strategy services.
Design packages translate material flow and labor assumptions into rack, aisle, and receiving logic that stays consistent through execution planning.
Tompkins International delivers warehouse master planning and facility layout work that connects space decisions to operational throughput and flow constraints. The service emphasizes pragmatic design packages for receiving, picking, and replenishment logic, with attention to how storage media and rack plans affect day-to-day labor.
- +Strong warehouse master planning that links layout to operational throughput
- +Detailed facility layout deliverables with rack and aisle planning specificity
- +Clear receiving process design tied to dock and material flow constraints
- +WMS integration requirements translated into design and interface needs
- –Automation and robotics scope requires a deliberate engagement path
- –Admin governance depth for design artifacts is lighter than software-first competitors
Best for: Fits when teams need constructible warehouse layout and workflow design tied to WMS and automation interfaces.
SSI Schaefer
enterprise_vendorIntralogistics provider offering warehouse planning, storage system design, and material flow engineering.
Automation-aware warehouse layout planning that maps receiving, storage, and pick routes to control integration decisions.
SSI Schaefer performs warehouse design and facility layout work with an emphasis on storage media selection, rack configuration, and dock-to-aisle flow planning. The service typically spans receiving process design through picking strategy inputs, with layout options tied to operational constraints like travel distance, aisle width, and material movement paths.
- +Layout planning connects rack choices to throughput and movement paths
- +Automation-aligned design reduces rework between mechanical layout and controls
- +Dock and receiving flow planning is detailed enough for downstream assignment
- +Strong systems integration coordination with warehouse control scope
- –Workflow detail depends on the quality of provided order and SKU inputs
- –Some layout variants require deeper stakeholder review to avoid change drift
- –Automation coupling can increase iteration cycles for mixed technology plans
- –Governance over cross-team assumptions is harder without a defined signoff rhythm
Best for: Fits when teams need warehouse design that coordinates layout with automation and material flow constraints.
Mecalux
enterprise_vendorStorage solutions company providing warehouse racking design, layout planning, and storage system engineering.
Rack configuration and layout outputs that translate directly into workable aisle and handling geometry for implementation.
Mecalux delivers warehouse design and material flow engineering focused on rack systems, storage layouts, and site-specific throughput planning. Its work tends to center on facility layout decisions that connect dock receiving flows to replenishment, picking, and dispatch routes. Mecalux also supports automation-adjacent design decisions by mapping conveyor and sortation concepts to operational constraints used in warehouse planning.
- +Strong rack and aisle planning that ties layout choices to operational flow
- +Practical material flow concepts that map receiving to dispatch pathways
- +Good fit for teams needing design guidance around storage media selection
- +Clear deliverables that support downstream engineering and implementation
- –Less effective for highly bespoke engineering scope without tight assumptions alignment
- –Automation and systems integration depth can lag dedicated WMS and controls specialists
- –Workflow modeling relies on input quality and assumptions set early in design
- –Tooling transparency for simulation parameters is limited for independent reviewers
Best for: Fits when warehouse teams need rack-centric layout design tied to throughput and physical constraints.
Conclusion
After evaluating 10 warehouse design, Fortna stands out as our overall top pick — it scored highest across our combined criteria of features, ease of use, and value, which is why it sits at #1 in the rankings above.
Use the comparison table and detailed reviews above to validate the fit against your own requirements before committing to a tool.
Frequently Asked Questions About Warehouse Design
How do Dematic and Swisslog handle warehouse control system integration during layout planning?
Which providers translate throughput modeling inputs into actionable facility layout constraints?
What breaks if slotting assumptions and rack configuration decisions are developed in separate project streams?
When should teams involve MEP and fire protection considerations in warehouse design deliverables?
Which service providers document material flow assumptions in a way that supports system handoff to WMS integration teams?
How do Kenco Group and Knapp differ in turning workflow routing into buildable drawings and interfaces?
How do SSI Schaefer and Dematic treat receiving process design as part of the overall warehouse plan?
What security and access-control concerns come up when warehouse design teams share configuration artifacts with engineering and operations?
How should teams plan data migration when existing layout and automation assumptions must be carried into a new warehouse project?
