Solutions
Who We Serve
Our Solutions
Who We Serve
🔌 API vs Web Portal

DIWASS API vs web portal: which one fits your volume?

Every DIWASS user eventually faces the same choice: file through the government web portal, or integrate the API. There is no single correct answer - but there is a wrong way to decide, and that is to guess. The right path comes down to one number: how many cross-border shipments you notify each month.

The baseline

What the government web portal covers

DIWASS ships with a government-provided web portal, and it covers the baseline legal requirement in full. You can file notifications, update statuses and confirm receipts through it manually. For occasional cross-border activity - a handful of shipments a month - that is genuinely enough: no integration project to run, no development work to plan, no ongoing upkeep to own.

The trade-off only shows up as volume grows. Nothing about the portal breaks. It just scales linearly with your staff time, because every shipment is typed in by a person.

The manual cycle

What manual filing actually costs

A fully manual notification cycle is four steps, and none of them are hard. The problem is that they repeat, per shipment, indefinitely.

📝
Create the transport record
The shipment already exists in your own ERP, TMS or planning sheet - material, route, vehicle, dates.
⌨️
Re-type it into the portal
Log in to DIWASS and enter the same data again by hand. Nothing carries over from the system that already holds it.
Wait for feedback
There is no real-time validation at the point of booking. Errors in classification or permit surface later, not while you are filing.
🔄
Chase the status events
Departure, receipt and completion each have to be tracked and confirmed manually, inside their own windows.

Each cycle takes 33 minutes or more. At a modest 40 shipments a month, that is over 22 hours of pure administrative time every month - roughly three working days spent re-typing data you already have.

System to system

What the DIWASS API actually solves

DIWASS exposes a SOAP/XML API with message-level security for direct system-to-system integration. The point is not speed for its own sake - it is that data stops being re-entered, and validation moves to the moment of booking.

🔄

No double entry

Shipment data moves from your existing ERP or TMS straight into DIWASS. Teams never re-type what they have already recorded.

Eural codes checked in real time

The system validates the Eural code against the relevant permit at the point of booking - not days later, and not at the border.

🔁

Status updates sync automatically

Announced, Moving, Received and Completed sync back to the ERP without anyone watching a portal screen.

🕒

Receipt confirmations match reality

On the processor side, confirmations can be matched against real arrival data, which protects the three-working-day confirmation window.

Done properly, the same shipment cycle drops from 33 minutes to three to five - roughly an 88% cut in processing time, and the 22-plus hours a month at 40 shipments drops to almost nothing. The cost sits upfront instead: this is an integration project, not a form to fill in, and it needs proper planning against whatever ERP or TMS is already in place.

Decide by volume

DIWASS API vs web portal, by monthly volume

1-20 / month
The web portal is fine as-is. Manual entry costs less than the integration would, and there is no compliance benefit to automating it yet.
21-100 / month
Worth actively evaluating integration. This is where manual entry starts costing real staff time, and where a missed status update stops being unlikely.
100+ / month
API or ERP integration is close to essential. At this volume manual entry is not really manual any more - it is a backlog building quietly behind your operation.

The thresholds are about staff time and error probability, not about compliance status. The portal is legally sufficient at any volume. It simply stops being operationally sufficient long before it stops being legal.

The precondition

What integration actually depends on

DIWASS compliance is not only about the notification itself. It depends on the operational data behind it: which material moved, from where, on which vehicle, and confirmed by whom.

If that data already lives in a structured, connected system, integration is a fairly short technical step. If it is still scattered across spreadsheets and inboxes, the integration project quietly turns into a data cleanup project first - and that is the part that takes the time, not the API.

Frequently asked questions

DIWASS API vs web portal, in short

Is the DIWASS web portal enough to be compliant?

Yes. The government portal covers the full legal requirement at any volume - notifications, status updates and receipt confirmations. The question is operational, not legal: above roughly 20 shipments a month, manual entry starts costing more staff time than the integration would.

What kind of API does DIWASS use?

A SOAP/XML API with message-level security, designed for direct system-to-system integration from an ERP or TMS. It is not a REST/JSON API, so plan the work against SOAP tooling.

How much time does API integration actually save?

A manual cycle runs 33 minutes or more per shipment; an integrated one runs three to five - about an 88% reduction. At 40 shipments a month that removes 22-plus hours of administrative work.

At what volume should we integrate?

Below 20 cross-border shipments a month, stay on the portal. Between 21 and 100, evaluate seriously. Above 100, integration is close to essential.

What blocks a DIWASS integration most often?

Not the API - the data. If material, route, vehicle and confirmation data is scattered across spreadsheets and email, that has to be consolidated first. Structured operational data makes the integration itself a short step.

Not sure which side of the line you're on?

Walk through your monthly shipment volume and current systems with us, and get a clear recommendation on portal, API or full ERP - before you commit to an integration project.

On this page