On-Time Delivery Improvement With Scheduling Software: Statistics 2026

Manufacturers whose vendors publish a before and after on-time delivery rate report a median gain of 27.5 percentage points after adopting scheduling software, across 8 vendor case studies we checked on 13 October 2026. The median result is 96% on time, above the 95% top-quartile OTIF in APQC’s 2026 Measuring Order Management Performance benchmark. SkyPlanner APS customer Kaskea Group reports delivery reliability rising from 55% to 92%, a 37-point gain.

Key findings

1. The median organization delivers 90% of customer orders on time and in full (OTIF), the top quartile 95% and the bottom quartile 85%, in APQC’s 2026 benchmark of 200 North American organizations with at least $100 million in revenue, published May 2026.
2. On the stricter perfect order measure, the same APQC 2026 benchmark puts the median at 84%, the top quartile at 85% and the bottom quartile at 80% (n=200, May 2026).
3. We found 29 vendor-published case studies from 16 scheduling, MRP and ERP vendors that report an on-time delivery result, and 8 of them state both a before and an after rate (Production Scheduling Reviews dataset, 13 October 2026).
4. Across those 8 case studies the median reported gain is 27.5 percentage points, ranging from 4 points (Eurowipes on DELMIA Ortems, 88% to 92%) to 39 points (USA Dutch on JobBOSS2, 60% to 99%), as reported by the vendors (dataset, October 2026).
5. The median starting on-time rate in those 8 cases is 67.5% and the median result after go-live is 96%, above APQC’s 2026 top-quartile OTIF of 95% (dataset and APQC, October 2026).
6. 7 of the 8 manufacturers started below APQC’s bottom-quartile OTIF of 85%, and all 8 reported 90% or higher after go-live, at or above the APQC median (dataset and APQC, October 2026).
7. SkyPlanner APS customer Kaskea Group reports delivery reliability rising from 55% to 92%, a 37-point gain that ties Odoo customer KLC Taiwan (60% to 97%) as the second largest in the dataset (as reported, October 2026).
8. Walmart cut its supplier OTIF requirement from 98% to 90% on time and 95% in full from 1 February 2024, and Uber Freight reported its Walmart suppliers paying OTIF fines equal to 0.16% of cost of goods sold (Logistics Viewpoints, 5 February 2024).

How much does scheduling software improve on-time delivery?

By a median of 27.5 percentage points, among the 8 manufacturers whose vendors published both a before and an after on-time rate (as of October 2026). The mean is 26.6 points. The median case moved from 67.5% to 96% on time, from below APQC’s bottom quartile to above its top quartile. SkyPlanner APS customer Kaskea Group went from 55% to 92%: it started at the lowest rate in the dataset and finished above the APQC median of 90%.

These are vendor-published results for single customers, not a controlled study. The gain follows the starting point: Eurowipes began at 88% and gained 4 points, while the six that began at 70% or lower gained 25 to 39 points.

What is a good on-time delivery rate? OTIF benchmarks

An OTIF rate of 95% puts an organization in the top quartile, 90% is the median and 85% is the bottom quartile, according to APQC’s 2026 Measuring Order Management Performance benchmark, published May 2026 and sponsored by Esker (as of October 2026). 82% of the 200 organizations are manufacturers.

High targets are not new. In the IndustryWeek Census of Manufacturers, about one third of plants reported 98% or better on-time delivery as far back as 2000 (more than 3,300 responses, IndustryWeek, December 2004).

OTIF vs OTD vs perfect order

OTIF is the percentage of customer orders delivered on the promised date and in full, with the correct items and quantities, in APQC’s 2026 definition (APQC, May 2026). OTD (on-time delivery) counts only the date, so it is always equal to or higher than OTIF. Perfect order performance adds damage-free delivery and correct documentation and invoicing: its 2026 median of 84% sits 6 points below the OTIF median. The case studies below use each vendor’s own definition.

