Mōryō vs TORU
Side-by-side comparison of Mōryō (Slip Robotics) and TORU (Magazino) — specs, pricing, Robo Score, and verified deployments. Updated daily.
Optimize comparison for buyer
Optimized for Agriculture buyers. Priority specs lifted to the top and marked with a target.
Layer 1: Identity & Trust
Manufacturer Country
- Mōryō—
- TORUGermany
Year First Available
- Mōryō—
- TORU2016
Verified Deployments
- Mōryō0 Deployments
- TORU0 Deployments
Layer 2: Operational
Price
- MōryōContact for quote
- TORU$63,000 USD
Battery / Shift Runtime
- Mōryō10 hrs
- TORU9 hrs
Availability Status
- MōryōACTIVE
- TORUACTIVE
Payload & Form Factor
Payload
- Mōryō5,443 kg
- TORU95 kg
AMR Subtype
- Mōryōpallet mover
- TORUother
Length
- Mōryō700 mm
- TORU102.4 mm
Width
- Mōryō590 mm
- TORU66.9 mm
Turning Radius
- Mōryō0 mm
- TORU—
Navigation & Sensing
Navigation Type
- Mōryōlidar slam,vision
- TORUother
Pedestrian Detection
- MōryōYes
- TORU—
Battery
Battery Chemistry
- Mōryōli ion nmc
- TORUother
Opportunity Charging
- MōryōYes
- TORU—
Auto Docking
- MōryōYes
- TORU—
Battery Swap
- MōryōYes
- TORU—
Connectivity
API Type
- Mōryōclosed
- TORU—
OTA Updates
- MōryōYes
- TORU—
Reliability
MTBF
- Mōryō10,000 hrs
- TORU—
Predictive Maintenance
- MōryōYes
- TORU—
Commercial
Price (USD)
- MōryōContact for quote
- TORU$63,000 USD
Pricing Models
- Mōryōraas
- TORU—
Warranty
- Mōryō—
- TORU1 yrs
| ||
|---|---|---|
| Layer 1: Identity & Trust | ||
| Manufacturer Country (values differ) | — | Germany |
| Year First Available (values differ) | — | 2016 |
| Verified Deployments | 0 Deployments | 0 Deployments |
| Layer 2: Operational | ||
| Price (values differ) | Contact for quote | $63,000 USD |
| Battery / Shift Runtime (priority for Agriculture buyers) (values differ) | 10 hrs | 9 hrs |
| Availability Status | ACTIVE | ACTIVE |
| Layer 3: Category Specific | ||
| Payload & Form Factor | ||
| Payload (priority for Agriculture buyers) (values differ) | 5,443 kg | 95 kg |
| AMR Subtype (values differ) | pallet mover | other |
| Length (values differ) | 700 mm | 102.4 mm |
| Width (values differ) | 590 mm | 66.9 mm |
| Turning Radius (values differ) | 0 mm | — |
| Navigation & Sensing | ||
| Navigation Type (values differ) | lidar slam,vision | other |
| Pedestrian Detection (values differ) | Yes | — |
| Battery | ||
| Battery Chemistry (values differ) | li ion nmc | other |
| Opportunity Charging (values differ) | Yes | — |
| Auto Docking (values differ) | Yes | — |
| Battery Swap (values differ) | Yes | — |
| Connectivity | ||
| API Type (values differ) | closed | — |
| OTA Updates (values differ) | Yes | — |
| Reliability | ||
| MTBF (values differ) | 10,000 hrs | — |
| Predictive Maintenance (values differ) | Yes | — |
| Commercial | ||
| Price (USD) (values differ) | Contact for quote | $63,000 USD |
| Pricing Models (values differ) | raas | — |
| Warranty (values differ) | — | 1 yrs |
Insufficient data for full comparison
The following fields had no data for any of the selected robots: Min Aisle Width, Ground Clearance, Robot Weight, Localization Accuracy, Docking Repeatability, Obstacle Detection Range, Min Object Detection Height, Max Speed (Loaded), Max Speed (Unloaded), Picks / Hour / Robot, Battery Capacity, Runtime (Loaded), Charging Time, Charge Cycles (Rated), ISO 3691-4 Certified, R15.08 Certified, Safety Category, Emergency Stops, Safety LiDAR Coverage, Safety Zone Count, Audible Alert, WMS Integrations, Fleet Size Supported, Multi-Robot Traffic Mgmt, Cybersecurity Certs, Uptime SLA, Field Service Response, Spare Parts Lead Time, RaaS / Month, Expected Service Life
ROI Comparison
Same operating assumptions across every robot — the only difference is price. Set your numbers once to see which pays back fastest.
Annual labor displaced (per robot): $50,000
| Metric | Mōryō | TORU |
|---|---|---|
| Investment | No price | $63,000 |
| Payback period | — | 15.1 mo |
| Net savings (5 yr) | — | $187,000 |
| ROI (5 yr) | — | +297% |
Mōryō has no listed price, so payback can't be computed. Contact the manufacturer for a quote.
Estimates labor-cost displacement only — not a full total cost of ownership. Actual ROI depends on integration, maintenance, training, downtime, and task fit. Converted currencies are indicative; USD is the price of record.
Trade-offs at a glance
Frequently asked
Who makes Mōryō and TORU?
Mōryō is made by Slip Robotics. TORU is made by Magazino, based in DE.
How do Mōryō and TORU compare on the Robo Score?
Mōryō scores 49.4 on the Robo Score. TORU scores 73.4. The Robo Score is a 0–100 credibility figure blending commercial maturity, verified deployments, company standing, and independent coverage — see methodology for the full breakdown.
Are Mōryō and TORU in the same category?
Both robots are classified as Amr Warehouse on Robolist. Filters and ranking treat them as direct alternatives.
What is the realistic total cost of ownership for Amr Warehouse robots?
Hardware cost is one input. Amr Warehouse TCO also includes integration, training, downtime, and end-of-life. Our breakdown: AMR TCO: Fleet Size, Charging Infrastructure, and WMS Integration.
What should a buyer ask vendors when choosing between Mōryō and TORU?
Spec sheets only show part of the story. Useful vendor questions cover support, lifecycle, integration cost, and references. We have a buyer-focused checklist: AMR Vendor Selection: Orchestration, Integration, and Scaling.
Going deeper — picking the right robot
AMR TCO: Fleet Size, Charging Infrastructure, and WMS Integration
8 min readWarehouse AMRs
AMR Vendor Selection: Orchestration, Integration, and Scaling
9 min readWarehouse AMRs
AMR Pilot in an Existing Warehouse: The 90-Day Playbook
9 min readWarehouse AMRs
Build vs buy vs lease: which model fits a first deployment
8 min readChoosing Your First Robot
The hidden specs vendors hope you'll miss
10 min readReading the Spec Sheet
Want to be notified when specs or pricing change for these robots? Drop your email.
Other comparisons
About this comparison
Mōryō vs TORU compares two robots in the amr-warehouse category. All data is sourced from manufacturer spec sheets, verified deployments, and third-party filings; see our methodology for how the Robo Score is calculated.