Compare CyberLogitec OPUS Terminal vs Navis Mixed Cargo TOS for terminal operations across vessel, yard, gate, equipment, automation/integration, deployment, evidence coverage and known research gaps.
TechSelectAI compares CyberLogitec OPUS Terminal and Navis Mixed Cargo TOS using recorded product evidence rather than user-specific recommendation scoring. CyberLogitec OPUS Terminal currently has 11 supported, 24 conditional, 53 unknown/not-yet-verified, and 0 not-supported capabilities. Navis Mixed Cargo TOS currently has 10 supported, 12 conditional, 66 unknown/not-yet-verified, and 0 not-supported capabilities. Known-fact confidence is 97% for CyberLogitec OPUS Terminal and 98% for Navis Mixed Cargo TOS. Latest recorded review or verification activity across the comparison: Sep 19, 2026.
This summary reflects recorded TechSelectAI evidence only. It is separate from buyer-specific Fit Score, Evidence Confidence, TechSelectAI Verified Reviews and Public Review Intelligence. Unknown means not yet verified, not unsupported.
Integrated container terminal operating system for berth, vessel, yard, gate, rail and equipment operations with optimization and semi-to-fully automated terminal support.
Kaleris General Cargo / Navis Mixed Cargo TOS, formerly MTN / Master Terminal, for multipurpose terminals handling containers, breakbulk, dry and liquid bulk, project cargo, RoRo, vehicles and other mixed cargo across vessel, yard, gate, truck, rail and barge operations.
Different coverage percentages can reflect how much TechSelectAI has researched and verified, not which product is better. “Research pending” means the current evidence set is incomplete; it is not evidence that the product lacks the capability.
This summarizes the current evidence record by operational module. Known counts include supported and conditional facts. Pending counts are research gaps, not negative capability findings.
| TOS operational module | CyberLogitec OPUS Terminal | Navis Mixed Cargo TOS |
|---|---|---|
| Billing, Analytics & Operational Control | 6 / 9 known5 conditional · 3 research pending · 0 explicitly unsupported | 6 / 9 known3 conditional · 3 research pending · 0 explicitly unsupported |
| Equipment Dispatch & Automation | 8 / 10 known5 conditional · 2 research pending · 0 explicitly unsupported | 1 / 10 known1 conditional · 9 research pending · 0 explicitly unsupported |
| Gate, Truck & Landside Operations | 3 / 11 known2 conditional · 8 research pending · 0 explicitly unsupported | 2 / 11 known1 conditional · 9 research pending · 0 explicitly unsupported |
| Integration, Data & Ecosystem | 4 / 11 known2 conditional · 7 research pending · 0 explicitly unsupported | 1 / 11 known0 conditional · 10 research pending · 0 explicitly unsupported |
| Platform Architecture, Resilience & Security | 1 / 8 known0 conditional · 7 research pending · 0 explicitly unsupported | 4 / 8 known2 conditional · 4 research pending · 0 explicitly unsupported |
| Rail & Intermodal Operations | 2 / 7 known1 conditional · 5 research pending · 0 explicitly unsupported | 0 / 7 known0 conditional · 7 research pending · 0 explicitly unsupported |
| Reefer, DG & Special Cargo | 0 / 7 known0 conditional · 7 research pending · 0 explicitly unsupported | 1 / 7 known1 conditional · 6 research pending · 0 explicitly unsupported |
| Vessel & Berth Planning | 6 / 11 known5 conditional · 5 research pending · 0 explicitly unsupported | 3 / 11 known2 conditional · 8 research pending · 0 explicitly unsupported |
| Yard Strategy & Inventory | 5 / 11 known4 conditional · 6 research pending · 0 explicitly unsupported | 4 / 11 known2 conditional · 7 research pending · 0 explicitly unsupported |
The links below are the most recently checked verified sources in this comparison dataset. Source recency and confidence describe the research record; they do not establish a universal product ranking.
