<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">The Southern California mayors emphasized that their ports will remain competitive. </div>

The Southern California mayors emphasized that their ports will remain competitive.

<div>Long Beach mayor Robert Garcia, left, and Los Angeles mayor Eric Garcetti reaffirm their commitment to making port operations more environmentally sustainable.The mayors of Los Angeles and Long Beach this week reaffirmed the commitments of their ports to work toward adoption of zero-emission trucks and cargo-handling equipment and to further reduce pollution from vessels while continuing to grow the cargo base of the largest US port complex.This commitment to balance environmental sustainability with sound business practices, which has been an ongoing demand of port users and cargo owners, will be embodied in the latest version of the ports’ joint <a>Clean...

Long Beach mayor Robert Garcia, left, and Los Angeles mayor Eric Garcetti reaffirm their commitment to making port operations more environmentally sustainable. The mayors of Los Angeles and Long Beach this week reaffirmed the commitments of their ports to work toward adoption of zero-emission trucks and cargo-handling equipment and to further reduce pollution from vessels while continuing to grow the cargo base of the largest US port complex. This commitment to balance environmental sustainability with sound business practices, which has been an ongoing demand of port users and cargo owners, will be embodied in the latest version of the ports’ joint Clean Air Action Plan (CAAP) that should be finalized in November. “Our ports are the engines that power our economy. They must also be the forces that drive our region toward a greener, more sustainable future,” Los Angeles mayor Eric Garcetti said Monday when the two cities signed a joint declaration. “With the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach ranked as the nation’s two largest ports, it is crucial to double down on our commitment to combatting climate change by achieving the goals of the Paris Agreement and by committing to zero emissions goals for the Clean Air Action Plan,” said Long Beach mayor Robert Garcia. The mayors’ joint declaration came as Los Angeles and Long Beach are finalizing the third iteration of their landmark CAAP that was adopted in 2006 and updated in 2010. Port staff since late last year has been holding public meetings and gathering written comments from stakeholders and local communities on the final version of CAAP 3.0. Port staff intends to deliver the final version in November to the two harbor commissions for adoption, Rick Cameron, managing director of planning and environmental affairs at the Port of Long Beach, said Tuesday. The Southern California mayors emphasized that their ports will remain competitive despite the recent action by the Trump administration to pull the United States out of the Paris Climate Agreement , which has been adopted by almost 200 nations with input from many of the world’s top climatologists and the backing of the world’s leading and largest corporations. Cameron said that achieving a balance between environmental sustainability and cargo growth is crucial to the competitive position of the Southern California ports. “We don’t want to be the outlier,” he said. However, all ports at their state and local levels contend with the same pollution and health-risk issues that face Los Angeles-Long Beach, so they are also under pressure to reduce harmful emissions from port operations. In this latest revision of CAAP, the two greatest areas of concentration are trucks and cargo-handling equipment, where zero- and near-zero emission technologies have advanced the furthest. The ports’ clean-truck programs, which mandate the use of 2007 or newer model trucks, have reduced emissions by more than 90 percent compared with the pre-2007 model year trucks that formerly dominated harbor haulage and are still in widespread use at many other US ports. CAAP 3.0 intends to promote a zero-emission drayage fleet by 2035 as electric and battery-power technology is developed. The ports also intend to implement similar technology for cargo-handling equipment. As the Middle Harbor terminal in Long Beach and the TraPac terminal in Los Angeles complete their automation projects over the next two years, they will approach zero-emissions with their electric cargo-handling equipment. Automation is quite costly, however, so the ports are working with technology providers as they develop zero- and near-zero emission equipment for non-automated terminals, Cameron said. The ports have significantly reduced emissions from vessels at berth through mandatory electric plug-in technology (cold-ironing), and vessels in transit through slow-steaming requirements within coastal waters. Emissions from vessels in transit during the long voyages from Asia and other markets to the United States are being addressed by the low-sulfur fuel requirements of the International Maritime Organization that will take effect in 2020. Since those regulations are international in scope, the competitiveness of the Southern California ports will not be affected, he said. Cameron noted that the ports are also working to comply with regulatory requirements affecting freight transportation developed by the South Coast Air Quality Management District and the California Air Resources Board. The ports will also ensure that their stakeholders have access to any grants and other financial incentives that are available at the state level to foster compliance with California regulations, he said. Likewise, the ports continue to promote innovations through the technology advancement program under the CAAP, which provides financial assistance for development and testing of technologies that reduce emissions. Contact Bill Mongelluzzo at bill.mongelluzzo@ihsmarkit.com and follow him on Twitter: @billmongelluzzo .

