What is the Difference Between IFV vs APC vs AFV?

An AFV (Armored Fighting Vehicle) is the broad category for any armored combat vehicle; while APCs (Armored Personnel Carriers) focuses on transporting troops with light arms (like MGs) for basic protection, while IFVs (Infantry Fighting Vehicles) are an advanced type of AFV, designed to fight alongside infantry, boasting heavier armor, stronger cannons (20-40mm+), and anti-tank missiles for direct fire support, essentially merging transport and fighting roles.  armored personnel carriers mostly built out of modified tank hulls (sometimes literally old tank hulls). They usually carry the full squad of an APC, have the weapons fit of an APC (machine guns), but have tank level protection (proof against autocannons, MGs, highly resistant to RPGs and some ATGMs). Some armies use them for moving infantry into very dangerous areas (like Israel into the RPG/ATGM rich Hezbollah areas, or high-resistance Hamas zones) but the other use for them is closer to specialist troops going very into harms way (like assault engineers vs general infantry use). 

Armored Personnel Carrier (APC)

APC primary role is transporting infantry squads safely across battlefields, protecting them from small arms fire and shrapnel. Its armament is typically lighter, like Heavy Machine Guns (HMGs) or grenade launchers, that are not powerful enough for direct combat support. The APC armor is lighter, designed for infantry protection, not tank-level combat something like the M113 (early variants). An APC is a lightly armed armored vehicle with limited use of machine guns or light autocannons for self-defense. APC is designed to transport infantry safely to the battlefield. Its primary role is protection, not heavy combat.

APCs emerged in WWII and became essential during Cold War mechanized warfare. They prioritize troop safety against small arms and shrapnel, but lack the firepower to engage heavily armored threats. Their role is to deliver soldiers close to combat zones, where infantry dismounts to fight. APCs are cheaper and lighter than IFVs, making them suitable for peacekeeping and rapid deployment missions. APC is an armored vehicle that generally carries a squad (9-12 men) that is designed mostly to allow infantry to move with tanks and other armored vehicles, basically it's there to get the infantry within 300-500 meters of the objective.

Infantry Fighting Vehicle (IFV)

The IFV primary role is transporting infantry and providing direct, integrated fire support during engagements, moving with tanks. The armament is heavier, usually a 20-40mm autocannon and often anti-tank guided missiles, and sometimes heavier weapons capable of destroying light armored vehicles. The armor is heavier than APCs, offering better protection, though generally less than a Main Battle Tank (MBT). An IFV is a hybrid between an APC and a tank: it carries infantry but is heavily armed to fight alongside them. IFVs were developed to address APC limitations, giving infantry mobility plus firepower. They allow troops to fight from inside the vehicle or dismount under cover. IFVs are central to modern mechanized infantry doctrine, enabling combined arms operations where infantry, armor, and artillery work seamlessly. However, critics argue IFVs blur roles, exposing infantry to risks if vehicles are destroyed, unlike APCs which focus purely on transport.

Examples:

• M2 Bradley IFV (USA)
• BMP-2 (Russia)
• Warrior FV510 (UK)

Armored Fighting Vehicle (AFV)

The AFV is an umbrella term for any armed, armored vehicle used in combat, including tanks, IFVs, APCs, assault guns, etc. Its key features combine mobility, protection, and offensive capability. APCs and IFVs are both types of AFVs, but IFVs have a much more significant fighting capability than standard APCs. An AFV is any armored combat vehicle designed for battlefield roles, combining protection, mobility, and firepower. AFVs are meant to survive hostile fire while delivering offensive or defensive capabilities. They can be tracked or wheeled, depending on terrain and mission. AFVs revolutionized warfare starting with WWI tanks. Their defining feature is versatility: some are optimized for direct fire (tanks), others for troop transport (APCs), and others for combined arms support (IFVs). Modern AFVs integrate advanced sensors, reactive armor, and modular weapon systems, making them adaptable to diverse combat environments. Some  examples:

• Tank: M1 Abrams (USA)
• Armoured Car: BRDM-2 (Russia)
• Self-Propelled Gun: 2S1 Gvozdika (Russia)
• IFV/APC: M2 Bradley, M113

Comparison Table

The difference is due to the needs of a country military and where the vehicle fit into their doctrine, which would create niche vehicles like a heavily armored one without heavy armaments, or one with heavy armaments, etc. Like as an example, perhaps it would be ideal for the boys with boots on the ground in the United States Army to have access to something like the Namer where they can travel around contested regions well-protected, but switching out their M113 and/or Bradleys for Namer would be detrimental for the expeditionary warfare capability the United States military doctrine surrounds itself with in the modern era.

At the same time, a country like Israel that originally had M113 found them unsuitable for their threat environment against insurgent's IEDs and RPGs. Since they do not need to worry about travelling abroad to fight as they are only worried about their neighbors, they can afford to build the 60 ton Namer to protect their soldiers really well as they travel from Point A to Point B, and support the vehicle as well since they don't need to worry if it fits into a C-17 fuselage for transport across the world.