This study examines the economic and operational conditions for automating the material handling process between the welding and painting departments at CJ Automotive through an investment in Automated Guided Vehicles (AGV) or Autonomous Mobile Robots (AMR). The background of the study is the increasing automation within Industry 4.0 and the need for more efficient material flows in the manufacturing industry. Companies today use manual forklifts for internal material transportation, which ties up both time and personnel resources. The purpose of the study is to investigate whether an investment in AGV or AMR is economically and operationally profitable, as well as which of the technologies is most suitable for CJ Automotive’s current and future production. The study was conducted as a case study using both qualitative and quantitative methods. Data collection consisted of interviews, observations, frequency studies, capacity calculations, flow analysis, and investment and break-even calculations. The results from the frequency study showed that the manual forklift currently remains idle approximately 64.7% of the working time, indicating that large parts of the forklift resource are being used inefficiently. Furthermore, the analysis showed that both AGV and AMR systems meet the company’s operational requirements and conditions regarding transport capacity and speed. However, AGV and AMR differ in terms of flexibility, integration, installation, and investment costs. AGV systems offer high operational reliability and are well suited for standardized flows but require more extensive installations and fixed driving routes. AMR systems are more flexible and can navigate autonomously around obstacles yet have hidden installation costs that may become expensive. The study shows that AGV generally entails a manageable investment cost with rapid integration into the current working methods. The financial analyses show that both alternatives have the potential to reduce labor costs and improve material handling efficiency over time. However, AGV is considered the more advantageous solution thanks to lower investment costs and shorter implementation time. At the same time, it appears that the profitability of the investment is strongly dependent on future production volumes and how well the system is integrated into the company’s existing processes. The study therefore recommends that the company primarily investigate an investment in AGV technology as a first step toward increased automation of material handling.