FBA vs FBM in 2025: Choosing the Right Fulfillment Model for Your Amazon Business

For Amazon sellers in 2025, fulfillment is not just an operational detail—it is a strategic decision that defines profitability, customer satisfaction, and long-term growth. The two primary models, Fulfillment by Amazon (FBA) and Fulfillment by Merchant (FBM), continue to divide opinions. Some sellers praise FBA for convenience and Prime eligibility, while others prefer FBM for its flexibility and lower costs on certain products.

But the reality is more nuanced. Choosing the right model depends on product type, competition, margins, and growth ambitions. In this article, we’ll examine how FBA and FBM work today, what factors influence the choice, which tools sellers can use to measure profitability, why hybrid strategies are gaining traction, and what the future holds for Amazon fulfillment.

At first glance, the difference seems simple:

Behind these acronyms lies a different customer experience and operational setup.
With FBA, customers enjoy fast shipping and seamless returns. For sellers, the trade-off is higher fees and less direct control over inventory. With FBM, sellers maintain full control of stock and shipping, which can be an advantage for oversized products, seasonal items, or categories where margins are thin. However, FBM sellers often find it harder to compete for the Buy Box, especially if delivery times lag behind Prime standards.

Deciding between FBA and FBM is not a one-size-fits-all question. Several factors play a decisive role:

Example cases:

Fulfillment decisions should be made with numbers, not intuition. Thankfully, several tools help sellers calculate ROI, estimate fees, and assess competition. Among the most widely used are:

One of the most practical ways to compare FBA and FBM is through the AMZ Sales Estimator. Sellers can input an ASIN and category to forecast monthly sales and then model different fulfillment scenarios.

How it works in practice:

For example, if a product is expected to sell 500 units per month with Prime eligibility but only 200 units via FBM, the math may still favor FBA even with higher fees. On the other hand, if storage costs balloon due to low turnover, FBM may preserve margins.

In 2025, many experienced sellers no longer see FBA and FBM as mutually exclusive. Instead, they adopt hybrid models that combine the strengths of both.
A seller might run fast-moving, lightweight SKUs through FBA to maximize Prime visibility while handling oversized or seasonal items via FBM. Prep centers and 3PL (third-party logistics) providers make this easier, taking over storage and shipping responsibilities for FBM without the seller needing their own warehouse.

Hybrid strategies also unlock multichannel fulfillment. Inventory stored with a 3PL can be sold not just on Amazon, but also through eBay, Walmart Marketplace, or a Shopify store. Meanwhile, FBA ensures steady sales velocity for core products.

This combination gives sellers resilience. If Amazon raises storage fees or enforces new restrictions, FBM capacity provides a backup. If logistics networks face delays, FBA’s fulfillment speed compensates. Hybrid approaches allow sellers to scale without being locked into one rigid system.

Both FBA and FBM come with trade-offs.

FBA risks include high storage and removal fees, especially as Amazon continues to penalize slow-moving inventory. Sellers also face dependence on Amazon’s policies, which can change without warning, affecting storage limits, fees, or product eligibility.

FBM risks revolve around logistics complexity. Handling storage, shipping, and customer service in-house requires infrastructure and reliability. Without Prime eligibility, winning the Buy Box is more difficult, and shipping delays can quickly damage account health.

Looking forward, Amazon is investing heavily in Amazon Warehousing & Distribution (AWD), a service designed to give sellers cheaper bulk storage with integration into FBA. Shipping costs across the industry are expected to rise, making efficient logistics management even more critical. The long-term outlook suggests sellers will need to diversify fulfillment strategies, balancing FBA’s advantages with the flexibility of FBM.

Choosing between FBA and FBM in 2025 is less about picking one model forever and more about aligning fulfillment strategy with product type, sales velocity, and business goals. FBA remains the dominant choice for small, fast-moving items that benefit from Prime visibility, while FBM offers flexibility for oversized or niche products where margins would otherwise vanish.

The smartest sellers approach fulfillment with data, comparing scenarios and calculating profitability before committing. Many discover that a hybrid strategy—leveraging both FBA and FBM—provides the resilience needed to handle shifting fees, policy changes, and fluctuating demand.

Ultimately, the right model is the one that balances cost efficiency with customer experience. In a marketplace as dynamic as Amazon, sellers who stay flexible and strategic will be the ones who turn fulfillment into a competitive advantage rather than a liability.