<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">The latest integration is a sign of continued strategic partnerships between logistics software vendors as they seek to amplify the value their solutions offer. </div>

The latest integration is a sign of continued strategic partnerships between logistics software vendors as they seek to amplify the value their solutions offer.

3684678_FI.jpg

<div>Two technology providers catering to logistics services providers have linked up to allow intermediaries to pipe data from freight rate management solutions into pricing tools. The partnership, announced Thursday, involves logistics system <a>integration specialist Chain.io</a> mapping master data from an array of transportation management systems (TMSs) in its network to the freight pricing optimization and <a>tendering software of Winmore.</a> The move is designed to help forwarders and brokers win business by quoting more accurately and quickly. The integration is a sign of continued strategic partnerships between logistics software vendors as they seek to amplify the value their solutions offer by...

Two technology providers catering to logistics services providers have linked up to allow intermediaries to pipe data from freight rate management solutions into pricing tools. The partnership, announced Thursday, involves logistics system integration specialist Chain.io mapping master data from an array of transportation management systems (TMSs) in its network to the freight pricing optimization and tendering software of Winmore. The move is designed to help forwarders and brokers win business by quoting more accurately and quickly. The integration is a sign of continued strategic partnerships between logistics software vendors as they seek to amplify the value their solutions offer by looping ancillary data or functionality from complementary providers. The partnership also hints at the reality that freight intermediaries are competing fiercely to win customers and need several components to snag that business as shippers increasingly use online tools in their procurement process. Among those components are an easy-to-use customer interface, internal pricing optimization tools, quality historical rate data, and pre-built integrations to external systems where pricing data resides. “Only logistics service providers with the best data can win the right deals at the right price,” Chain.io CEO Brian Glick said in a statement. "Forwarders, brokers, and carriers that respond to bids quickly and with pricing based on real historical data will continually outperform their peers.” Philadelphia-based Chain.io, founded in 2017, landed an $11 million funding round in June from venture capital firms. Its customers and partners include visibility providers FourKites and project44, forwarding software vendors Magaya, Freightos, and Descartes, and logistics providers Hellman Worldwide Logistics, NNR, and Jaguar Freight Services. San Francisco-based Winmore’s customers include third-party logistics providers CH Robinson, DHL, and Hillebrand. The Chain.io integration adds to existing partnerships with freight rate benchmarking data providers Xeneta, Sonar, and Freightos. It’s also connected to logistics providers and carrier TMSs CargoWise, MercuryGate, McLeod Software, and Trimble. “Through our integration into Chain.io, we can extend our pricing optimization platform deeper into the pricing and product functions at freight forwarders, carriers, and freight brokers, delivering richer insight that can have a transformational impact,” Winmore CEO Aaron Sasson said in the statement. Sasson added that the company generally helps pricing teams increase their tender win rates by more than 10 percent. The two companies cited recent McKinsey research showing that investment into freight pricing optimization that drives as little as a 2 percent increase in sales revenue can increase operating margin by 30 percent. Contact Eric Johnson at eric.johnson@spglobal.com and follow him on Twitter: @LogTechEric .

Logistics Technology News

Chain.io, Winmore partnership targets pricing speed for 3PLs

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">The crackdown on more than 150 onshore wind farms marks the latest push by the Trump administration to dismantle the US wind industry. </div>

The crackdown on more than 150 onshore wind farms marks the latest push by the Trump administration to dismantle the US wind industry.

Feature image

<div class="phx-topic">Wind project cargo activity is facing yet another setback after over 150 onshore wind developments in the US were put on hold by the Trump administration. Citing national security concerns, the Department of Defense <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2026/05/04/climate/wind-power-delays-trump-pentagon.html">has stalled approvals for about 165 onshore wind projects</a> located on private lands, the administration’s latest push against wind energy development. The inactivity could have repercussions for the breakbulk sector, as the wind industry represents an important source of project cargo. The lion’s share of those shipments is for the onshore wind industry, which accounted for more than 90% of global wind turbine orders in 2025 despite an 18% year-over-year decline, according to data from S&amp;P Global Energy. John Welch, senior director of heavy-haul operations for Fort Worth, Texas-based Lone Star Transportation, told the Journal of Commerce that cargo transportation for the wind industry depends on a predictable project pipeline, as the moves often call for complex logistics work. “Transporting the major wind components requires significant advance planning, specialized equipment, routing, permitting, escorts, crews, and considerable coordination,” he said. “And that is just the transportation portion.” Welch said national security reviews are important, and that any legitimate concerns should be addressed through the appropriate process. However, “At the same time, delays or uncertainty in project approvals can ripple through the logistics and supply chain, making it more difficult for transportation providers and their customers to plan efficiently and responsibly,” he said. Among the stalled projects are wind farms that were awaiting final signoff, others in mid-negotiation, and projects that typically do not require federal oversight, <a href="https://www.ft.com/content/74d8cf6f-aa17-4a24-a621-e26b1bad2e1e?syn-25a6b1a6=1">the Financial Times reported</a>, citing the American Clean Power Association (ACP) and sources close to the matter. Jason Grumet, ACP’s CEO, told the Journal of Commerce that efforts to delay onshore projects contradict calls from senior federal officials for permitting reform while “abusing the current permitting system.”  “The core idea of permitting reform is that America wins when we can modernize all critical infrastructure,” Grumet said. “It’s incoherent to pursue that goal while actively blockading domestic energy production that will help meet our growing energy needs and keeping energy affordable for American families.” <h3>Wind supply chain recalibrates </h3>The crackdown on onshore windfarms marks the latest push by the Trump administration to dismantle the US wind industry. On March 23, French energy giant TotalEnergies signed off on a deal to <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/offshore-wind-cancellations-set-up-energy-project-pivot-in-the-us-6192787">accept $1 billion from the US government to cancel its two offshore wind projects</a> — Carolina Long Bay and New York Bight — and instead pivot to developing fossil fuel facilities. And in February, the Trump administration began taking steps to reverse a sweep of court victories allowing construction to resume on five offshore wind projects the administration has tried to stop. The slowdown of US wind farm development over the past couple of years has forced heavy-haul transport specialist Art Espaillat to suspend operations of his onshore wind logistics consultancy, as many of his competitors lowered their rates when project developers pulled back. “It just created a race to the bottom for a lot of companies like mine,” Espaillat told the Journal of Commerce. Espaillat said many of the US wind projects he has worked on over the past six years had already secured agreements with utilities to supply power to the grid, only to reach a standstill because of federal permitting delays. “They’re setting up roadblocks that not a lot of other industries are getting,” he said. With fewer turbines in need of transport, comparably sized data center components have been eating up the available heavy-haul capacity, Espaillat said. But if those stalled wind projects were to pick back up again in another two years, the industry could face a scenario similar to the challenges that played out in 2020 when the global wind industry’s rapid expansion created supply chain bottlenecks for turbines and components. “Developers lost a lot of money because there weren’t enough trucks, not enough ships, and it was too much too fast,” Espaillat said. “Executing in a scenario like that is very expensive and chaotic.” Contact Autumn Cafiero Giusti at <a href="mailto:autumn@autumngiusti.com">autumn@autumngiusti.com</a>.</div>

