Alvys opens freight AI agents to fleets of all sizes

Alvys introduced Alvys Foundry on Tuesday, an agentic AI platform that lets carriers, brokers and hybrid carrier-brokers build and deploy freight AI agents inside the transportation management system they already run. The Solana Beach, Calif.

-based company paired the launch with a second announcement: its TMS is now open to fleets of all sizes, extending a platform built around larger trucking companies to owner-operators and small carriers.

Foundry offers three paths: more than 20 pre-built agent templates, custom agents built and tuned by Alvys engineers, or agents customers assemble themselves. Early targets are the work that still eats dispatch hours, including check-call automation, invoice and settlement prep, and track-and-trace exceptions.

“Over the past year, we’ve watched how our customers were actually adopting AI; where it helped, where it stalled, and where the hype left operators with more tools and more logins instead of more capacity,” said CEO Nick Darman. “Alvys Foundry is the answer to what we saw.”

The launch delivers on the roadmap Alvys laid out with its $40 million Series B in September 2025, a round led by RTP Global. The company has raised $77 million and says the platform moves more than $9 billion in freight a year. To understand the value of agents, imagine a trucking company that runs two operations at once.

The one most known moves the freight. The other proves that freight moved on time, safely and under the right authority. The second involves all the paperwork, and in a post-Montgomery world, may decide who wins the next contract. Large fleets have the staff for the second operation.

They employ legions of specialists to watch federal safety records and dispute shipper service failures before either hardens into a number a customer can see. Small fleets find out what they missed after the damage is done. That is the gap Foundry is aimed at, and Darman told FreightWaves that experience came from personal experience.

The DOT knock that started it Darman started a trucking company in 2004 while at Georgia State University, spent a few years at J. P. Morgan, and went back into trucking in 2010. Growing that business, he hit a form of fraud he did not know existed.

“Drivers and owner-operators would fraudulently use my signs, my DOT number, my authority, and run freight without my consent. They were racking up violations under my name. I had no idea until a year later, when the DOT knocked on my door for an audit.” He had 10 to 20 drivers then and knew all of them.

Logging into the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration portal every morning never occurred to him. Larger carriers have the resources to submit a Request for Data Review (RDR) to the FMCSA. The request is accessed through the FMCSA DataQs system and requires carriers to prove they were not at fault for the crash.

It is an ongoing process to submit, process, verify and track DataQs requests — something smaller fleets and owner-operators are most at risk of but least aware of. “You’re actually being labeled as an unsafe company. But that’s not necessarily the case,” Darman said.

“When you look at how some of these owners or entrepreneurs run their companies, they run their companies very safely. But the underlying data on FMCSA doesn’t support the way they run their companies.” Freight AI agents versus the 24/7 watch desk The industry’s fix for that problem is headcount, available only to companies that can pay for it.

“They have employees on it around the clock. They log into FMCSA every day to make sure that there’s nothing shady happening,” Darman said. “And when something is happening where a driver that’s not employed by the carrier is being reported on FMCSA, they dispute it right away.” Foundry replaces the shift with an agent.

“You could have an agent check an integration with FMCSA,” Darman said. “The moment something doesn’t match the driver records on file, it flags the owner. That way the owner can dispute the record immediately.” Darman was direct that the use case is still theoretical: “I haven’t used that with anyone yet, but I think it’s such a powerful use case.”

The argument behind it is a cost line. “Instead of having employees doing this work for you, you could actually deploy this agent that’s not costing you much,” he said. On time and on the scorecard are two different things The same asymmetry runs through shipper relationships. “Being on time for every pickup and delivery is one thing.

Making sure the shipper’s scorecard shows you were on time is another. ,” Darman said. “Those are two different things.” Small carriers argue the facts, but without data, shippers fall back to their records. “They’re just arguing, ‘Hey, I was on time,’ but [a large shipper] will look at you: ‘Well, I’m sorry. My scorecard shows otherwise,'” Darman said.

Large carriers have treated scorecard maintenance as its own discipline for years, flagging EDI 214 status messages that land outside a delivery window and rou