Where does extensibility matter most, and which providers build it into the design-to-implementation workflow?
Tools reviewed
Primary sources checked during evaluation.
Referenced in the comparison table and product reviews above.
How to Choose the Right Warehouse Design
Options differ most in how well they translate warehouse design decisions into day-to-day throughput and exception handling. Look for strong performance modeling via mappedAttribute and for clear automation coverage via API and automation surface, not just drawings or static layouts.
Throughput modeling tied to design choices
Why it matters
Throughput modeling tied to design choices tells us whether a layout can actually meet order flow under realistic constraints. Without it, “good on paper” layouts often fail when volume shifts.
How to check
Ask for a scenario run where you change one design input (like slotting or aisle layout) and watch projected throughput change. Then compare the outputs to what the product shows during order and pick simulation.
Material flow simulation with bottleneck visibility
Why it matters
Material flow simulation with bottleneck visibility shows where congestion happens between receiving, storage, and picking. This is the quickest way to spot design conflicts before investing effort elsewhere.
How to check
Provide a simple flow map and run a simulation for at least two order mixes. On the results screen, check whether it highlights the exact step or path where queues build.
Inventory and slotting inputs that persist
Why it matters
Inventory and slotting inputs that persist matter because warehouse design is only useful if the tool keeps assignments consistent across planning iterations. Otherwise, each redesign becomes a rebuild instead of an update.
How to check
Load an item list with demand patterns and run slotting-related planning. Then change one layout parameter and verify the existing storage assignments update logically rather than resetting.
Configuration and versioning for redesigns
Why it matters
Configuration and versioning for redesigns helps teams compare alternatives without losing the baseline. When multiple stakeholders iterate, this becomes the audit trail for design decisions.
How to check
Create two design variants from the same baseline and switch between them. Ask the demo to show what changes are tracked (inputs, constraints, layout elements) and whether you can revert cleanly.
API and automation surface for updates
Why it matters
An API and automation surface matters when design plans must stay synchronized with operational data feeds. Deeper automation reduces manual copy-paste when you adjust the design frequently.
How to check
Ask for example API calls or an integration walkthrough that updates layout parameters and reruns planning. Confirm whether the workflow supports repeatable provisioning and configuration settings from an external system.
Admin governance controls for shared work
Why it matters
Admin governance controls for shared work keep teams from overwriting each other’s design variants. It also supports traceability during reviews and handoffs.
How to check
Ask how roles work for creating, editing, and approving a design variant. In the demo, request an audit log view of who changed which configuration and when.
Red flags
- Throughput metrics change without showing which design input caused them.
- Simulations show a result but don’t identify the bottleneck step or path.
- Edits wipe earlier slotting and force rework every redesign.
Fit by situation
- If you must defend a design alternative with measurable order-flow results, prioritize Throughput modeling tied to design choices.
- If your warehouse redesign work depends on comparing multiple flow paths and diagnosing congestion, prioritize Material flow simulation with bottleneck visibility.
- If planners and engineers iterate weekly with shared variants, prioritize Configuration and versioning for redesigns.
Funding and competing interests
This study was co-funded by several of the vendors assessed in it. No single vendor funded it. Funders could propose the market studied.
They had no role in selecting vendors, setting or weighting criteria, analysing data or drawing conclusions, and they received the same factual-accuracy check as every other vendor assessed.
Market definition, inclusion rules and criteria weights were fixed by an editor before research began and did not change afterwards. Editorial process →
- Construction InfrastructureTop 10 Best Building Design Services of 2026
- Storage Moving RelocationTop 10 Best Warehouse Consulting Services of 2026
- Construction InfrastructureTop 10 Best Data Center Design Development Services of 2026
- Construction InfrastructureTop 10 Best House Construction Design Software of 2026
- Storage Moving RelocationTop 10 Best Warehouse Layout Design Software of 2026
Keep exploring
Comparing two specific tools?
Software Alternatives
See head-to-head software comparisons with feature breakdowns, pricing, and our recommendation for each use case.
Explore software alternatives→In this category
Construction Infrastructure alternatives
See side-by-side comparisons of construction infrastructure tools and pick the right one for your stack.
Compare construction infrastructure tools→