North American ports

LA, Long Beach double down on clean ports goal

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">The 2025 result follows a familiar trend seen across the full-year financials reported so far by Maersk, Hapag-Lloyd and Ocean Network Express as the industry moves into an overcapacity-driven downcycle. </div>

The 2025 result follows a familiar trend seen across the full-year financials reported so far by Maersk, Hapag-Lloyd and Ocean Network Express as the industry moves into an overcapacity-driven downcycle.

Feature image

<div class="phx-topic">The sharply correcting container shipping market pulled down HMM’s 2025 earnings as a drop in average rates across its network offset an increase in volume, the South Korean carrier said Wednesday. It is a familiar trend seen across the full-year 2025 results reported so far by <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/gemini-benefits-face-looming-challenge-from-oversupplied-market-maersk-ceo-6164887">Maersk</a>, <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/fourth-quarter-rate-slump-drags-down-hapag-lloyds-2025-financials-6166755">Hapag-Lloyd</a> and <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/frontloading-drags-one-to-a-loss-in-its-fiscal-third-quarter-6161263">Ocean Network Express</a> as the carriers move into an overcapacity-driven downcycle. “A large volume of new container vessel deliveries is expected to result in oversupply, while demand growth remains weak, likely to exacerbate supply-demand imbalances,” HMM said in its results statement. The carrier’s total volume in 2025 reached 3.9 million TEUs, up 3.2% year over year. But the higher throughput was undermined by average revenue per TEU that fell 24.3% to $1,214. The declining rates saw HMM’s total revenue for the year sliding 6.9% to $7.5 billion, while operating profit dropped 58.4% to $220 million and net profit slid 50.3% to $1.3 billion. Although HMM’s fourth-quarter performance was a slight improvement on Q3, the weakening market saw key metrics decline significantly year over year. Fourth-quarter revenue of $1.86 billion was a drop of 14.2% year over year, operating profit fell 68.3% to $220 million and net profit of $250 million was down 59.5% compared to Q4 2024. Excess capacity in the market will continue to exert downward pressure on rate levels. The global container shipping order book sits near 10.7 million TEUs, or 32% of the current in-service fleet, according to Sea-web, a sister company of the Journal of Commerce within S&amp;P Global. Just over 1 million TEUs of capacity via ships above 10,000 TEUs is scheduled to be delivered this year. But 2.3 million TEUs is due for delivery in 2027, with another 3.4 million TEUs due to come online in 2028, equal to all the tonnage received in 2022 and 2023. Despite the growing supply-demand imbalance, analysts expect global container shipping volume growth of 2% to 4% in 2026. Maritime consultant Drewry has even raised the collective financial outlook for carriers this year from a $10 billion loss to a $1 billion profit. <h3>Hub-and-spoke network expansion </h3>In its outlook for the year, HMM announced plans to expand its hub-and-spoke network. Last October, the carrier <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/hmm-inks-25-billion-lng-container-ship-order-6098410">said it would spend $8 billion on eco-friendly vessels</a> by 2030 to boost its operational fleet to 130 container ships totaling 1.55 million TEUs. The investment is part of a $17 billion spending plan that also includes $3 billion on its logistics business with the acquisition of new container terminals and expanding existing facilities by 2030. HMM is part of the Premier Alliance with ONE and Yang Ming that operates or calls at terminals in the hubs of Felixstowe, Rotterdam, Hamburg, Le Havre, Algeciras and Singapore on the Asia-Europe trade; Piraeus, Istanbul, Damietta and Jeddah in the Mediterranean; and Los Angeles, Long Beach, Oakland, Kaohsiung, Ningbo, Shanghai, Pusan and Yantian on the trans-Pacific. HMM also said Wednesday it plans to strengthen low-emission services in a bid to increase market share and “improve cost structures through optimized feeder operations.” An area the Premier Alliance carriers will need to significantly improve on is schedule reliability, which was at 26% last year, according to <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/gemini-schedule-reliability-shows-sum-greater-than-its-parts-xeneta-6167423">Xeneta’s “Schedule Reliability Scorecard” for 2025</a>. Partners ONE and Yang Ming both saw individual on-time performance hit close to that mark, but HMM was only at a 15% on-time rate. Contact Greg Knowler at <a href="mailto:greg.knowler@spglobal.com">greg.knowler@spglobal.com</a>. </div>