Status and confidence reflect recorded evidence. Unknown means not yet verified, not unsupported. In the summary above, TechSelectAI labels this state “research pending”.
| Capability | CyberLogitec OPUS Terminal | Navis Mixed Cargo TOS |
|---|---|---|
| Billing / tariff / financial integrationBilling, Analytics & Operational Control | Not Yet Verified0% confidence | Supported99% confidenceKaleris documents capture of billable events, contracts and invoices with built-in billing options for Master Terminal. |
| Customer self-service portalBilling, Analytics & Operational Control | Not Yet Verified0% confidence | Partially Supported98% confidenceKaleris documents customer portals and an integrated web portal for communicating cargo availability, but the full transaction set available to external customers is not enumerated. |
| Operational audit historyBilling, Analytics & Operational Control | Partially Supported95% confidenceOPUS Terminal's container intelligent management explicitly uses container history and configurable reports/search, providing operational-history evidence without establishing a complete immutable audit trail for all terminal changes. | Partially Supported95% confidenceKaleris states that cargo movements are recorded in real time and supports track-and-trace visibility, but a complete immutable operational audit-history model is not separately established. |
| Operational visibility, analytics & KPIsBilling, Analytics & Operational Control | Partially Supported95% confidenceOPUS Terminal includes operation analysis and simulation; richer digital-twin visualization/analytics may use the separate OPUS DigiPort product and is not treated as universally included. | Supported97% confidenceKaleris documents real-time cargo visibility and a digital interface for inventory and yard-utilization visibility. |
| Productivity & equipment KPIsBilling, Analytics & Operational Control | Partially Supported96% confidenceOPUS Terminal includes operation analysis, configurable reports and productivity-oriented decision support, while richer real-time KPI dashboards and digital-twin analytics are documented under the separate OPUS DigiPort product. | Partially Supported96% confidenceKaleris customer evidence documents improved insight into daily performance and group-level performance consolidation, but a complete product-wide KPI catalogue is not established; the current product page labels operational dashboards as upcoming. |
| Shift / control-room dashboardBilling, Analytics & Operational Control | Partially Supported96% confidenceCyberLogitec states that OPUS Terminal provides planning, operation, monitoring and dashboards, but richer real-time visualization and digital-twin analytics are separately associated with OPUS DigiPort and are not attributed to base OPUS Terminal. | Not Yet Verified0% confidence |
| Simulation / what-if analysisBilling, Analytics & Operational Control | Supported99% confidenceOPUS Terminal explicitly provides operation simulation for task workload and yard location using automated planning information, including workload estimation by time, block and equipment. | Not Yet Verified0% confidence |
| Storage, tariff & service billingBilling, Analytics & Operational Control | Not Yet Verified0% confidence | Supported99% confidenceThe Mixed Cargo solution sheet documents granular billing by cargo type, subtype, handling type, revenue tons and board feet, plus value-added services, cash payments and proforma invoices. |
| Volume / workload forecastingBilling, Analytics & Operational Control | Partially Supported95% confidenceOPUS Terminal simulation estimates future workload by time, block and equipment, but broader container-volume, labor or resource-demand forecasting is not established; AI prediction functions are documented separately in OPUS DigiPort. | Not Yet Verified0% confidence |
| AGV / ASC automated-equipment integrationEquipment Dispatch & Automation | Supported99% confidenceCyberLogitec documents OPUS Terminal interfacing automated equipment control systems in projects using AGVs and automated rail-mounted gantry cranes, supporting operational planning and field execution. | Not Yet Verified0% confidence |
| Equipment dispatch & controlEquipment Dispatch & Automation | Supported99% confidenceOPUS Terminal documents optimized equipment workload execution and unified equipment operations across terminal layouts. | Not Yet Verified0% confidence |
| Equipment position trackingEquipment Dispatch & Automation | Partially Supported96% confidenceReal-time container and vehicle location tracking is documented in the DGT implementation, but that deployment also uses TLC and the separate OPUS DigiPort IoT/data platform; native OPUS Terminal-only scope is not assumed. | Not Yet Verified0% confidence |
