Zum Inhalt springen
AF Logo
Business Case Tool

Compare cumulative costs of a robot cell against manual labor — CapEx, OpEx, break-even and net cash flow in one view. Transparent, fact-based, management-ready.

Why this matters

Comparing only the purchase price gets the math wrong

Integration, safety, maintenance, and licenses are not minor add-ons. Leaving them out systematically understates the investment.

Economic viability stays too abstract

Without concrete numbers, internal sign-off slows down. A quantified business case measurably accelerates decisions.

Engineering and management rarely speak the same language

Cost curves and break-even points bridge the gap between technical detail planning and commercial sign-off.

What the TCO Simulator delivers

Break-even in months

The exact point in time where the automated solution starts winning economically.

Net cash flow

Cumulative financial advantage across the entire time horizon.

Cumulative cost curves

Two lines, one intersection, one verdict — visual and instantly readable.

Real coverage factor

Full manual cost including absence rate, shift model, and real working days.

Three OpEx blocks — individually configurable

Power & energy, maintenance & service, software licensing — each line item configured separately, not lumped into a single figure.

Real labor costs — flexibly modelled

Hourly rate, workers per shift, shift pattern, productive annual hours, and absence rate combine into real fully-burdened labor costs.

What the result looks like

Preview
ManualAutomatedBreak-even
Model basisUpfront: 80k€OpEx/yr: 9k€Labor/yr: 66k€
Break-even
16.8months
Net cash flow (5 yr)
+206k€
TCO automation (5 yr)
124k€

When this model is enough — and when to go deeper

This model fits when

  • Presales and first qualification
  • Internal business-case discussions
  • Fast scenario comparisons
  • Management pre-meetings before detail planning
  • Investment decisions in early project phases

Go deeper when

  • Discounting (NPV) or residual value matters
  • Inflation and wage-growth effects need to be modeled
  • Residual labor (loading and supervision) must be represented
  • Multiple scenarios (cobot vs. industrial robot vs. AMR) need direct comparison (coming in a future version)
  • A final CFO sign-off or board document is being prepared

No discounting model, no residual value, no inflation — deliberately transparent and built for the early phase.

Transparent and vendor-neutral

Transparent formula logic

No black box. Break-even = CapEx ÷ monthly cost advantage. Every number traces back to a single input.

Vendor-neutral

The model works with your numbers, not with manufacturer assumptions or pre-defined system classes.

Explicit assumptions

Coverage factor, working days, shift model, and absence rate are visible inputs, not hidden defaults.

Scope and limitations

This tool does not model discounting (NPV), residual value, or inflation. For investment decisions over seven years or for formal financial reports, a more complete model is recommended.

Break-even shows when the cumulative savings fully offset the initial investment — not when the investment becomes liquidity-neutral.

Optimized for pre-engineering and presales. For final CFO or board submissions, internal corporate planning models remain authoritative.

Quantify the business case in minutes.