Home / Compare / Reds10 vs All3
Reds10 vs All3
Two companies that put automated design at the front of industrialised construction. Reds10 is an established UK modular builder; All3 is building an AI-plus-robotics system for timber housing.
DESK RESEARCH, NOT TESTED. Compiled from vendors' public websites (accessed Oct 15, 2026). Vendor claims are not verified by Means & Methods Lab. No scores or rankings.
Side by side
| Sheet row | Reds10 | All3 |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Industrialised modular construction with automated design (UK) | AI design, robotic prefab & on-site assembly robot (housing) |
| AI role (our label) | AI features added to established product | AI-first |
| What it does | UK company that designs, manufactures, and delivers modular buildings for defence, education, justice, healthcare, and residential clients, plus modular hire. In a company article, its Group Digital and Technology Officer says Reds10 automates steelwork design so that a standard school project produces 1,500+ detailed drawings in-house, automatically, formatted for direct CNC production; uses Autodesk Construction Cloud as its common data environment; and automates compliance records with 3D models, QR codes, GPS-authorised imagery, and AI-driven verification (for example for firestopping). It claims a 40% build-speed increase in one factory within six months without robotics (vendor claim). Listed projects include Wembley Manor School (121 modular units) and the NHS Hospital 2.0 modular bedroom prototype. | Vertically integrated construction technology company for multi-storey timber housing. Its Real Time Architecture (RTA) design platform uses AI agents to generate massing, layouts, and circulation options, scores them on usable area, cost, daylight, and code compliance (it cites DIN standards), then builds a component-level structural model using genetic algorithms and parametric optimisation, with automatic fire, acoustic, and thermal checks. All3 says a coordinated model takes about nine hours versus months conventionally (vendor claim). The model feeds bills of materials and robotic production programmes; components are made in robotic factories the vendor says run at 90% automation, and assembled on site by Mantis, its autonomous construction robot. Pilot factory in Belgrade. Architects can import DWG and export DWG or BIM; All3 says some software features can be used on their own but the system is designed to run as a whole. |
| Who it's for | UK public and private clients procuring schools, hospitals, defence and justice facilities, and housing. | Real estate developers, architects, municipalities, and housing providers, particularly for constrained urban sites in Europe. |
| Pricing (as publicly stated) | Not publicly listed (project-based; site routes to contact). (Checked Oct 15, 2026.) | Not publicly listed (turnkey delivery; site routes to contact). (Checked Oct 15, 2026.) |
| Test status | Not tested. No scores. | Not tested. No scores. |
| Vendor links | ||
| Sources |
Facts last checked: Oct 15, 2026. Prices change; check the vendor page before relying on them.
Where the vendor descriptions differ
- Design automation: Reds10 says it automatically generates 1,500+ CNC-ready steelwork drawings on a standard school project. All3 says its platform generates layouts in minutes and component-level structural models in hours.
- Data environment: Reds10 names Autodesk Construction Cloud as its common data environment. All3 describes a single digital building model that feeds permits, bills of materials, and robotic production.
- Robotics: Reds10 claims a 40% build-speed gain in one factory without investing in robotics. All3 describes robotic factories and the Mantis assembly robot.
- Sectors: Reds10 lists defence, education, justice, healthcare, and residential. All3 focuses on multi-storey residential and mixed-use.
- Pricing: neither publishes prices.
Paraphrased from the sources listed above. Vendor claims are reported as claims.
What we can't tell you yet
Which tool is better for your work. That needs testing on the same package with a verified answer key. Planned measures for this comparison:
- Error rate in automated drawings or models reaching the factory
- Who reviews automated outputs before fabrication
See the methodology and leaderboard status.