| Equipment status & downtime awarenessEquipment Dispatch & Automation | Not Yet Verified0% confidence | Not Yet Verified0% confidence |
| Job pooling & dispatch optimizationEquipment Dispatch & Automation | Partially Supported98% confidenceCyberLogitec states the TLC module optimizes overall terminal workload and equipment/yard work orders; TLC module entitlement is not assumed as universal base OPUS Terminal entitlement. | Not Yet Verified0% confidence |
| Quay crane job executionEquipment Dispatch & Automation | Partially Supported96% confidenceAutomated-terminal implementations prepare work plans, assign equipment and manage real-time allocation including double-trolley quay cranes; exact QC work-queue entitlement depends on the implemented OPUS/TLC stack. | Not Yet Verified0% confidence |
| RTG / RMG dispatch & work queuesEquipment Dispatch & Automation | Partially Supported97% confidenceCyberLogitec documents ARMGC operations with OPUS Terminal, TLC and the automation stack; RTG/RMG dispatch is therefore evidenced at implementation/module level rather than assumed as identical universal base-product scope. | Not Yet Verified0% confidence |
| Terminal automation / ECS integrationEquipment Dispatch & Automation | Supported99% confidenceCyberLogitec documents OPUS Terminal integration with automated equipment control systems and semi-to-fully automated terminal operations. | Not Yet Verified0% confidence |
| Terminal tractor / straddle dispatchEquipment Dispatch & Automation | Partially Supported95% confidenceOPUS Terminal/TLC optimizes terminal equipment workload and DGT uses real-time vehicle location and job allocation, but straddle-carrier-specific dispatch is not established by the reviewed evidence. | Not Yet Verified0% confidence |
| VMT mobile work instructionsEquipment Dispatch & Automation | Not Yet Verified0% confidence | Partially Supported98% confidenceKaleris documents work orders and task management together with mobile workforce tools and Mixed Cargo mobile applications; VMT-specific work-instruction behavior is not separately established. |
| Automated gate lane orchestrationGate, Truck & Landside Operations | Partially Supported96% confidenceCyberLogitec documents OPUS Terminal managing gate operations in automated-terminal projects, but public evidence does not enumerate kiosk, barrier, scale and lane-device orchestration as universal base functionality. | Not Yet Verified0% confidence |
| Driver identification & authorizationGate, Truck & Landside Operations | Not Yet Verified0% confidence | Not Yet Verified0% confidence |
| Gate & truck operationsGate, Truck & Landside Operations | Supported99% confidenceOPUS Terminal documents terminal workloads covering vessel, rail and gate operations and integrated trucking-company workflows. | Not Yet Verified0% confidence |
| Gate customs / line / terminal holdsGate, Truck & Landside Operations | Not Yet Verified0% confidence | Not Yet Verified0% confidence |
| Gate OCR / ANPR integrationGate, Truck & Landside Operations | Partially Supported96% confidenceA production OPUS Terminal deployment at Tecon Santos supports OCR-enabled terminal equipment and digital technologies; ANPR scope and the distinction between native recognition and integrated subsystems are not established. | Not Yet Verified0% confidence |
| Interchange / EIR processingGate, Truck & Landside Operations | Not Yet Verified0% confidence | Not Yet Verified0% confidence |
| Pre-gate & out-gate validationGate, Truck & Landside Operations | Not Yet Verified0% confidence | Not Yet Verified0% confidence |
| Truck appointment integrationGate, Truck & Landside Operations | Not Yet Verified0% confidence | Supported99% confidenceThe current General Cargo TOS page explicitly lists gate processing and appointment control within terminal execution. |
| Truck pre-advice & booking validationGate, Truck & Landside Operations | Not Yet Verified0% confidence | Not Yet Verified0% confidence |
| Truck turn-time & queue monitoringGate, Truck & Landside Operations | Not Yet Verified0% confidence | Not Yet Verified0% confidence |
| Weighbridge & VGM workflowsGate, Truck & Landside Operations | Not Yet Verified0% confidence | Partially Supported96% confidenceGeneral Cargo TOS explicitly supports weighing as a value-added task, but weighbridge integration and VGM workflows are not separately established. |