The sharply correcting container shipping market pulled down HMM’s 2025 earnings as a drop in average rates across its network offset an increase in volume, the South Korean carrier said Wednesday. It is a familiar trend seen across the full-year 2025 results reported so far by Maersk , Hapag-Lloyd and Ocean Network Express as the carriers move into an overcapacity-driven downcycle. “A large volume of new container vessel deliveries is expected to result in oversupply, while demand growth remains weak, likely to exacerbate supply-demand imbalances,” HMM said in its results statement. The carrier’s total volume in 2025 reached 3.9 million TEUs, up 3.2% year over year. But the higher throughput was undermined by average revenue per TEU that fell 24.3% to $1,214. The declining rates saw HMM’s total revenue for the year sliding 6.9% to $7.5 billion, while operating profit dropped 58.4% to $220 million and net profit slid 50.3% to $1.3 billion. Although HMM’s fourth-quarter performance was a slight improvement on Q3, the weakening market saw key metrics decline significantly year over year. Fourth-quarter revenue of $1.86 billion was a drop of 14.2% year over year, operating profit fell 68.3% to $220 million and net profit of $250 million was down 59.5% compared to Q4 2024. Excess capacity in the market will continue to exert downward pressure on rate levels. The global container shipping order book sits near 10.7 million TEUs, or 32% of the current in-service fleet, according to Sea-web, a sister company of the Journal of Commerce within S&P Global. Just over 1 million TEUs of capacity via ships above 10,000 TEUs is scheduled to be delivered this year. But 2.3 million TEUs is due for delivery in 2027, with another 3.4 million TEUs due to come online in 2028, equal to all the tonnage received in 2022 and 2023. Despite the growing supply-demand imbalance, analysts expect global container shipping volume growth of 2% to 4% in 2026. Maritime consultant Drewry has even raised the collective financial outlook for carriers this year from a $10 billion loss to a $1 billion profit. Hub-and-spoke network expansion In its outlook for the year, HMM announced plans to expand its hub-and-spoke network. Last October, the carrier said it would spend $8 billion on eco-friendly vessels by 2030 to boost its operational fleet to 130 container ships totaling 1.55 million TEUs. The investment is part of a $17 billion spending plan that also includes $3 billion on its logistics business with the acquisition of new container terminals and expanding existing facilities by 2030. HMM is part of the Premier Alliance with ONE and Yang Ming that operates or calls at terminals in the hubs of Felixstowe, Rotterdam, Hamburg, Le Havre, Algeciras and Singapore on the Asia-Europe trade; Piraeus, Istanbul, Damietta and Jeddah in the Mediterranean; and Los Angeles, Long Beach, Oakland, Kaohsiung, Ningbo, Shanghai, Pusan and Yantian on the trans-Pacific. HMM also said Wednesday it plans to strengthen low-emission services in a bid to increase market share and “improve cost structures through optimized feeder operations.” An area the Premier Alliance carriers will need to significantly improve on is schedule reliability, which was at 26% last year, according to Xeneta’s “Schedule Reliability Scorecard” for 2025 . Partners ONE and Yang Ming both saw individual on-time performance hit close to that mark, but HMM was only at a 15% on-time rate. Contact Greg Knowler at greg.knowler@spglobal.com .