Wind project cargo activity is facing yet another setback after over 150 onshore wind developments in the US were put on hold by the Trump administration. Citing national security concerns, the Department of Defense has stalled approvals for about 165 onshore wind projects located on private lands, the administration’s latest push against wind energy development. The inactivity could have repercussions for the breakbulk sector, as the wind industry represents an important source of project cargo. The lion’s share of those shipments is for the onshore wind industry, which accounted for more than 90% of global wind turbine orders in 2025 despite an 18% year-over-year decline, according to data from S&P Global Energy. John Welch, senior director of heavy-haul operations for Fort Worth, Texas-based Lone Star Transportation, told the Journal of Commerce that cargo transportation for the wind industry depends on a predictable project pipeline, as the moves often call for complex logistics work. “Transporting the major wind components requires significant advance planning, specialized equipment, routing, permitting, escorts, crews, and considerable coordination,” he said. “And that is just the transportation portion.” Welch said national security reviews are important, and that any legitimate concerns should be addressed through the appropriate process. However, “At the same time, delays or uncertainty in project approvals can ripple through the logistics and supply chain, making it more difficult for transportation providers and their customers to plan efficiently and responsibly,” he said. Among the stalled projects are wind farms that were awaiting final signoff, others in mid-negotiation, and projects that typically do not require federal oversight, the Financial Times reported , citing the American Clean Power Association (ACP) and sources close to the matter. Jason Grumet, ACP’s CEO, told the Journal of Commerce that efforts to delay onshore projects contradict calls from senior federal officials for permitting reform while “abusing the current permitting system.”  “The core idea of permitting reform is that America wins when we can modernize all critical infrastructure,” Grumet said. “It’s incoherent to pursue that goal while actively blockading domestic energy production that will help meet our growing energy needs and keeping energy affordable for American families.” Wind supply chain recalibrates The crackdown on onshore windfarms marks the latest push by the Trump administration to dismantle the US wind industry. On March 23, French energy giant TotalEnergies signed off on a deal to accept $1 billion from the US government to cancel its two offshore wind projects — Carolina Long Bay and New York Bight — and instead pivot to developing fossil fuel facilities. And in February, the Trump administration began taking steps to reverse a sweep of court victories allowing construction to resume on five offshore wind projects the administration has tried to stop. The slowdown of US wind farm development over the past couple of years has forced heavy-haul transport specialist Art Espaillat to suspend operations of his onshore wind logistics consultancy, as many of his competitors lowered their rates when project developers pulled back. “It just created a race to the bottom for a lot of companies like mine,” Espaillat told the Journal of Commerce. Espaillat said many of the US wind projects he has worked on over the past six years had already secured agreements with utilities to supply power to the grid, only to reach a standstill because of federal permitting delays. “They’re setting up roadblocks that not a lot of other industries are getting,” he said. With fewer turbines in need of transport, comparably sized data center components have been eating up the available heavy-haul capacity, Espaillat said. But if those stalled wind projects were to pick back up again in another two years, the industry could face a scenario similar to the challenges that played out in 2020 when the global wind industry’s rapid expansion created supply chain bottlenecks for turbines and components. “Developers lost a lot of money because there weren’t enough trucks, not enough ships, and it was too much too fast,” Espaillat said. “Executing in a scenario like that is very expensive and chaotic.” Contact Autumn Cafiero Giusti at autumn@autumngiusti.com .

Energy projects

Breakbulk News

US onshore wind halt deals latest blow for project cargo

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">Logistics and transportation veterans decried Amazon’s announcement this week that it is offering bundled supply chain services as merely a repackaging of current capabilities; others weren’t as quick to dismiss it. </div>

Logistics and transportation veterans decried Amazon’s announcement this week that it is offering bundled supply chain services as merely a repackaging of current capabilities; others weren’t as quick to dismiss it.