| Carrier booking & release integrationIntegration, Data & Ecosystem | Partially Supported94% confidenceCyberLogitec explicitly documents shipping-carrier integration, but booking, release and carrier-message transaction depth is not enumerated in the reviewed public material. | Not Yet Verified0% confidence |
| CODECO / COARRI EDI messagingIntegration, Data & Ecosystem | Not Yet Verified0% confidence | Not Yet Verified0% confidence |
| COPARN / COPRAR EDI messagingIntegration, Data & Ecosystem | Not Yet Verified0% confidence | Not Yet Verified0% confidence |
| EDI, APIs & external-system integrationIntegration, Data & Ecosystem | Supported98% confidenceCyberLogitec documents integration with automated equipment, carriers, port authorities and trucking companies, including EDI-driven terminal data and interfaces. | Supported98% confidenceKaleris documents robust EDI integration for all major container-cargo EDI plus definable file formats for mixed cargo; API support is not separately inferred. |
| ERP / finance integrationIntegration, Data & Ecosystem | Not Yet Verified0% confidence | Not Yet Verified0% confidence |
| Event / webhook / streaming integrationIntegration, Data & Ecosystem | Not Yet Verified0% confidence | Not Yet Verified0% confidence |
| Gate / OCR subsystem integrationIntegration, Data & Ecosystem | Supported97% confidenceTecon Santos documents OPUS Terminal integration with OCR-enabled operational technology; exact OCR vendor adapters and project topology remain implementation-specific. | Not Yet Verified0% confidence |
| MOVINS / BAPLIE vessel messagingIntegration, Data & Ecosystem | Not Yet Verified0% confidence | Not Yet Verified0% confidence |
| PCS / customs / authority integrationIntegration, Data & Ecosystem | Partially Supported94% confidenceOPUS Terminal explicitly supports integration with port authorities, but the reviewed material does not establish universal Port Community System or customs-interface coverage. | Not Yet Verified0% confidence |
| Reefer monitoring system integrationIntegration, Data & Ecosystem | Not Yet Verified0% confidence | Not Yet Verified0% confidence |
| REST / web-service API integrationIntegration, Data & Ecosystem | Not Yet Verified0% confidence | Not Yet Verified0% confidence |
| Android mobile applicationMobile Access | Not Yet Verified0% confidence · native_android_appMobile availability has not yet been verified from first-party evidence. | Not Yet Verified0% confidence |
| iOS mobile applicationMobile Access | Not Yet Verified0% confidence · native_ios_appMobile availability has not yet been verified from first-party evidence. | Not Yet Verified0% confidence |
| Mobile web accessMobile Access | Not Yet Verified0% confidence · mobile_webMobile availability has not yet been verified from first-party evidence. | Not Yet Verified0% confidence |
| BCP / degraded or offline operationsPlatform Architecture, Resilience & Security | Not Yet Verified0% confidence | Not Yet Verified0% confidence |
| Cloud / on-prem deployment flexibilityPlatform Architecture, Resilience & Security | Not Yet Verified0% confidence | Not Yet Verified0% confidence |
| Disaster recovery & RPO/RTO controlsPlatform Architecture, Resilience & Security | Not Yet Verified0% confidence | Not Yet Verified0% confidence |
| High availability architecturePlatform Architecture, Resilience & Security | Not Yet Verified0% confidence | Partially Supported97% confidenceKaleris documents 99.9% availability under Navis Master Care for Master Terminal, but the reviewed public material does not describe the underlying high-availability architecture or topology. |
| Multi-terminal / multi-site operationPlatform Architecture, Resilience & Security | Not Yet Verified0% confidence | Supported99% confidenceKaleris documents a multi-terminal Master Terminal implementation for Euroports and states the global network will operate on one central system with group-level visibility. |
| RBAC / SSO / enterprise identityPlatform Architecture, Resilience & Security | Not Yet Verified0% confidence | Partially Supported99% confidenceThe current General Cargo TOS page explicitly lists Single Sign-On, but role-based access-control depth and supported identity-provider standards are not separately documented. |
| Security & administrative audit loggingPlatform Architecture, Resilience & Security | Not Yet Verified0% confidence | Not Yet Verified0% confidence |
| Throughput & scale for large terminalsPlatform Architecture, Resilience & Security | Supported99% confidenceCyberLogitec states OPUS Terminal has verified operational performance in a mega-size fully automated terminal of approximately 10 million TEU annual volume. | Supported99% confidenceKaleris explicitly states Mixed Cargo TOS supports large cargo volumes and large numbers of internal and external users; Cuxport also describes the solution as scalable and configurable for any-sized terminal operation. |