Container lines

Container Shipping News

Maritime

HMM profitability falls as carrier warns of growing supply-demand imbalance

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">Kevin Price, president of the port’s stevedoring services company Gateway Terminals, will join GPA in July as president and then add the CEO’s role in mid-2027.</div>

Kevin Price, president of the port’s stevedoring services company Gateway Terminals, will join GPA in July as president and then add the CEO’s role in mid-2027.

<div class="phx-topic">The Georgia Ports Authority (GPA) on Tuesday unveiled an 18-month succession plan that will see long-time CEO Griff Lynch step down in mid-2027 and replaced by a marine terminals veteran who will initially come aboard as GPA’s president this summer.Kevin Price, president of the Port of Savannah’s stevedoring services company Gateway Terminals, will join GPA in July as president and then add the CEO’s role in mid-2027, GPA said in a statement. Price will lead Savannah as it plans its next growth phase with the opening of a new container terminal in the next decade.“Georgia Ports’ long-term approach with its employees, customers, business partners and infrastructure investments are competitive differentiators,” Price said in the statement. Price has served as president of Gateway Terminals since 2022. Prior to that, he spent four years at stevedore Virginia International Terminals, where he rose to chief operating officer. His prior experience includes time at the former Global Container Terminals facility in New Jersey, and with Maersk and APM Terminals in their Northeast operations. Under Lynch, <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/lynch-to-succeed-foltz-as-georgia-ports-chief-5212877">who became chief executive of the port in 2016</a>, Savannah saw total container volumes handled go from 3.6 million TEUs to 5.7 million TEUs in 2025, a 4.5% annual average rate. During that time, the Port of Savannah <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/savannah-expands-with-2030-goal-of-9-million-teu-5222906">dredged its harbor to 47 feet</a> and modernized <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/savannah-project-reflects-growing-premium-for-us-berth-space-5243335">the Garden City Terminal, allowing it to handle three post-Panamax ships at once</a>. The GPA likewise built up rail capacity at Savannah with upgrades to <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/us-se-ports-prepping-more-growth-amid-continued-west-coast-diversions_20230306.html">the Mason Mega rail terminal that allowed it to handle 1 million container lifts annually</a>, and the <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/us-southeast-ports-expand-intermodal-rail-reach-5245618">completion of the Appalachian Regional Port in 2018</a> and expected completion this year of <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/ns-to-eliminate-midwest-service-from-charleston-savannah-due-to-low-volumes-5200097">the Blue Ridge Connector inland port</a>. Along with finishing the Blue Ridge Connector, the GPA’s near-term plans include opening two new container berths at its Ocean Terminal by 2027. The GPA is also working with the state to increase the air clearance for ships on the Savannah River by raising the Talmadge Bridge. The GPA said in its most recent annual report that it expects container volume to increase just over 45% through 2035. That equates to a 3.7% average annual growth rate that would put Savannah’s volumes at 8.3 million TEUs over the next decade. To handle that growth, the GPA is looking to secure a permit for the construction of the Savannah Container Terminal on Tybee Island at the mouth of the Savannah River. The terminal, which would have berths for three large vessels, is targeted for completion in 2032 at a cost of approximately $4.5 billion. Contact Michael Angell at <a href="mailto: michael.angell@spglobal.com">michael.angell@spglobal.com</a>. </div>