<div class="phx-topic">Amazon’s launch this week of a suite of supply chain services for shippers not currently using its e-commerce seller ecosystem has sparked a healthy debate within the logistics industry about whether the services represent a threat to third-party logistics providers (3PLs). On one side of that debate are mostly transportation and logistics veterans who suggest the announcement is primarily marketing — a neat and more digestible packaging of offerings that Amazon has long provided as individual services, such as warehousing, fulfillment, and brokered and for-hire transportation. <div class="wrapper-narrow float-right-element"><img src="/images/phoenix/6215654_0.1.jpg"></img></div>On the other side are those who think Amazon’s foray into diversified logistics is taking shape in a way that threatens everyone from integrators like UPS and FedEx to mom-and-pop forwarders and freight brokers to supply chain software vendors. “I’m laughing at all the ‘oohs’ and ‘aahs’ over something that is essentially just a marketing ploy,” Eric Williams, CEO of freight brokerage pricing vendor Beagl and a former transportation executive with Target, wrote on X. In a response to a question posted on X about whether Amazon had just “knee-capped” the forwarder Flexport, its CEO Ryan Petersen replied: “No, they’ve had this offering for many years.” One longtime logistics veteran who did not want to be identified described the announcement to the Journal of Commerce as “Groundhog Day,” given that it felt familiar. <h3>‘Execution engine’ </h3>Still, there are certainly watchers of the supply chain space who assert that Amazon’s move is more than just a repackaging of existing capabilities. “Amazon has built a fully integrated execution engine,” Brittain Ladd, a former Amazon executive and prolific analyst of the retail, supply chain and technology space, said in a LinkedIn post. “Not a platform. Not software. An integrated execution engine that also includes robotics and automation.” Ladd said sources within Amazon believe the company will be able to save third-party shippers a sizable percentage over what they might be paying now by using current combinations of transportation, contract logistics, final mile, and software partners. “I don’t care how long a 3PL has done business with a customer,” he said. “When customers learn that Amazon can reduce their costs...and transition their logistics needs into Amazon’s ecosystem with minimal disruption, they will choose Amazon.” Or will they? This type of offering has been tried by large retailers before. Walmart in the late 2000s toyed with the idea of offering third-party contract logistics services to other shippers, but the idea never gained enough traction to grow into a substantial business unit. More recently, American Eagle Outfitters cut bait on a third-party logistics venture designed to attract other shippers. It’s hard to pinpoint how and why these ventures didn’t succeed, but some part of it is attributable to the reticence of shippers to use competitors as logistics partners. <h3>Competitor tension </h3>Amazon is a different beast than American Eagle and even Walmart, but some of that competitive tension will surely remain. Although Amazon noted in its announcement that retail customers like Lands’ End and, ironically, American Eagle, are existing users of its supply chain services, it’s hard to imagine retailers that compete directly with Amazon’s e-commerce business engaging in a massive migration to its logistics offering. Some commenters made the link between the announcement Monday of Amazon Supply Chain Services (ASCS) and the wildly successful Amazon Web Services (AWS) cloud infrastructure business. Surely, the branding team at Amazon would surely love for ACSC to become as synonymous with logistics as AWS has become with cloud. In business circles, the much-loved trope is that Amazon takes its biggest cost centers and eventually turns them into revenue drivers. But is logistics like other parts of its business? Amazon has long blended the digital and physical worlds, but the fragmentation of freight transportation across modes is much more challenging than what it has faced in parcel or web hosting or even warehousing and fulfillment. Take, for example, Amazon’s non-vessel-operating common carrier (NVO) business. That unit is big enough to be the <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/journal-of-commerce-top-25-trans-pacific-nvos-in-2025-6182176">seventh-largest trans-Pacific NVO</a>, according to data from S&amp;P Global Market Intelligence, but it is not in any way dominant. <h3>Domestic focus </h3>What’s more, the announcement Monday suggests Amazon’s focus is largely on domestic services — brokerage, drayage, warehousing, final-mile, inventory management, and distribution. Within each of those categories, Amazon will contend with a set of competitors that range from large, diversified, and often well-capitalized players, to the normal cohort of smaller providers. Given the highly fragmented nature of logistics on the whole, and even within each subcategory, this will be a test of whether Amazon’s technological might and huge scale will overpower businesses that focus on people-to-people relationships first and foremost. The not-so-small matter of which shippers might be reluctant to turn over the keys to their supply chains to a company that has become famously dominant in e-commerce, fulfillment and web services overlaps with the fragmentation issue. Competitors in each service category will also be split into ones that cater to many shipper verticals and ones that focus on single verticals. In the announcement, Amazon specifically mentioned automotive, healthcare, electronics, apparel &amp; beauty, and food &amp; beverage, as key verticals it would target. Some of those verticals can be neatly split into manufacturer and retailer segments. Are retailers ready to give Amazon intricate information on their supplier networks or customs information? Or will Amazon find more joy in targeting upstream suppliers within the retail industry, or larger shippers in the industrial sector? <h3>‘Base load’ benefits </h3>Aside from just generating more revenue from its decade of investment in third-party logistics, the benefit to Amazon bundling its services is clear: By providing what one LinkedIn commenter called a “base load“ of third-party cargo across various modes, Amazon could essentially subsidize or even zero out the cost of moving its own freight. That “own” freight could take the form of volume from third-party sellers already on Amazon’s e-commerce platform or its own products that Amazon moves as an outright shipper itself. That’s a target worth chasing for a company with the scale and reach of Amazon. And it would give them yet another lever to distance themselves from competition across the various categories in which it participates. That even includes AWS, where it is competing with Google and Microsoft to collect monetizable logistics industry information. Still... “This is not like AWS,” Dave Ross, chief strategy officer of less-than-truckload carrier Roadrunner and a former equities analyst, wrote on LinkedIn. “There is no ‘move to the cloud’ when it comes to freight. Amazon is adding no new capacity. [It] just wants to be a middleman to replace your current middleman. I’ll take the ‘under’ on its overall impact to the transportation &amp; logistics industry after hype and headlines pass.” Contact Eric Johnson at <a href="mailto:eric.johnson@spglobal.com">eric.johnson@spglobal.com</a>. </div>

Amazon’s launch this week of a suite of supply chain services for shippers not currently using its e-commerce seller ecosystem has sparked a healthy debate within the logistics industry about whether the services represent a threat to third-party logistics providers (3PLs). On one side of that debate are mostly transportation and logistics veterans who suggest the announcement is primarily marketing — a neat and more digestible packaging of offerings that Amazon has long provided as individual services, such as warehousing, fulfillment, and brokered and for-hire transportation. On the other side are those who think Amazon’s foray into diversified logistics is taking shape in a way that threatens everyone from integrators like UPS and FedEx to mom-and-pop forwarders and freight brokers to supply chain software vendors. “I’m laughing at all the ‘oohs’ and ‘aahs’ over something that is essentially just a marketing ploy,” Eric Williams, CEO of freight brokerage pricing vendor Beagl and a former transportation executive with Target, wrote on X. In a response to a question posted on X about whether Amazon had just “knee-capped” the forwarder Flexport, its CEO Ryan Petersen replied: “No, they’ve had this offering for many years.” One longtime logistics veteran who did not want to be identified described the announcement to the Journal of Commerce as “Groundhog Day,” given that it felt familiar. ‘Execution engine’ Still, there are certainly watchers of the supply chain space who assert that Amazon’s move is more than just a repackaging of existing capabilities. “Amazon has built a fully integrated execution engine,” Brittain Ladd, a former Amazon executive and prolific analyst of the retail, supply chain and technology space, said in a LinkedIn post. “Not a platform. Not software. An integrated execution engine that also includes robotics and automation.” Ladd said sources within Amazon believe the company will be able to save third-party shippers a sizable percentage over what they might be paying now by using current combinations of transportation, contract logistics, final mile, and software partners. “I don’t care how long a 3PL has done business with a customer,” he said. “When customers learn that Amazon can reduce their costs...and transition their logistics needs into Amazon’s ecosystem with minimal disruption, they will choose Amazon.” Or will they? This type of offering has been tried by large retailers before. Walmart in the late 2000s toyed with the idea of offering third-party contract logistics services to other shippers, but the idea never gained enough traction to grow into a substantial business unit. More recently, American Eagle Outfitters cut bait on a third-party logistics venture designed to attract other shippers. It’s hard to pinpoint how and why these ventures didn’t succeed, but some part of it is attributable to the reticence of shippers to use competitors as logistics partners. Competitor tension Amazon is a different beast than American Eagle and even Walmart, but some of that competitive tension will surely remain. Although Amazon noted in its announcement that retail customers like Lands’ End and, ironically, American Eagle, are existing users of its supply chain services, it’s hard to imagine retailers that compete directly with Amazon’s e-commerce business engaging in a massive migration to its logistics offering. Some commenters made the link between the announcement Monday of Amazon Supply Chain Services (ASCS) and the wildly successful Amazon Web Services (AWS) cloud infrastructure business. Surely, the branding team at Amazon would surely love for ACSC to become as synonymous with logistics as AWS has become with cloud. In business circles, the much-loved trope is that Amazon takes its biggest cost centers and eventually turns them into revenue drivers. But is logistics like other parts of its business? Amazon has long blended the digital and physical worlds, but the fragmentation of freight transportation across modes is much more challenging than what it has faced in parcel or web hosting or even warehousing and fulfillment. Take, for example, Amazon’s non-vessel-operating common carrier (NVO) business. That unit is big enough to be the seventh-largest trans-Pacific NVO , according to data from S&P Global Market Intelligence, but it is not in any way dominant. Domestic focus What’s more, the announcement Monday suggests Amazon’s focus is largely on domestic services — brokerage, drayage, warehousing, final-mile, inventory management, and distribution. Within each of those categories, Amazon will contend with a set of competitors that range from large, diversified, and often well-capitalized players, to the normal cohort of smaller providers. Given the highly fragmented nature of logistics on the whole, and even within each subcategory, this will be a test of whether Amazon’s technological might and huge scale will overpower businesses that focus on people-to-people relationships first and foremost. The not-so-small matter of which shippers might be reluctant to turn over the keys to their supply chains to a company that has become famously dominant in e-commerce, fulfillment and web services overlaps with the fragmentation issue. Competitors in each service category will also be split into ones that cater to many shipper verticals and ones that focus on single verticals. In the announcement, Amazon specifically mentioned automotive, healthcare, electronics, apparel & beauty, and food & beverage, as key verticals it would target. Some of those verticals can be neatly split into manufacturer and retailer segments. Are retailers ready to give Amazon intricate information on their supplier networks or customs information? Or will Amazon find more joy in targeting upstream suppliers within the retail industry, or larger shippers in the industrial sector? ‘Base load’ benefits Aside from just generating more revenue from its decade of investment in third-party logistics, the benefit to Amazon bundling its services is clear: By providing what one LinkedIn commenter called a “base load“ of third-party cargo across various modes, Amazon could essentially subsidize or even zero out the cost of moving its own freight. That “own” freight could take the form of volume from third-party sellers already on Amazon’s e-commerce platform or its own products that Amazon moves as an outright shipper itself. That’s a target worth chasing for a company with the scale and reach of Amazon. And it would give them yet another lever to distance themselves from competition across the various categories in which it participates. That even includes AWS, where it is competing with Google and Microsoft to collect monetizable logistics industry information. Still... “This is not like AWS,” Dave Ross, chief strategy officer of less-than-truckload carrier Roadrunner and a former equities analyst, wrote on LinkedIn. “There is no ‘move to the cloud’ when it comes to freight. Amazon is adding no new capacity. [It] just wants to be a middleman to replace your current middleman. I’ll take the ‘under’ on its overall impact to the transportation & logistics industry after hype and headlines pass.” Contact Eric Johnson at eric.johnson@spglobal.com .

