GLB and FBX are both common character formats, but they are optimized for different parts of the pipeline. If your goal is to rig, animate and move characters between tools, it helps to know where each format shines.
GLB (glTF binary): sharing and web
- Compact and portable
- Great for web previews and sharing
- Often includes textures in a single package
- Opens in Blender, three.js and other web viewers
FBX: DCC tools and game engines
- Widely used for skeletal animation workflows
- Reliable in Unity and Unreal importers: a humanoid in Unity, a skeletal mesh in Unreal
- A common interchange format for rigged assets
Which one is better for auto-rigging?
Neither. Both enter the same V3 conveyor, and the rig depends on the shape of your model, not on the file format. The pose does not have to be a T-pose, and if the file already has a skeleton or an animation, its own rest pose is used first. The result is the same rigged, animated model in the viewer.
Recommended practical pipeline
- Start with GLB (easy to share) or FBX (engine-friendly), whichever you have. An OBJ works too: upload it with its MTL and textures in a ZIP.
- Auto-rig it: the rig and the animation clips appear in the viewer within about a minute.
- Download the export your pipeline needs: FBX for Unity and Unreal, GLB for the web and Blender, or USDZ, a ZIP, a Unity package or a Blender file.
- Keep GLB as a distribution format if needed.
Common issues when converting
Materials don't match
Materials can differ across formats. GLB often keeps textures packaged, while FBX can require external texture paths or engine-side material setup. AutoRig keeps your own textures through rigging, and a model without textures gets PBR textures automatically.
Axis/rotation differences
Coordinate systems vary. A consistent export toolchain reduces surprises.