Related
- Category hub: Offsite, prefab & industrialized construction
- Compare: Togal.AI vs Kreo
- Compare: HCSS HeavyBid vs B2W Estimate
- Compare: AGTEK vs Trimble Business Center
- Compare: Document Crunch vs Provision
- Compare: Nomic vs Buildcheck vs InspectMind
- Compare: Exayard vs Togal.AI
- Compare: Beam AI vs Civils.ai
- Compare: Downtobid vs BuildingConnected
- Compare: Bluebeam Max vs Nomic
- Compare: STACK vs Handoff AI
- Compare: Countfire vs Exayard
- Compare: ALICE vs nPlan
- Compare: OpenSpace vs Buildots
- Compare: PlanHub vs ConstructConnect
- Compare: Trunk Tools vs Provision
- Compare: Doxel vs Buildots
- Compare: Kreo vs Exayard
- Compare: Handoff AI vs Beam AI
- Compare: ALICE vs Karmen
- Compare: nPlan vs SmartPM
- Compare: Part3 vs AutoSpecs
- Compare: Firmus vs Buildcheck
- Compare: Propeller vs AGTEK
- Compare: SitesAI Estimate vs Foreman AI
- Compare: DESTINI Estimator vs Ediphi
- Compare: viAct vs Intenseye
- Compare: Tenna vs Trackunit
- Compare: Tenna vs Tenderd
- Compare: Bedrock Robotics vs Gravis Robotics
- Compare: One Click LCA vs EC3
- Compare: HammerTech vs WakeCap
- Compare: MaintainX vs Brightly
- Compare: Raken vs CompanyCam
- Compare: Fieldwire vs PlanRadar
- Compare: Outbuild vs Planera
- Compare: Voxel vs Intenseye
- Compare: DroneDeploy vs Propeller
- Compare: Track3D vs Buildots
- Compare: Cintoo vs DroneDeploy
- Compare: viAct vs Voxel
- Compare: Civils.ai vs Exayard
- Compare: Togal.AI vs STACK
- Compare: Karmen vs Planera
- Compare: Outbuild vs SmartPM
- Compare: WakeCap vs viAct
- Compare: Samsara vs Tenna
- Compare: Built Robotics vs Bedrock Robotics
- Compare: OpenSpace vs DroneDeploy
- Compare: Reconstruct vs OpenSpace
- Compare: Procore AI vs Autodesk Assistant
- Compare: Dodge One vs ConstructConnect
- Compare: Shovels vs Dodge One
- Compare: C.Scale vs One Click LCA
- Compare: Trayd vs Miter
- Compare: Riskcast vs Raken
- Compare: Pelles AI vs Trunk Tools
- Compare: Kwant.ai vs WakeCap
- Compare: Skydio vs DroneDeploy
- Compare: Matterport vs Cintoo
- Compare: Reconstruct vs Track3D
- Compare: CivCheck vs CodeComply.AI
- Compare: PermitFlow vs GreenLite
- Compare: Civ Robotics vs Dusty Robotics
- Compare: Okibo vs KEWAZO
- Compare: Rebar vs Countfire
- Compare: Rebar vs Pelles AI
- Compare: Davis AI vs TestFit
- Compare: TraceAir vs TestFit
- Compare: Trendspek vs ConeLabs
- Compare: Citylogix vs Trendspek
- Compare: Voliro vs Skydio
- Compare: SmartPM vs Document Crunch
- Compare: SewerAI vs ITpipes
- Compare: Exodigo vs GroundedAI
- Compare: Sitewire vs Built Technologies
- Compare: Converge vs Giatec
- Compare: Cloud Cycle vs Giatec MixPilot
- Compare: CivilGrid vs Exodigo
- Compare: OneCrew vs HCSS HeavyBid
- Compare: All3 vs Reframe Systems
- Compare: Reframe Systems vs Reds10
- Compare: Foldcast vs Strong by Form
- Compare: Steelray Delay Analyzer vs SmartPM
- Compare: Nodes & Links vs Foresight
- Compare: First Rule vs Document Crunch
- Compare: First Rule vs Provision
- Compare: Procore Resource Planning (LaborChart) vs Bridgit
- Compare: Assignar vs Procore Resource Planning
- Compare: HammerTech vs SafetyClerk
- Compare: Eyrus vs Kwant.ai
Means & Methods Lab has no commercial relationship with any vendor on this page. Rankings and placement are never for sale. See how we make money.