Supply chain

Amazon’s 3PL foray: marketing ploy or existential threat to 3PLs?

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">Rates to the US East Coast and Europe are down by as much as $500 per FEU in recent weeks as ocean carriers look to lift volumes that softened in April.</div>

Rates to the US East Coast and Europe are down by as much as $500 per FEU in recent weeks as ocean carriers look to lift volumes that softened in April.

<div class="phx-topic">Ocean rates out of India to the US and Europe have weakened in recent weeks as carriers face an uncertain demand environment amid geopolitical and macroeconomic challenges. Spot booking rates from West India to the US East Coast have fallen $400 to $500 per FEU from late-April levels, an analysis of new data collected by the Journal of Commerce from local freight forwarders indicates. Forwarder sources have pegged spot pricing by lead European carriers for loads from Nhava Sheva to New York at between $2,200 to $2,500 per FEU, while reporting even lower quotes of $2,000 to $2,200 from Asian liners. Sources say most India–USEC carriers have extended current short-term contract rates for bookings through May after abandoning rate increase plans for April and early May. But carriers continue to file fresh rate increase notices on the trade lane, including two separate hikes of $1,000 per container now planned by Hapag-Lloyd for May 15 and June 1. Platts, a sister company of the Journal of Commerce within S&amp;P Global, assessed India-USEC spot rates at $1,950 per FEU as of May 5, marking a 10% week-on-week decline. <div class="wrapper-narrow"><dynamic-object type="jocchartid" resource-id="893ffa5c-0a69-45c7-a555-425e44318711"></dynamic-object></div>Similarly, on the India-Europe trade lane, active carriers have pushed rates lower by up to $500 per FEU over the past two weeks in an effort to lift volumes as close as possible to their declared space allocations. Rates from Nhava Sheva to Felixstowe/London Gateway/Rotterdam now stand at around $2,000 per FEU, the analysis shows. Despite tactical price adjustments, cargo liftings for some of the recent West India-USEC/North Europe sailings have been lighter, with average capacity utilization near 70%, down from the 80% to 90% level normally fulfilled and/or targeted by carriers, according to the sources. Forwarders generally believe the rate pressure will persist through the second quarter, which is traditionally a slack period for Indian exports following the fiscal year-end rush in March. <div class="wrapper-narrow"><dynamic-object type="jocchartid" resource-id="ae1df54b-4003-46b5-a8c3-e0d35707e941"></dynamic-object></div>Apart from that seasonal factor, carriers’ heightened sales efforts to pick up additional volumes from India to compensate for the lack or limited availability of transshipment cargo out of the Middle East hubs has contributed to the downward rate shift, liner executives agree. “There has been a 20% bump in our Indian westbound allocations for the USEC since the Middle East war,” a sales executive at a major European liner told the Journal of Commerce. “We are also seeing consistent sailings across major services, so there is no pricing opportunity to gain from blanked capacity.” Corroborating that, industry data points to only two void calls across five India-USEC connections operated by Hapag-Lloyd, Mediterranean Shipping Co., CMA CGM and Maersk in the week 19 to 23 period. Data from PIERS, a sister product of the Journal of Commerce, shows Indian exports to the US East Coast jumped more than 20% in March from February, to 73,540 TEUs. Contact Bency Mathew at <a href="mailto:bencyvmathew@gmail.com">bencyvmathew@gmail.com</a>.</div>