| Rail / intermodal operationsRail & Intermodal Operations | Supported98% confidenceOPUS Terminal explicitly documents optimized work orders across vessel, rail and gate entry/exit workflows. | Not Yet Verified0% confidence |
| Rail crane work queuesRail & Intermodal Operations | Not Yet Verified0% confidence | Not Yet Verified0% confidence |
| Rail interchange eventsRail & Intermodal Operations | Not Yet Verified0% confidence | Not Yet Verified0% confidence |
| Rail load / discharge planningRail & Intermodal Operations | Partially Supported97% confidenceThe TLC module explicitly optimizes entry-exit container work involving rail, but detailed train, wagon and rail-crane planning scope is not established. | Not Yet Verified0% confidence |
| Rail-yard inventory visibilityRail & Intermodal Operations | Not Yet Verified0% confidence | Not Yet Verified0% confidence |
| Train schedule & service managementRail & Intermodal Operations | Not Yet Verified0% confidence | Not Yet Verified0% confidence |
| Wagon / consist planningRail & Intermodal Operations | Not Yet Verified0% confidence | Not Yet Verified0% confidence |
| Container weight / VGM controlReefer, DG & Special Cargo | Not Yet Verified0% confidence | Not Yet Verified0% confidence |
| Damage & inspection workflowReefer, DG & Special Cargo | Not Yet Verified0% confidence | Not Yet Verified0% confidence |
| Dangerous-goods segregation controlsReefer, DG & Special Cargo | Not Yet Verified0% confidence | Not Yet Verified0% confidence |
| OOG & special-equipment handlingReefer, DG & Special Cargo | Not Yet Verified0% confidence | Not Yet Verified0% confidence |
| Reefer plug / unplug workflowReefer, DG & Special Cargo | Not Yet Verified0% confidence | Not Yet Verified0% confidence |
| Reefer temperature & alarm integrationReefer, DG & Special Cargo | Not Yet Verified0% confidence | Not Yet Verified0% confidence |
| Reefer, dangerous goods & special cargo controlsReefer, DG & Special Cargo | Not Yet Verified0% confidence | Partially Supported94% confidenceKaleris positions Master Terminal for containers, break-bulk, bulk, general cargo, RoRo, vehicles and logs; full reefer, dangerous-goods and OOG control is not inferred from cargo-type coverage alone. |
| BAPLIE import / exportVessel & Berth Planning | Not Yet Verified0% confidence | Not Yet Verified0% confidence |
| Berth window & berth allocation schedulingVessel & Berth Planning | Partially Supported97% confidenceOPUS Terminal documents automated berth planning, but the reviewed public evidence does not establish a dedicated berth-window scheduling workflow or conflict-management depth. | Partially Supported96% confidenceKaleris General Cargo TOS explicitly supports berth resource allocation, but detailed berth-window scheduling, conflict handling and arrival/departure window logic are not separately documented. |
| Carrier vessel-plan collaborationVessel & Berth Planning | Not Yet Verified0% confidence | Not Yet Verified0% confidence |
| Discharge / load sequencingVessel & Berth Planning | Partially Supported97% confidenceA CyberLogitec OPUS Terminal Advanced Module implementation at Pusan Newport Company explicitly improves planning for container loading and unloading, but the public material does not enumerate a complete vessel load/discharge sequencing model or universal base entitlement. | Not Yet Verified0% confidence |
| Quay crane split planningVessel & Berth Planning | Not Yet Verified0% confidence | Not Yet Verified0% confidence |
| Quay crane work queuesVessel & Berth Planning | Partially Supported96% confidenceThe TLC module executes optimized work orders across vessel, rail and gate operations, but quay-crane work-queue depth is not described as a standalone universal base capability. | Not Yet Verified0% confidence |
| Restow & vessel rehandle planningVessel & Berth Planning | Not Yet Verified0% confidence | Not Yet Verified0% confidence |
| Stowage & bay planningVessel & Berth Planning | Partially Supported96% confidenceOPUS Terminal documents automated vessel planning using historical analysis and configurable patterns; exact bay-position and stowage-rule depth is not separately established in the reviewed public material. | Partially Supported98% confidenceKaleris explicitly lists vessel planning and stowage coordination, but detailed container bay, hatch and deck stowage logic is not separately established for Mixed Cargo TOS. |
| Twin / tandem lift planningVessel & Berth Planning | Not Yet Verified0% confidence | Not Yet Verified0% confidence |