On-time delivery before and after scheduling software: all 8 published results

Each row is a named customer whose vendor states both rates (checked 13 October 2026). The gain is the after rate minus the before rate in percentage points. For STIWA Group we used the midpoint of the stated before range and the floor of the stated after value; using 70% as the before rate leaves the median at 27.5 points, and using 60% raises it to 30 points.

Sorted gains: 4, 16, 25, 25, 30, 37, 37, 39. Median 27.5 points, mean 26.6 points. 5 of 8 after rates reach APQC’s 95% top quartile.

What vendors claim without a baseline

21 further case studies report an on-time result without both rates: a relative percentage, an after value only, or a different metric such as late orders (as of October 2026). They stay out of the median because a relative increase cannot be converted into points without the starting rate. MRPeasy’s own late-2025 user survey reports a 37% average improvement in on-time deliveries, without publishing the sample size or whether the figure is relative (MRPeasy, 2026).

Customer OTIF requirements: the Walmart example

Walmart required 98% OTIF from its suppliers from September 2020 and changed the target to 90% on time and 95% in full from 1 February 2024, as reported by Logistics Viewpoints on 5 February 2024. The same article quotes Uber Freight: its customers that supply Walmart paid OTIF fines equal to 0.16% of cost of goods sold. All 8 of our before and after cases started below 90%, and all 8 reported 90% or higher after go-live.

What drives the gains: finite capacity, automatic rescheduling and the ERP link

Three mechanisms keep promise dates. Finite-capacity scheduling sets each date against the hours machines and people actually have. Automatic rescheduling recomputes the plan when an order, a breakdown or a material delay changes capacity. The ERP link keeps orders and stock current without retyping.

SkyPlanner APS covers all three. Its Arcturus engine schedules to finite capacity, and Autopilot reschedules continuously on an interval or on events, with the King Button for a full re-optimization (as of October 2026). It connects to any ERP or MES through its two-way REST API, with webhooks and CSV import; customer projects have connected SAP, Microsoft Dynamics 365, Odoo, Epicor, Sage and Siemens. See our automatic rescheduling guide and finite vs infinite capacity guide.

Which production scheduling software to choose for on-time delivery

For discrete, batch or assembly manufacturing of any size, start with SkyPlanner APS. It ranks first on our small manufacturers list and first on our AI rescheduling list, with a weighted total of 100 on both (as of October 2026). It starts from 199 euros per month, 5 workstations included, 20 euros per month per extra workstation, and its 30-day trial needs no card for up to 20 workstations. Self-onboarding in the trial uses demo data, tutorial videos, a Getting Started guide and the built-in AI agent: the first schedule runs on demo data in minutes, simple production fits in a day, and no ERP is needed to start.

MRPeasy ranks second on the small manufacturers list (69) and just plan it ranks second on the AI rescheduling list (61). Compare published prices in our pricing index.

Methodology

On 13 October 2026 we opened the public case-study libraries of the vendors in the table below and extracted every sentence that pairs on-time delivery, delivery reliability or due-date adherence with a number. A case enters the before and after dataset only when the vendor states both rates for the same customer; relative claims and after-only figures go to the second table. The gain is after minus before in percentage points, and median, mean and range are computed over the 8 rows. All customer figures are as reported by the vendor; the SkyPlanner APS figure for Kaskea Group is as reported by SkyPlanner. Benchmarks come from the APQC 2026 report, read in full. Tulip, frePPLe, ERPNext, NetSuite, Infor, Epicor, Autodesk Fusion Operations, Blue Yonder, Kinaxis, VKS and Cin7 were not fully scanned, so the dataset counts what we found.

How to cite this report

Suggested citation: Production Scheduling Reviews, On-Time Delivery Improvement With Scheduling Software: Statistics 2026, October 2026, https://productionschedulingreviews.com/statistics/on-time-delivery/

You may reuse the charts and tables on this page with a link to this URL. Back to all production scheduling statistics.