Ocean rates out of India to the US and Europe have weakened in recent weeks as carriers face an uncertain demand environment amid geopolitical and macroeconomic challenges. Spot booking rates from West India to the US East Coast have fallen $400 to $500 per FEU from late-April levels, an analysis of new data collected by the Journal of Commerce from local freight forwarders indicates. Forwarder sources have pegged spot pricing by lead European carriers for loads from Nhava Sheva to New York at between $2,200 to $2,500 per FEU, while reporting even lower quotes of $2,000 to $2,200 from Asian liners. Sources say most India–USEC carriers have extended current short-term contract rates for bookings through May after abandoning rate increase plans for April and early May. But carriers continue to file fresh rate increase notices on the trade lane, including two separate hikes of $1,000 per container now planned by Hapag-Lloyd for May 15 and June 1. Platts, a sister company of the Journal of Commerce within S&P Global, assessed India-USEC spot rates at $1,950 per FEU as of May 5, marking a 10% week-on-week decline. Similarly, on the India-Europe trade lane, active carriers have pushed rates lower by up to $500 per FEU over the past two weeks in an effort to lift volumes as close as possible to their declared space allocations. Rates from Nhava Sheva to Felixstowe/London Gateway/Rotterdam now stand at around $2,000 per FEU, the analysis shows. Despite tactical price adjustments, cargo liftings for some of the recent West India-USEC/North Europe sailings have been lighter, with average capacity utilization near 70%, down from the 80% to 90% level normally fulfilled and/or targeted by carriers, according to the sources. Forwarders generally believe the rate pressure will persist through the second quarter, which is traditionally a slack period for Indian exports following the fiscal year-end rush in March. Apart from that seasonal factor, carriers’ heightened sales efforts to pick up additional volumes from India to compensate for the lack or limited availability of transshipment cargo out of the Middle East hubs has contributed to the downward rate shift, liner executives agree. “There has been a 20% bump in our Indian westbound allocations for the USEC since the Middle East war,” a sales executive at a major European liner told the Journal of Commerce. “We are also seeing consistent sailings across major services, so there is no pricing opportunity to gain from blanked capacity.” Corroborating that, industry data points to only two void calls across five India-USEC connections operated by Hapag-Lloyd, Mediterranean Shipping Co., CMA CGM and Maersk in the week 19 to 23 period. Data from PIERS, a sister product of the Journal of Commerce, shows Indian exports to the US East Coast jumped more than 20% in March from February, to 73,540 TEUs. Contact Bency Mathew at bencyvmathew@gmail.com .

Container lines

Forwarding

Asia-Europe

Container Shipping News

Maritime

Indian westbound rates under pressure amid demand uncertainty, overcapacity

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">The 14-day lead time now in place at Asian hubs would become a “global standard” for vessels seeking bunker fuel should the key waterway remain closed for another month, says S&amp;P Global’s Fotios Katsoulas.</div>

The 14-day lead time now in place at Asian hubs would become a “global standard” for vessels seeking bunker fuel should the key waterway remain closed for another month, says S&P Global’s Fotios Katsoulas.

<div class="phx-topic">Keeping the Strait of Hormuz closed for another month would expand the two-week bunker refueling lead times now required in Asia across the globe and create a new price floor for low-sulfur fuel oil, energy analysts at S&amp;P Global warn. Much of Asia’s bunker fuel is sourced from Persian Gulf countries and exported via Hormuz, which has been effectively closed since the Middle East war began Feb. 28. The availability of the fuel has tightened across key Asian hubs, where carriers report wait times of up to 15 days in Singapore and at Japanese ports. “The 14-day lead time will become the global standard, not just an Eastern one,” Fotios Katsoulas, director and head of tankers, freight and alternative fuels research at S&amp;P Global Energy, told the Journal of Commerce. “We anticipate a permanent price floor for very low-sulfur fuel oil (VLSFO) in Asia as the cost of rerouting supply from the US and Europe becomes baked into the local market.” Katsoulas said the ongoing closure of the Strait of Hormuz will also lead to refining imbalances and potentially force a shift in production away from marine fuels toward higher-value distillates such as jet fuel and diesel, further strangling bunker availability. <h3>Uptick in satellite fuel hub activity </h3>While the regional nature of the conflict may be having a limited effect on major container shipping trade lanes, about 20% of the world’s oil and gas exports are moved via Hormuz, and its closure is being acutely felt at key bunkering hubs. Katsoulas said as Singapore and Fujairah in the UAE become increasingly difficult to navigate, there has been a significant uptick in activity at satellite hubs. Chinese ports at Zhoushan and Hong Kong are acting as overflow valves for North Asian traffic, while Port Klang and Tanjung Pelepas in Malaysia are seeing a surge in bunker demand from container lines that traditionally would have topped off in Singapore. Port Louis in Mauritius is emerging as a vital pit stop for vessels making long-haul voyages to and from Asia around the Cape of Good Hope in southern Africa, although the fast-growing demand has seen lead times there jump to more than 10 days. But Katsoulas said the most significant change in container line behavior has been a shift toward what he labeled “extreme tankering.” “Lines are no longer looking for the cheapest fuel; they are looking for the highest volume per call,” he said. “We see vessels maxing out their tanks in Rotterdam or the US Gulf — carrying a higher fuel load than is aerodynamically or economically optimal— to ensure they can bypass the volatility of the Indian Ocean and Southeast Asia entirely. “This heavy-lifting strategy is effectively a hedge against being caught in a dry port in the East,” Katsoulas added. S&amp;P Global is the parent company of the Journal of Commerce. <h3>‘Project Freedom’ paused </h3>The shifting bunker market dynamics come as a US initiative to free vessels stranded in the Persian Gulf has been paused, mere days after it began. In a social media post Wednesday, President Donald Trump said “Project Freedom,” announced Sunday, was put on hold because “great progress” was being made on a deal with Iran to end hostilities. The Pentagon estimated that about 22,500 mariners on 1,550 vessels were still trapped in the Persian Gulf. Jakob Larsen, chief safety and security officer at shipping association Bimco, called the suspension of Project Freedom so soon after its launch “a surprise.” “Changes announced at short notice or changes that are surprising, such as the sudden suspension of Project Freedom, are a challenge for shipowners attempting to assess the risks and planning for leaving the Persian Gulf,” Larsen said in a statement Wednesday. “While a few ships made it out safely while Project Freedom was in place, it was clear that transits without coordination with Iran entailed significant risk,” he added. Indeed, that was demonstrated Tuesday when a CMA CGM vessel was attacked while transiting the Strait of Hormuz. The carrier said in a statement that the attack on the CMA CGM San Antonio injured an undisclosed number of seafarers and damaged the vessel. “The injured crew members have been evacuated and are provided with the necessary medical care ... CMA CGM is closely monitoring the situation and remains fully mobilized alongside the crew,” the carrier said. Reuters reported that the vessel <a href="https://www.reuters.com/world/cma-cgm-container-ship-hit-strait-hormuz-injuring-crew-2026-05-06/">was hit by an “Iranian projectile”</a> while moving past the coast of Oman at night. The ongoing security concerns are keeping the waterway firmly out of bounds to commercial shipping. “The situation in and around the Strait of Hormuz remains uncertain,” Hapag-Lloyd said in an update Tuesday. “The safety of our crews and personnel remains our top priority. We will continue to avoid transiting the Strait of Hormuz for now and instead <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/hapag-lloyd-msc-to-use-feeders-to-restore-upper-persian-gulf-cargo-links-6214083">use third-party feeder services to serve Upper Gulf ports</a>.” Meanwhile, the US, alongside Bahrain, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Kuwait, and Qatar, on Tuesday presented a draft of a UN Security Council resolution defending freedom of navigation in the Strait of Hormuz. “The Islamic Republic of Iran continues to hold the world’s economy hostage with its efforts to close the Strait of Hormuz, threats to attack ships in the Strait, laying of sea mines that pose a danger to shipping, and attempts to charge tolls for the world’s most important waterway,” US Secretary of State Marco Rubio said in a statement announcing the draft resolution. The resolution requires Iran to cease attacks on ships, and to stop laying mines and applying tolls on vessels using Hormuz. It also demands that Iran disclose the number and location of the mines it has laid and cooperate with efforts to remove them, while also supporting the creation of a humanitarian corridor. The US expects the Security Council to vote on the resolution “in the next couple of days.” Contact Greg Knowler at <a href="mailto:greg.knowler@spglobal.com">greg.knowler@spglobal.com</a>. </div>

