# Which yard management system integrates best with WMS and TMS platforms for a mid-size warehouse that needs the three systems to share data automatically?

<p class="elv-tracking-normal elv-text-default elv-font-figtree elv-text-base elv-leading-base elv-font-normal" elv="true">I compared pricing pages and cost signals in recent reviews to answer what is the cheapest yard management software for a small trucking yard that still provides the basics of trailer tracking and dock scheduling reliably. Most vendors in the <a class="a a--md" elv="true" href="https://www.g2.com/categories/yard-management">yard management software</a> category gate pricing behind a sales call, and the product carrying G2's best-free-software badge turns out to offer a one-month trial rather than an actual free plan when you read its plans page. One vendor does publish real numbers, though, which makes the comparison more concrete than usual for this category. Here's what held up:</p><ul>
<li>
<a class="a a--md" elv="true" href="https://www.g2.com/products/conduit-software-conduit/reviews"><strong>Conduit</strong></a>: The only product here with published pricing, and its smallest tier is sized exactly for this question. Its pricing page lists Dock Scheduling and Driver Sign-In at $149 per facility per month each at the small-volume tier of 0-199 trucks per month, with the full yard management module on contact-sales (vendor-stated). It's also the most-reviewed option here with a majority small-business user base on its G2 profile, and recent reviewers describe exactly the basics this question asks for, easy check-in and check-out of trucks and simple appointment management.</li>
<li>
<a class="a a--md" elv="true" href="https://www.g2.com/products/datadocks/reviews"><strong>DataDocks</strong></a>: The strongest budget signal backed by actual reviews among the quote-only vendors. Cost efficiency is a named pro on its G2 profile, recent reviewers describe setup and support as painless, and the vendor pitches it at operations that don't want a major overhaul. No published pricing, and the named con to check is limited API integration options if you ever need it talking to other systems.</li>
<li>
<a class="a a--md" elv="true" href="https://www.g2.com/products/gatego/reviews"><strong>Gatego</strong></a>: The only product in the category built specifically for trailer yards rather than warehouse docks, with real-time check-ins that skip manual inventory counts (vendor-stated). Its lone review calls it best-in-class for logistics yard management, but one review is one review; demo it rather than trust the rating.</li>
<li>
<a class="a a--md" elv="true" href="https://www.g2.com/products/yardview/reviews"><strong>YardView</strong></a>: Explicitly positioned around affordability with trailer and container inventory tracking (vendor-stated). Its two reviews are positive but old and thin, so it earns a look on positioning alone, not proven evidence.</li>
</ul><p class="elv-tracking-normal elv-text-default elv-font-figtree elv-text-base elv-leading-base elv-font-normal" elv="true">For a small yard, the practical move the reviews support is starting with the gate and dock basics and refusing to pay for modules you won't touch. Conduit's published module prices also give you a useful anchor number to hold against every quote-only vendor on this list. Has anyone running a yard under 50 trailers gotten an actual annual figure from the quote-only vendors here, and how did it compare against Conduit's published per-facility rate?</p>

##### Post Metadata
- Posted at: 2 months ago
- Net upvotes: 1


## Comments
### Comment 1

&lt;p&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color: rgb(0, 0, 0);&quot;&gt;project44 and Blue Yonder Warehouse Management both show up here with real integration into broader WMS and TMS ecosystems, letting the three systems share data automatically rather than needing manual reconciliation.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

##### Comment Metadata
- Posted at: 2 days ago



### Comment 2

&lt;p&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;background-color: transparent; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);&quot;&gt;Worth asking which system is master for appointment time specifically, since all three will hold a version of it. Whichever one the yard staff actually trust becomes the real answer regardless of what the integration diagram says.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

##### Comment Metadata
- Posted at: 4 days ago
- Author title: Tech Consultant



### Comment 3

&lt;p&gt;Picking up the exceptions point: what decides whether three systems genuinely share data is whether there&#39;s one identifier all three trust. The yard system knows a trailer and a driver, the WMS knows a receipt against a PO, and the TMS knows a load. If nothing carries a single shared key end to end, every integration is really a fuzzy match on carrier plus PO plus date, and that match is exactly what falls apart on a reschedule, a no-show or a partial load. So the question I&#39;d put to each vendor is which field is the join, and at what point in the flow it gets created, because if the yard system is the first thing to see the trailer arrive, it may be the one that has to mint it.&lt;/p&gt;

##### Comment Metadata
- Posted at: 4 days ago
- Author title: Tech Consultant



### Comment 4

Most vendors say “we integrate with WMS/TMS,” but in practice, it’s often just status syncing, not true workflow orchestration. The friction usually shows up around edge cases: reschedules, driver no-shows, partial loads. Did you see any reviews calling out bi-directional updates that actually held up in live operations, or was it mostly “we still had to manually reconcile exceptions”?

##### Comment Metadata
- Posted at: 2 months ago
- Author title: Writer





## Related discussions
- [How well does Trello scale into a larger team?](https://www.g2.com/discussions/1-how-well-does-trello-scale-into-a-larger-team)
  - Posted at: over 13 years ago
  - Comments: 6
- [Can we please add a new section](https://www.g2.com/discussions/2-can-we-please-add-a-new-section)
  - Posted at: over 13 years ago
  - Comments: 0
- [Quantifiable benefits from implementing your CRM](https://www.g2.com/discussions/quantifiable-benefits-from-implementing-your-crm)
  - Posted at: over 13 years ago
  - Comments: 4