The Georgia Ports Authority (GPA) on Tuesday unveiled an 18-month succession plan that will see long-time CEO Griff Lynch step down in mid-2027 and replaced by a marine terminals veteran who will initially come aboard as GPA’s president this summer. Kevin Price, president of the Port of Savannah’s stevedoring services company Gateway Terminals, will join GPA in July as president and then add the CEO’s role in mid-2027, GPA said in a statement. Price will lead Savannah as it plans its next growth phase with the opening of a new container terminal in the next decade. “Georgia Ports’ long-term approach with its employees, customers, business partners and infrastructure investments are competitive differentiators,” Price said in the statement. Price has served as president of Gateway Terminals since 2022. Prior to that, he spent four years at stevedore Virginia International Terminals, where he rose to chief operating officer. His prior experience includes time at the former Global Container Terminals facility in New Jersey, and with Maersk and APM Terminals in their Northeast operations. Under Lynch, who became chief executive of the port in 2016 , Savannah saw total container volumes handled go from 3.6 million TEUs to 5.7 million TEUs in 2025, a 4.5% annual average rate. During that time, the Port of Savannah dredged its harbor to 47 feet and modernized the Garden City Terminal, allowing it to handle three post-Panamax ships at once . The GPA likewise built up rail capacity at Savannah with upgrades to the Mason Mega rail terminal that allowed it to handle 1 million container lifts annually , and the completion of the Appalachian Regional Port in 2018 and expected completion this year of the Blue Ridge Connector inland port . Along with finishing the Blue Ridge Connector, the GPA’s near-term plans include opening two new container berths at its Ocean Terminal by 2027. The GPA is also working with the state to increase the air clearance for ships on the Savannah River by raising the Talmadge Bridge. The GPA said in its most recent annual report that it expects container volume to increase just over 45% through 2035. That equates to a 3.7% average annual growth rate that would put Savannah’s volumes at 8.3 million TEUs over the next decade. To handle that growth, the GPA is looking to secure a permit for the construction of the Savannah Container Terminal on Tybee Island at the mouth of the Savannah River. The terminal, which would have berths for three large vessels, is targeted for completion in 2032 at a cost of approximately $4.5 billion. Contact Michael Angell at michael.angell@spglobal.com .

Port infrastructure

Marine terminals

GPA names next CEO as Savannah readies for new growth phase

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">Xeneta’s “Schedule Reliability Scorecard” for 2025 showed Maersk and Hapag-Lloyd are more reliable under Gemini than in standalone services, while other alliances showed uneven performance among partners. </div>

Xeneta’s “Schedule Reliability Scorecard” for 2025 showed Maersk and Hapag-Lloyd are more reliable under Gemini than in standalone services, while other alliances showed uneven performance among partners.

<div class="phx-topic">Maersk and Hapag-Lloyd broke further away from other ocean carriers in on-time performance in 2025, although vessels under their new Gemini Cooperation alliance showed better reliability than their standalone services, data from Xeneta shows. Most other carriers saw performance remaining flat last year, with reliability varying among other alliances. Xeneta’s “Schedule Reliability Scorecard” for 2025 showed that Maersk saw 56% of all its ships arrive on time last year, with an average delay of two days. That is up from the 37% on-time performance and average two-and-half day delay reported at the end of 2024 by eeSea, which Xeneta acquired last August. Meanwhile, second-place Hapag-Lloyd also saw improvement in its 2025 overall reliability, Xeneta data showed, with 52% of all vessels arriving on time and an average delay of three days. At the end of 2024, Hapag-Lloyd saw only about a fifth of its ships arriving on time with an average delay of close to five days. The gain for each carrier stems from the jointly-operated services under the Gemini partnership, with vessels in the alliance hitting 81% schedule reliability. But Xeneta said the performance data shows “the reliability of their non-alliance partnerships generally falls short of Gemini’s optimized structure.”The average delay days for Maersk and Hapag-Lloyd are the lowest among the 12 global ocean carriers in Xeneta’s benchmark. Among that group, delays averaged about four-and-half days. Cosco Shipping and Wan Hai Lines saw average delays of just under three-and-half days, while HMM saw an average eight-and-half-day delay, the highest among the dozen carriers on Xeneta’s list. <h3>Alliance partners show mixed results</h3>Container alliances other than Gemini saw their overall performance in 2025 remain largely flat, Xeneta’s data showed. Individual ocean carrier performance within those alliances varied, which Xeneta said highlighted the need for shippers to know who is operating a particular service. Xeneta said Ocean Alliance had an overall on-time performance of 26% in 2025, which is a step up from the 20% reported for the alliance in 2024. The gain stems largely from improvements at CMA CGM, which saw on-time performance reach 33% in 2025 versus 27% in 2024, and Cosco Shipping, which reached 35% in 2025 compared with a 24% rate the year prior. Those gains appeared to offset performance from Ocean Alliance partner Evergreen Marine, which lagged with a 25% on-time performance last year. “This is valuable evidence for shippers to consider selecting CMA CGM or COSCO on their non-alliance offerings, or to potentially lean into Ocean Alliance services where they function as the primary vessel providers instead of [Evergreen],” Xeneta said.A similar dynamic played out with the Premier Alliance, which had an overall on-time performance of 26% last year. Partners Ocean Network Express and Yang Ming both saw individual on-time performance hit close to that mark, but HMM was only at a 15% on-time rate, according to Xeneta.Mediterranean Shipping Co. saw its on-time performance hit 25% last year with a nearly five-day average delay, “just a pace above the bottom of our rankings” Xeneta said. Zim Integrated Shipping Services, which has container space-sharing agreements with MSC on several lanes, saw last year’s on-time performance improve to 36%, up from 27% in 2024 and placing it in the top three for 2025. Contact Michael Angell at <a href="mailto: michael.angell@spglobal.com">michael.angell@spglobal.com</a>.</div>