Keeping the Strait of Hormuz closed for another month would expand the two-week bunker refueling lead times now required in Asia across the globe and create a new price floor for low-sulfur fuel oil, energy analysts at S&P Global warn. Much of Asia’s bunker fuel is sourced from Persian Gulf countries and exported via Hormuz, which has been effectively closed since the Middle East war began Feb. 28. The availability of the fuel has tightened across key Asian hubs, where carriers report wait times of up to 15 days in Singapore and at Japanese ports. “The 14-day lead time will become the global standard, not just an Eastern one,” Fotios Katsoulas, director and head of tankers, freight and alternative fuels research at S&P Global Energy, told the Journal of Commerce. “We anticipate a permanent price floor for very low-sulfur fuel oil (VLSFO) in Asia as the cost of rerouting supply from the US and Europe becomes baked into the local market.” Katsoulas said the ongoing closure of the Strait of Hormuz will also lead to refining imbalances and potentially force a shift in production away from marine fuels toward higher-value distillates such as jet fuel and diesel, further strangling bunker availability. Uptick in satellite fuel hub activity While the regional nature of the conflict may be having a limited effect on major container shipping trade lanes, about 20% of the world’s oil and gas exports are moved via Hormuz, and its closure is being acutely felt at key bunkering hubs. Katsoulas said as Singapore and Fujairah in the UAE become increasingly difficult to navigate, there has been a significant uptick in activity at satellite hubs. Chinese ports at Zhoushan and Hong Kong are acting as overflow valves for North Asian traffic, while Port Klang and Tanjung Pelepas in Malaysia are seeing a surge in bunker demand from container lines that traditionally would have topped off in Singapore. Port Louis in Mauritius is emerging as a vital pit stop for vessels making long-haul voyages to and from Asia around the Cape of Good Hope in southern Africa, although the fast-growing demand has seen lead times there jump to more than 10 days. But Katsoulas said the most significant change in container line behavior has been a shift toward what he labeled “extreme tankering.” “Lines are no longer looking for the cheapest fuel; they are looking for the highest volume per call,” he said. “We see vessels maxing out their tanks in Rotterdam or the US Gulf — carrying a higher fuel load than is aerodynamically or economically optimal— to ensure they can bypass the volatility of the Indian Ocean and Southeast Asia entirely. “This heavy-lifting strategy is effectively a hedge against being caught in a dry port in the East,” Katsoulas added. S&P Global is the parent company of the Journal of Commerce. ‘Project Freedom’ paused The shifting bunker market dynamics come as a US initiative to free vessels stranded in the Persian Gulf has been paused, mere days after it began. In a social media post Wednesday, President Donald Trump said “Project Freedom,” announced Sunday, was put on hold because “great progress” was being made on a deal with Iran to end hostilities. The Pentagon estimated that about 22,500 mariners on 1,550 vessels were still trapped in the Persian Gulf. Jakob Larsen, chief safety and security officer at shipping association Bimco, called the suspension of Project Freedom so soon after its launch “a surprise.” “Changes announced at short notice or changes that are surprising, such as the sudden suspension of Project Freedom, are a challenge for shipowners attempting to assess the risks and planning for leaving the Persian Gulf,” Larsen said in a statement Wednesday. “While a few ships made it out safely while Project Freedom was in place, it was clear that transits without coordination with Iran entailed significant risk,” he added. Indeed, that was demonstrated Tuesday when a CMA CGM vessel was attacked while transiting the Strait of Hormuz. The carrier said in a statement that the attack on the CMA CGM San Antonio injured an undisclosed number of seafarers and damaged the vessel. “The injured crew members have been evacuated and are provided with the necessary medical care ... CMA CGM is closely monitoring the situation and remains fully mobilized alongside the crew,” the carrier said. Reuters reported that the vessel was hit by an “Iranian projectile” while moving past the coast of Oman at night. The ongoing security concerns are keeping the waterway firmly out of bounds to commercial shipping. “The situation in and around the Strait of Hormuz remains uncertain,” Hapag-Lloyd said in an update Tuesday. “The safety of our crews and personnel remains our top priority. We will continue to avoid transiting the Strait of Hormuz for now and instead use third-party feeder services to serve Upper Gulf ports .” Meanwhile, the US, alongside Bahrain, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Kuwait, and Qatar, on Tuesday presented a draft of a UN Security Council resolution defending freedom of navigation in the Strait of Hormuz. “The Islamic Republic of Iran continues to hold the world’s economy hostage with its efforts to close the Strait of Hormuz, threats to attack ships in the Strait, laying of sea mines that pose a danger to shipping, and attempts to charge tolls for the world’s most important waterway,” US Secretary of State Marco Rubio said in a statement announcing the draft resolution. The resolution requires Iran to cease attacks on ships, and to stop laying mines and applying tolls on vessels using Hormuz. It also demands that Iran disclose the number and location of the mines it has laid and cooperate with efforts to remove them, while also supporting the creation of a humanitarian corridor. The US expects the Security Council to vote on the resolution “in the next couple of days.” Contact Greg Knowler at greg.knowler@spglobal.com .

International ports

Ongoing Hormuz closure could expand bunker wait times globally: analyst

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">But the window to lock in those savings over long-haul trucking will shrink because railroads eventually will increase their spot and contract pricing, too.</div>

But the window to lock in those savings over long-haul trucking will shrink because railroads eventually will increase their spot and contract pricing, too.

