Both validate mill test reports with AI. They differ on where they run, how they reach production, and who they fit. Here is the factual comparison, sourced from public materials.
| Dimension | MTR CrossCheck (Apolo) | MTR.AI |
|---|---|---|
| What it is | A pre-built Apolo agent for MTR validation, configured to your acceptance rules by a forward-deployed engineer. | A focused software product for AI-powered MTR compliance verification. |
| Where it runs | On-prem or in an environment you control. Open-weight models on private GPUs, no third-party LLM. | Hosted software with drag-and-drop and batch upload, per their public materials. |
| Standards | ASTM, ASME, API 5L / 5CT / 5B, plus your internal specs and customer-specific acceptance rules encoded during onboarding. | Built-in rules for API 5L, API 5CT, ASTM A106 / A516 / A312, ASME SA-series; automatic carbon-equivalent calculation and unit conversion. |
| Mill formats | Mixed formats from different mills; new formats added during onboarding. | Any format including degraded scans, multi-page reports, and mixed languages, per their materials. |
| Physical traceability | Not a CrossCheck feature today. Validation is document-against-spec. | GPS-verified photo evidence tying MTRs to physical material, with device fingerprinting. |
| How it reaches production | A forward-deployed engineer integrates it with your systems and your spec library. Weeks, not quarters. | Self-serve product motion, per their public materials. |
| Built for | Mid-market distributors and service centers where MTR clearance gates quotes and data cannot go to a hosted service. | Teams that want fast, self-serve certificate verification with field-level photo traceability. |
If you want lightweight, self-serve certificate verification, are comfortable uploading MTRs to hosted software, and value photo-evidence traceability from the field, MTR.AI is built around exactly that motion.
If MTR clearance is gating your quote desk, your validation runs against internal and customer-specific acceptance rules rather than published specs alone, and your documents cannot leave your infrastructure, that is the workflow CrossCheck was built for. It also does not arrive alone: a forward-deployed engineer encodes your spec library, integrates your systems, and stays on the account as it expands to spec matching and beyond.
Run the same small set of MTRs and your comparison specs through both. CrossCheck pilots run on your own documents inside your environment.
Yes. Internal specs and customer acceptance rules are encoded during onboarding, alongside ASTM, ASME, and API standards.
It is based on public materials as of June 2026. If something is out of date, email start@apolo.us and we will correct it.
Send a representative set and your specs. Minutes, not hours, with your reviewer making every final call.