Softwr

Manufacturing · head to head

AMFG vs eMaint

AMFG logo

AMFG

Manufacturing

Automated quoting and production workflow software for machine shops and additive bureaus

From
On request
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite
eMaint logo

eMaint

Manufacturing

Configurable CMMS from Fluke Reliability for asset-heavy operations

From
$69/user/month
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite

The short version

  • Each has a real cost: AMFG no pricing is published in any form, and the product is sold by module and site, so total cost is invisible until you are several sales calls in.; eMaint the interface is dated against MaintainX and Limble, and this is the most common objection from technicians during a trial
  • They diverge on capability: AMFG covers Geometric auto-quoting, eMaint covers Configurable without code.
  • Prices and features above were last checked on 31 August 2026.

Where they differ

Only the attributes on which AMFG and eMaint actually diverge.

Attributes where AMFG and eMaint differ
AttributeAMFGeMaint
Starting priceOn request$69/user/month
Pricing modelquotePer user per month, three-user minimum
PlatformsWeb, CloudWeb, iOS, Android

Identical on both: free tier (No), user rating (Not yet rated), category (Manufacturing).

What each one covers

Drawn from each product's published feature list. An absence here means we hold no record of it - not that the product lacks it.

Only in AMFG

  • Geometric auto-quoting
  • 2D drawing analysis
  • Production planning and scheduling
  • Shop-floor control
  • Quality tracking
  • Customer portal
  • CAD and CAM plugins

Only in eMaint

  • Configurable without code
  • Preventive and condition-based
  • Fluke sensor integration
  • Parts and purchasing
  • Compliance reporting
  • Multi-site

What people use each for

The jobs each tool is most often brought in to do.

AMFG

  • A machine shop losing work because quoting takes three days and competitors answer in three hoursnot eMaint
  • An additive bureau that needs one system for order intake, build scheduling and traceability across several machinesnot eMaint
  • A manufacturer running AM and CNC in the same facility and wanting one production record across bothnot eMaint
  • Replacing an email and spreadsheet ordering process with a customer portal that produces priced quotes automaticallynot eMaint

eMaint

  • Asset-heavy manufacturing with an established maintenance process to reproducenot AMFG
  • Teams moving from calendar-based to condition-based maintenancenot AMFG
  • Regulated environments needing audit-ready maintenance recordsnot AMFG
  • Organisations already invested in Fluke test and monitoring equipmentnot AMFG

Where each one falls short

Documented limitations, not opinions. Every one is a constraint you would hit in normal use.

AMFG

  • No pricing is published in any form, and the product is sold by module and site, so total cost is invisible until you are several sales calls in.
  • Automated quoting only becomes accurate once your cost model, machine rates and material data are properly loaded, so the value arrives months after go-live and early quotes need human checking.
  • The product started in additive manufacturing and has pivoted its marketing towards CNC machine shops, which means some CNC-specific depth is newer than the additive lineage and worth testing against your actual process mix.
  • It overlaps heavily with ERP and MES scope, so shops with an existing ERP face an ownership decision over scheduling and customer records that is a political problem, not a technical one.
  • It is a comparatively small vendor against established shop-floor systems, so integration work into an incumbent ERP will fall largely on you or a partner rather than on a pre-built certified connector.

eMaint

  • The interface is dated against MaintainX and Limble, and this is the most common objection from technicians during a trial
  • Configurability means implementation is a project rather than a signup, and teams that under-resource it end up with a half-configured system
  • The three-user minimum makes it poor value for very small teams
  • Mobile is functional but clearly secondary to the web application
  • Pricing above the Team tier is quote-based, so comparison against published competitors requires a sales conversation

Pricing, plan by plan

AMFG

On request
  • AMFG$undefined/year
    • Automated quoting and estimating
    • Production planning and scheduling
    • Shop-floor control and quality tracking

eMaint

$69/user/month
  • Team$69/user/month
    • Three-user minimum
    • Work orders
    • Preventive maintenance
  • Professional$undefined/user/month
    • Parts and purchasing
    • Custom forms
    • Advanced reporting
  • Enterprise$undefined/user/month
    • Condition monitoring
    • API and integrations
    • SSO

Which should you pick?

Choose AMFG if

  • You need geometric auto-quoting.
  • You work on Web, Cloud.
  • You also want 2d drawing analysis.
AMFG review

Choose eMaint if

  • You need configurable without code.
  • You work on Web, iOS, Android.
  • You also want preventive and condition-based.
eMaint review

Questions people ask

Is AMFG or eMaint better?
Neither clearly leads. AMFG starts at On request and eMaint at $69/user/month, and user ratings are close enough to be indistinguishable. Choose on capability and platform support.
Which is cheaper, AMFG or eMaint?
AMFG starts at On request and eMaint at $69/user/month.
Does AMFG or eMaint run on more platforms?
AMFG runs on Web, Cloud. eMaint runs on Web, iOS, Android.
What is AMFG best used for?
AMFG is most often used for a machine shop losing work because quoting takes three days and competitors answer in three hours, an additive bureau that needs one system for order intake, build scheduling and traceability across several machines, a manufacturer running am and cnc in the same facility and wanting one production record across both, replacing an email and spreadsheet ordering process with a customer portal that produces priced quotes automatically. Of those, a machine shop losing work because quoting takes three days and competitors answer in three hours and an additive bureau that needs one system for order intake, build scheduling and traceability across several machines are not what eMaint is typically brought in for.
What can AMFG do that eMaint cannot?
AMFG covers Geometric auto-quoting, 2D drawing analysis, Production planning and scheduling, Shop-floor control. eMaint covers Configurable without code, Preventive and condition-based, Fluke sensor integration, Parts and purchasing.

Answered from the vendors’ own pages

AMFG: Does AMFG replace my ERP?

No. It covers quoting through shop-floor execution and quality. Finance, purchasing and inventory usually stay in the ERP, and you must decide which system owns scheduling.

eMaint: Who owns eMaint?

Fluke Reliability, part of Fortive. That is why condition monitoring data from Fluke instruments integrates directly.

AMFG: Is it only for 3D printing?

No, though that is where it started. It now targets CNC machine shops as well and markets quoting for machining, sheet metal and additive.

eMaint: What does it actually cost?

The Team plan is 69 USD per user per month with a three-user minimum, so roughly 2,484 USD a year at the floor. Professional and Enterprise are quoted.

AMFG: How accurate is automated quoting out of the box?

Not accurate until your machine rates, materials and cost model are configured. Treat the first months of quotes as assisted rather than automatic.

eMaint: Is it better than MaintainX or Limble?

Different trade. eMaint is more configurable and better on condition-based maintenance; the others are markedly better on mobile experience and speed of setup. Asset complexity should decide it.

AMFG: Is pricing published?

No. It is quoted by number of users, sites and selected modules.

eMaint: How long does implementation take?

Weeks rather than days for anything beyond a basic work order setup. The configurability that makes it flexible is also what makes setup a project.

eMaint: Does it suit small teams?

Poorly. The three-user minimum and the configuration effort both assume an organisation large enough to have a maintenance function rather than a maintenance person.

Share

Related pages

More on AMFG

More on eMaint

Keep looking

Other head to heads