<div class="phx-topic">US shippers saved a record 30.6% on spot market freight and 26.2% on contract loads in the first quarter by using domestic intermodal instead of long-haul trucking amid a rise in truckload spot rates, according to <a href="https://www.joc.com/resources/special-reports/intermodal-savings-index">the latest Journal of Commerce Intermodal Savings Index</a> (ISI).       For the second consecutive quarter, the spot market index was higher than the contract index. The window to lock in these record savings, however, will shrink as railroads eventually will increase their spot and contract pricing, too. Similar to motor carriers, railroads and intermodal providers have been unable to recover cost inflation in their intermodal operations for three years. Railroads and intermodal marketing companies (IMCs) have begun the repricing process, which typically lags full truckload by three to six months. Major asset-based IMCs are rejecting tenders, shedding low-margin freight, or taking other measures to limit their exposure to the shipments that they accepted in recent years to keep their containers full. As shippers face the prospect of losing guaranteed capacity, there are many who will agree to rate increases to keep product moving. The higher rates will also show up in annual contracts being negotiated in the second and third quarters. “In terms of pricing, the over-the-road market dropped much further than intermodal did, so, in terms of the degree of change, I am not sure we will see the same degree in Intermodal as over the road,” said Jim Filter, executive vice president of Schneider National, on an April 30 earnings call. “In terms of timing, typically we say about two quarters [lag], and from what we can see, we stay pretty consistent with that.” <div class="wrapper-narrow"><dynamic-object type="jocchartid" resource-id="9f0dff14-0731-4ad3-859c-d093757d1ed4"></dynamic-object></div>Domestic intermodal volume in March jumped 9.5% year over year, according to the Intermodal Association of North America (IANA). North American railroads hauled 2.19 million domestic containers in the first quarter, up 4% compared with a year ago, according to IANA. The results were slightly higher than the Journal of Commerce mid-range forecast of volume growth between 1% and 3%, due mostly to the unanticipated surge in March. “We are seeing increased demand in how [shippers] are thinking about intermodal and what they can allocate to intermodal,” Filter said. “Current fuel cost is making a difference, as well as [shippers’] anticipation of what capacity will look like later this year ... While there is plenty of box capacity, the real constraint in this industry is always dray capacity.” <h3>Rates on the way up </h3>The Spot ISI averaged 130.6 in the first quarter, up from 118.4 a year ago. The Contract ISI rose to 126.3 from 124.9 a year ago.     Index values above 100 indicate intermodal is the more cost-effective mode; the higher the index number, the greater the savings. A Spot ISI of 130.6 translates to a 30.6% savings on intermodal versus truckload, while a Contract ISI of 126.3 implies a 26.3% savings.     All calculations assume local drayage at origin and destination, so shippers with distribution centers more than 30 miles from the terminal may save significantly less than the index values.   Spot truckload rates in the first quarter jumped 19 cents sequentially to $2.34 per mile, including fuel, while spot intermodal rates rose 10 cents to $1.64 per mile on the same routes. Contract truckload rates surged 27 cents to $2.25 per mile, including fuel, while contract intermodal prices climbed 15 cents to $1.65 per mile on the same routes. Contract truckload rates, excluding fuel spikes, rose 4.6% year over year in the first quarter, while contract intermodal rates climbed 2.5% year over year on the same lanes. In terms of raw dollars, intermodal shippers saved an average of $1,025 per container on the spot market in the first quarter compared with truckload, and $900 per box on the contract market. In the first quarter of 2025, the average spot intermodal load saved $675 per container, with the contract load saving $830.   <h3>Service will be put to the test </h3>The coming months will be the first major stress test for the railroads and the drayage networks of the IMCs since the service meltdowns during the pandemic-related freight surge. Multiple shippers have told the Journal of Commerce that on-time pickups and deliveries slipped in March, with their intermodal partners citing dray capacity as a root cause. The pressure isn’t likely to dissipate anytime soon. The  Journal of Commerce forecasts that domestic intermodal volume will grow between 3% and 4.5% year over year in the second quarter. Using advanced statistical analysis, the Journal of Commerce forecasts a 98% probability that volumes will exceed the 2.12 million loads hauled in the second quarter of 2025. The average intermodal train speed among US railroads was 2.7% faster year to date through the end of April compared with the same period a year ago, according to the US Surface Transportation Board. That came as the number of rail cars carrying containers that idled for more than 48 hours through the first four months of the year declined 14% compared with a year ago. Both data points show that, for now, intermodal trains are moving quickly through their service networks, and the handoffs between railroads and trucks remain fluid at most US rail hubs. Contact Ari Ashe at <a href="mailto:ari.ashe@spglobal.com">ari.ashe@spglobal.com</a>.       The data behind the Contract ISI and Spot ISI is available to Journal of Commerce subscribers with a Gold-tier subscription. </div>

US shippers saved a record 30.6% on spot market freight and 26.2% on contract loads in the first quarter by using domestic intermodal instead of long-haul trucking amid a rise in truckload spot rates, according to the latest Journal of Commerce Intermodal Savings Index  (ISI).       For the second consecutive quarter, the spot market index was higher than the contract index. The window to lock in these record savings, however, will shrink as railroads eventually will increase their spot and contract pricing, too. Similar to motor carriers, railroads and intermodal providers have been unable to recover cost inflation in their intermodal operations for three years. Railroads and intermodal marketing companies (IMCs) have begun the repricing process, which typically lags full truckload by three to six months. Major asset-based IMCs are rejecting tenders, shedding low-margin freight, or taking other measures to limit their exposure to the shipments that they accepted in recent years to keep their containers full. As shippers face the prospect of losing guaranteed capacity, there are many who will agree to rate increases to keep product moving. The higher rates will also show up in annual contracts being negotiated in the second and third quarters. “In terms of pricing, the over-the-road market dropped much further than intermodal did, so, in terms of the degree of change, I am not sure we will see the same degree in Intermodal as over the road,” said Jim Filter, executive vice president of Schneider National, on an April 30 earnings call. “In terms of timing, typically we say about two quarters [lag], and from what we can see, we stay pretty consistent with that.” Domestic intermodal volume in March jumped 9.5% year over year, according to the Intermodal Association of North America (IANA). North American railroads hauled 2.19 million domestic containers in the first quarter, up 4% compared with a year ago, according to IANA. The results were slightly higher than the Journal of Commerce mid-range forecast of volume growth between 1% and 3%, due mostly to the unanticipated surge in March. “We are seeing increased demand in how [shippers] are thinking about intermodal and what they can allocate to intermodal,” Filter said. “Current fuel cost is making a difference, as well as [shippers’] anticipation of what capacity will look like later this year ... While there is plenty of box capacity, the real constraint in this industry is always dray capacity.” Rates on the way up The Spot ISI averaged 130.6 in the first quarter, up from 118.4 a year ago. The Contract ISI rose to 126.3 from 124.9 a year ago.     Index values above 100 indicate intermodal is the more cost-effective mode; the higher the index number, the greater the savings. A Spot ISI of 130.6 translates to a 30.6% savings on intermodal versus truckload, while a Contract ISI of 126.3 implies a 26.3% savings.     All calculations assume local drayage at origin and destination, so shippers with distribution centers more than 30 miles from the terminal may save significantly less than the index values.   Spot truckload rates in the first quarter jumped 19 cents sequentially to $2.34 per mile, including fuel, while spot intermodal rates rose 10 cents to $1.64 per mile on the same routes. Contract truckload rates surged 27 cents to $2.25 per mile, including fuel, while contract intermodal prices climbed 15 cents to $1.65 per mile on the same routes. Contract truckload rates, excluding fuel spikes, rose 4.6% year over year in the first quarter, while contract intermodal rates climbed 2.5% year over year on the same lanes. In terms of raw dollars, intermodal shippers saved an average of $1,025 per container on the spot market in the first quarter compared with truckload, and $900 per box on the contract market. In the first quarter of 2025, the average spot intermodal load saved $675 per container, with the contract load saving $830.   Service will be put to the test The coming months will be the first major stress test for the railroads and the drayage networks of the IMCs since the service meltdowns during the pandemic-related freight surge. Multiple shippers have told the Journal of Commerce that on-time pickups and deliveries slipped in March, with their intermodal partners citing dray capacity as a root cause. The pressure isn’t likely to dissipate anytime soon. The  Journal of Commerce forecasts that domestic intermodal volume will grow between 3% and 4.5% year over year in the second quarter. Using advanced statistical analysis, the Journal of Commerce forecasts a 98% probability that volumes will exceed the 2.12 million loads hauled in the second quarter of 2025. The average intermodal train speed among US railroads was 2.7% faster year to date through the end of April compared with the same period a year ago, according to the US Surface Transportation Board. That came as the number of rail cars carrying containers that idled for more than 48 hours through the first four months of the year declined 14% compared with a year ago. Both data points show that, for now, intermodal trains are moving quickly through their service networks, and the handoffs between railroads and trucks remain fluid at most US rail hubs. Contact Ari Ashe at ari.ashe@spglobal.com .       The data behind the Contract ISI and Spot ISI is available to Journal of Commerce subscribers with a Gold-tier subscription.