Maersk and Hapag-Lloyd broke further away from other ocean carriers in on-time performance in 2025, although vessels under their new Gemini Cooperation alliance showed better reliability than their standalone services, data from Xeneta shows. Most other carriers saw performance remaining flat last year, with reliability varying among other alliances. Xeneta’s “Schedule Reliability Scorecard” for 2025 showed that Maersk saw 56% of all its ships arrive on time last year, with an average delay of two days. That is up from the 37% on-time performance and average two-and-half day delay reported at the end of 2024 by eeSea, which Xeneta acquired last August. Meanwhile, second-place Hapag-Lloyd also saw improvement in its 2025 overall reliability, Xeneta data showed, with 52% of all vessels arriving on time and an average delay of three days. At the end of 2024, Hapag-Lloyd saw only about a fifth of its ships arriving on time with an average delay of close to five days. The gain for each carrier stems from the jointly-operated services under the Gemini partnership, with vessels in the alliance hitting 81% schedule reliability. But Xeneta said the performance data shows “the reliability of their non-alliance partnerships generally falls short of Gemini’s optimized structure.” The average delay days for Maersk and Hapag-Lloyd are the lowest among the 12 global ocean carriers in Xeneta’s benchmark. Among that group, delays averaged about four-and-half days. Cosco Shipping and Wan Hai Lines saw average delays of just under three-and-half days, while HMM saw an average eight-and-half-day delay, the highest among the dozen carriers on Xeneta’s list. Alliance partners show mixed results Container alliances other than Gemini saw their overall performance in 2025 remain largely flat, Xeneta’s data showed. Individual ocean carrier performance within those alliances varied, which Xeneta said highlighted the need for shippers to know who is operating a particular service. Xeneta said Ocean Alliance had an overall on-time performance of 26% in 2025, which is a step up from the 20% reported for the alliance in 2024. The gain stems largely from improvements at CMA CGM, which saw on-time performance reach 33% in 2025 versus 27% in 2024, and Cosco Shipping, which reached 35% in 2025 compared with a 24% rate the year prior. Those gains appeared to offset performance from Ocean Alliance partner Evergreen Marine, which lagged with a 25% on-time performance last year. “This is valuable evidence for shippers to consider selecting CMA CGM or COSCO on their non-alliance offerings, or to potentially lean into Ocean Alliance services where they function as the primary vessel providers instead of [Evergreen],” Xeneta said. A similar dynamic played out with the Premier Alliance, which had an overall on-time performance of 26% last year. Partners Ocean Network Express and Yang Ming both saw individual on-time performance hit close to that mark, but HMM was only at a 15% on-time rate, according to Xeneta. Mediterranean Shipping Co. saw its on-time performance hit 25% last year with a nearly five-day average delay, “just a pace above the bottom of our rankings” Xeneta said. Zim Integrated Shipping Services, which has container space-sharing agreements with MSC on several lanes, saw last year’s on-time performance improve to 36%, up from 27% in 2024 and placing it in the top three for 2025. Contact Michael Angell at michael.angell@spglobal.com .