| Vessel & berth planning / executionVessel & Berth Planning | Supported99% confidenceOPUS Terminal documents automated vessel, berth and yard planning using historical analysis, configurable patterns and real-time plan updates. | Not Yet Verified0% confidence |
| Vessel call lifecycle managementVessel & Berth Planning | Partially Supported97% confidenceCyberLogitec's 2026 Incheon project states that OPUS Terminal manages berth and vessel operations in a unified platform, establishing vessel-operation scope without proving the full vessel-call lifecycle, berth-window workflow or port-call collaboration depth. | Supported99% confidenceKaleris explicitly lists vessel planning and execution across the General Cargo TOS operating scope. |
| Automated decking / grounding decisionsYard Strategy & Inventory | Not Yet Verified0% confidence | Not Yet Verified0% confidence |
| Block / stack allocation planningYard Strategy & Inventory | Partially Supported95% confidenceCyberLogitec documents automated yard planning and yard-location simulation, but explicit block, row, bay and stack allocation controls are not fully enumerated publicly. | Not Yet Verified0% confidence |
| Configurable yard strategy rulesYard Strategy & Inventory | Partially Supported97% confidenceAutomated yard planning uses historical analysis and configurable customer patterns; the reviewed public material does not enumerate the full yard-strategy rule model. | Partially Supported97% confidenceGeneral Cargo TOS documents yard and berth resource allocation plus cargo-specific handling workflows, but a universal automated yard-strategy/rules engine is not separately established. |
| Empty container inventory managementYard Strategy & Inventory | Not Yet Verified0% confidence | Not Yet Verified0% confidence |
| Housekeeping & remarshalling planningYard Strategy & Inventory | Not Yet Verified0% confidence | Not Yet Verified0% confidence |
| Import / export / prestack segregationYard Strategy & Inventory | Not Yet Verified0% confidence | Not Yet Verified0% confidence |
| Rehandle minimizationYard Strategy & Inventory | Not Yet Verified0% confidence | Not Yet Verified0% confidence |
| Yard density & capacity visibilityYard Strategy & Inventory | Partially Supported95% confidenceOperation Simulation estimates workload by time, block and equipment and evaluates yard locations, but explicit capacity-threshold and congestion-management controls are not fully described. | Supported99% confidenceKaleris documents real-time cargo visibility into capacity and occupancy together with improved yard utilization for Mixed Cargo TOS. |
| Yard holds & exception managementYard Strategy & Inventory | Not Yet Verified0% confidence | Not Yet Verified0% confidence |
| Yard inventory reconciliationYard Strategy & Inventory | Partially Supported96% confidenceCyberLogitec documents container intelligent management using container characteristics and history, while a Super Terminais implementation targets improved container-inventory accuracy; explicit planned-versus-physical reconciliation workflows are not separately established. | Partially Supported97% confidenceKaleris documents cargo and inventory management, real-time movement recording and yard/storage visibility; explicit planned-versus-physical reconciliation workflows are not separately documented. |
| Yard planning & container inventoryYard Strategy & Inventory | Supported99% confidenceOPUS Terminal documents yard optimization, container intelligent management and automated yard planning. | Supported98% confidenceKaleris documents real-time cargo movements, inventory visibility and improved yard utilization for Master Terminal / Navis Mixed Cargo TOS. |
Comparison facts, TechSelectAI analysis, community-derived insights and estimates are kept as separate evidence types. Missing evidence is not treated as proof of non-support.
Adjust the context below. Context Fit is calculated from the same published TechSelectAI evaluation signals and scoring methodology; it does not replace verified product facts or the saved project Decision Matrix.
What could change this recommendation? Confirmed requirements, must-have failures, exact integrations, regional availability, pricing, security requirements, and implementation capacity can materially change fit. For a saved, reproducible decision with custom weights, use a Selection Project.
A feature comparison is not the same as a recommendation. TechSelectAI can evaluate both products against your must-have capabilities, integrations, deployment constraints, security requirements, region and budget.
Evaluate for my company