Rail News

North-American rail

Surface

Shippers banked record discounts via intermodal in Q1: ISI

Use code GTT26W at checkout and save $900 on first year of an annual Gold subscription!

Upgrade Subscription - Gold Trials

Become a Gold Subscriber and Save!

Arm your team with the most trusted information portal for the international container shipping industry.

Group Subscriptions - Wide Box

Get into a group subscription today

Use code SSFTW30 at checkout to save 30% on a Silver or Silver Plus annual subscription! 

Subscribe Now - FT to S/SP - Wide Box

SPRING SALE!

Use code GW595 and upgrade to Gold for just $595! Valid for first year of subscription.

Upgrade Subscription - S/SP to Gold - Wide Box

SAVE $900 ON A GOLD SUBSCRIPTION

Use code SSLW30 at checkout and save 30% on an annual Silver or Silver Plus subscription!

Subscribe Now - Anonymous to S/SP - Wide Box

Access Journal of Commerce content for 30 days

Free Trial - Wide Box

START A FREE TRIAL TODAY

Use code SSGFTW895 at checkout to save $600 on first year of a Gold subscription!

Subscribe Now - FT to Gold - Wide Box

Use code SSLW895 at checkout and save $600 on first year of a Gold subscription!

Subscribe Now - Anonymous to Gold - Wide Box

SPRING SALE: Use code SSFTW30 to save 30% on first year of a Silver or Silver Plus annual subscription!


Subscribe Now - FT to S/SP - Offer Box

Subscribe and Save

GET INTO A GROUP SUBSCRIPTION: Arm your team with unlimited Journal of Commerce content

Group Subscriptions - Offer Box

Group Subscriptions

SPRING SALE: Use code SSLW30 at checkout and save 30% on an annual Silver or Silver Plus subscription!

Subscribe Now - Anonymous to S/SP - Offer Box

SUBSCRIBE TODAY

UPGRADE TO GOLD AND SAVE: Use code GTT26W at checkout and save $900 on first year of a Gold subscription!

Upgrade Subscription

SPRING SALE: Use code SSLW895 at checkout and save $600 on an annual Gold subscription!

Subscribe Now - Anonymous to Gold - Offer Box

SAVE $900 ON A GOLD SUBSCRIPTION: Use code GW595 and upgrade to Gold for just $595! Valid on first year of subscription.

Upgrade Subscription - S/SP to Gold - Offer Box

SPRING SALE: Use code SSGFTW895 and save $600 on the first year of a Gold subscription!

Subscribe Now - FT to Gold - Offer Box

SUBSCRIBE AND SAVE

A must-attend conference for shippers & logistics providers moving goods inland

Inland Conference - Rectangle Box

Attend Inland26

Monthly publication providing an editorial deep dive into global supply chain news

Journal of Commerce Magazine - Rectangle Box

Journal of Commerce Magazine

A premium access index of savings using domestic intermodal vs. OTR 

ISI Report - Rectangle Box

Intermodal Savings Index

An in-depth analysis of transport trends in the multipurpose and heavy-lift fleet segment

Breakbulk Report - Rectangle Box

Breakbulk Quarterly

An extensive dashboard of charts organized by trade lane, mode, and topic

Gateway - Rectangle Box

Gateway

Customers scoring their intermodal partners to identify the best service providers

Intermodal Service Scorecard - Rectangle Box

Intermodal Service Scorecard

A premium access outlook critical to shippers and transportation providers

QI Report - Rectangle Box

Quarterly Intelligence

Explore today’s cutting-edge global logistics technology news and analysis by the Journal of Commerce. Coverage includes logistics technology startups, logistics technology solutions, venture capital, management and impact, freight forwarder technology and the latest supply chain and logistics technology.

Our logistics technology news include logistics technology startups, solutions, and the impact of technology on logistics and supply chain management.

Logistics Technology News | Journal of Commerce

The Journal of Commerce’s supply chain news and analysis impacting the management of end-to-end supply chains reports on supply chain strategies, cargo visibility, inventory trends, sourcing, customs certification and contract logistics. Supply chain news coverage also delves into refrigerated shipping advancements and management of inventory status, regulatory updates and government funding projects.

Stay informed with the latest regulation news and trade updates. Explore comprehensive transportation news and trade regulations today.

Transport, Trade and Regulation News | Journal of Commerce

Transport, Trade and Regulation News

A thorough cool cargoes news by Journal of Commerce. Learn about the latest trends in refrigerated cargo transportation, weight capacity, technology, and more.

Cool Cargo News | Journal of Commerce

Cool Cargo News

Journal of Commerce keeps you informed on the latest last mile news with comprehensive coverage of carriers, logistics, and last mile transportation solutions.

Last Mile News | Journal of Commerce

Last Mile News

Discover the latest industrial real estate news and trends. Covering projects, real estate supply chain, logistics, pricing, cross dock facilities, and more.

Industrial Real Estate News | Journal of Commerce

Industrial Real Estate News

Stay updated on supply chain strategies, cargo visibility, inventory trends and more with our comprehensive supply chain news and analysis.

Latest News

More News & Analysis

US onshore wind halt deals latest blow for project cargo

Amazon’s 3PL foray: marketing ploy or existential threat to 3PLs?

Indian westbound rates under pressure amid demand uncertainty, overcapacity