Sign up for our daily Newsletter and stay up to date with all the latest news!

Subscribe I am already a subscriber

You are using software which is blocking our advertisements (adblocker).

As we provide the news for free, we are relying on revenues from our banners. So please disable your adblocker and reload the page to continue using this site.
Thanks!

Click here for a guide on disabling your adblocker.

Sign up for our daily Newsletter and stay up to date with all the latest news!

Subscribe I am already a subscriber

Maersk tops global carrier reliability rankings with consistent performance

Since 2019, the most reliable of the top 13 global carriers in each month, has rarely been the most reliable carrier in more than 30% of the trade lanes, that they offered a product in. For context, we benchmark schedule reliability across 34 trade lanes in our GLP report.

How is it then possible for a carrier to be the most reliable overall when they are not the most reliable in two-thirds of the trades they offer? The answer lies in consistency – these carriers were consistently in the top 5 of most reliable global carriers in 50%-80% of the trade lanes. Essentially, if they weren't 1st, they were 2nd or 3rd, and more often than not, no lower than the 5th most reliable on a given trade lane.

This is simple to understand every month but becomes complicated if you want to calculate relative schedule reliability performance over a longer timeframe. Who is the better performer – a carrier that is 1st in 50% of the trade lanes and 8th in 50% over 6 months, or one that is never 1st, but is 3rd in 100% of the trade lanes over that same period?

To quantify this for Jan-Sep 2024, we developed a composite score. For each global carrier, we calculated the percentage of times they ranked 1st, 2nd, 3rd, etc., on a trade lane. Every time they ranked 1st, they were assigned a score of 1.0, every time they ranked 2nd, they were assigned a score of 0.9, and so on, until a score of 0.1, which was assigned every time they ranked 10th on a trade lane. These scores were then added up, with the result shown in Figure 1.

Maersk was at the top of the composite rankings, having ranked 1st on a trade lane 16% of the time and within the top-3 44% of the time. ZIM followed, having been ranked 1st 17% of the time and within the top 3 39% of the time. CMA CGM, MSC, and PIL rounded out the top 5, while ONE was at the bottom with the lowest composite score. ONE was ranked 1st on a trade lane only 2% of the time and was within the top 3 30% of the time.

For more information:
Sea Intelligence
Email: [email protected]
www.sea-intelligence.com

Publication date: