Prox logo

Prox

Your digital co-workers built for logistics.

Fall 2025active2025Website
Robotic Process AutomationLogisticsRetailAutomationAI
Sponsored
Documenso logo

Documenso

Open source e-signing

The open source DocuSign alternative. Beautiful, modern, and built for developers.

Learn more →
?

Your Company Here

Sponsor slot available

Want to be listed as a sponsor? Reach thousands of founders and developers.

Report from 24 days ago

What do they actually do

Prox builds “digital co‑workers” — autonomous agents that execute repetitive logistics back‑office workflows inside a 3PL’s existing stack. Today they focus on carrier claims: the agents log into WMS/TMS and carrier portals, gather context, file claims, monitor carrier responses, send follow‑ups, and surface only exceptions for humans to review (Prox homepage).

They have a live production deployment at ShipBob where Prox agents run in batches and process carrier claims in parallel; the case study cites automating roughly 160,000 claims per year and removing most manual filing/monitoring from ops staff (ShipBob case study and YC profile).

Who are their target customer(s)

  • Claims processors at large 3PLs: They spend hours filling forms on carrier portals, checking statuses, and following up by email, which creates backlogs and missed recoveries. Prox’s ShipBob case study cites ~160,000 claims/year automated, replacing much of this manual work (ShipBob case study).
  • Fulfillment‑center operations managers: Exception-heavy tasks like proof‑of‑delivery collection and damage intake are labor‑intensive and slow, driving longer resolution times and more customer escalations (Prox homepage).
  • Billing and accounts teams at 3PLs/fulfillment providers: They reconcile invoices and refunds across mismatched systems and handle compliance paperwork, tying up finance headcount and delaying recoveries (Prox homepage).
  • Freight forwarders and logistics coordinators: They re‑enter the same data across TMS, carrier portals, and email threads, causing booking errors, missed deadlines, and administrative overhead (Prox homepage).
  • Customer support / account managers at brands using 3PLs: Slow or opaque claim resolution forces them to issue refunds or escalate without clear status, increasing costs and hurting NPS (ShipBob case study).

How would they acquire their first 10, 50, and 100 customers

  • First 10: Pursue large 3PLs/fulfillment centers with low‑risk pilots: shadow their team, connect to their WMS/TMS and carrier portals, and prove claims automation in production within days/weeks using ShipBob as the reference case (ShipBob case study; YC profile).
  • First 50: Package the ShipBob playbook into reusable connectors and workflow templates for common TMS/WMS stacks; hire a small SDR/AE team and partner with SIs/TMS vendors for warm intros, emphasizing fast time‑to‑value and measured workload reduction in sales cycles (Prox homepage; ShipBob case study).
  • First 100: Productize onboarding so smaller 3PLs and forwarders can adopt via channels/marketplaces and a self‑serve/assisted flow; sell bundles (claims + damage + invoicing) using documented ROI to increase ACV and expand within ops/billing teams (Prox homepage; ShipBob case study).

What is the rough total addressable market

Top-down context:

The global third‑party logistics (3PL) market was about $1.19 trillion in 2024 and is projected to grow materially this decade, underscoring the scale of back‑office work inside logistics providers (Precedence Research).

Bottom-up calculation:

Focus on mid‑to‑large 3PLs/fulfillment providers handling parcel claims at scale. Using a conservative serviceable pool of ~5,000 organizations from a U.S. base of ~72,900 3PL businesses (many are small) and peers abroad, and an average $50k/year for claims + adjacent workflow automation, the SAM is ≈$250M; extending to ~15,000 similar orgs globally yields ≈$750M (Red Stag citing IBISWorld 2024).

Assumptions:

  • Only a subset of the ~72,900 U.S. 3PL businesses are mid‑to‑large and process parcel claims frequently; 5,000 (US/EU) and 15,000 (global) are conservative counts.
  • Average annual spend of ~$50k per logo reflects 1–3 automated workflows (claims first), not full back‑office coverage.
  • Pricing is usage/workflow based and expands over time as Prox adds damage claims, POD, invoicing.

Who are some of their notable competitors