Asia-Europe

Trans-Pacific

Gemini schedule reliability shows sum greater than its parts: Xeneta  

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">Overall, more than 90% of respondents participating in the latest Journal of Commerce Intermodal Service Scorecard were satisfied with domestic intermodal service between July 1 and Dec. 31, 2025. </div>

Overall, more than 90% of respondents participating in the latest Journal of Commerce Intermodal Service Scorecard were satisfied with domestic intermodal service between July 1 and Dec. 31, 2025.

<div class="phx-topic">Union Pacific Railroad (UP) and J.B. Hunt Transport Services were voted the top railroad and domestic intermodal provider, respectively, for the second half of 2025, according to the latest Journal of Commerce <a href="https://www.joc.com/resources/special-reports/domestic-intermodal-service-scorecard">Intermodal Service Scorecard</a> released Tuesday. Overall, more than 90% of respondents were satisfied with domestic intermodal service between July 1 and Dec. 31, 2025, according to the survey of more than 145 shippers and asset-based and non-asset-based intermodal marketing companies (IMCs). The ISS is published twice a year. Railroads saw the biggest improvement, with 91.3% of respondents satisfied with performance during last year’s peak season, up from 77.5% during the same period of 2024. Intermodal providers overall, whether asset- or non-asset-based, also received higher scores. Just under 94% of shippers were satisfied with IMC performance, up from 90.9% during the peak season of 2024. The survey included 100 respondents who were shippers. “In the last six months our volume has been slipping, but Hunt has always provided sufficient equipment,” one shipper wrote in the survey. “They have gone so far as offering to reduce accessorial charges when we run into problems receiving loads at destination, which is a sign that they value our business.” <div class="wrapper-narrow"><dynamic-object type="jocchartid" resource-id="3f877148-7417-4744-b3a5-e66d957f4430"></dynamic-object></div>J.B. Hunt received 55.9% when shippers were asked to name the best IMC in the second half of 2025. Asset-light and non-asset IMCs came in second with 29% of the vote. That category encompasses asset-light providers such as Alliance Shippers and C.H. Robinson Worldwide, who own some containers, and pure non-asset IMCs such as Mode Transportation and Uber Freight, among many others. Shippers were asked to grade their IMC partners on a five-point scale, with five being the highest. J.B. Hunt received at least 4 out of 5 points in all categories except for pricing, while the asset-light and non-asset IMCs received at least 4 out of 5 in all categories except technology. J.B. Hunt received an overall grade of 4.6 out of 5, while the asset-light and non-asset IMCs received a score of 4.5. “It’s pretty rare when you can pick up the phone and be able to speak with the president of any company, but this is commonplace with InTek Freight and Logistics,” another shipper wrote. “We value long-term relationships with our vendors, and with InTek, it goes beyond a partnership; we feel like they are an extension of our transportation department.” Schneider received the second-best overall score among large asset-owning intermodal providers at 3.7 out of 5; the category consists of providers with more than 10,000 privately-owned containers. <h3>UP wins again for best railroad </h3>Union Pacific edged out rival BNSF Railway for the top railroad for the second consecutive survey, although the two railroads traded first and second place in all the key performance indicators (KPIs). When choosing among all the Class I railroads, 36.3% of IMCs rated UP as the best railroad, while BNSF received 20.5% of the vote. However, when the KPIs are included, the results show that the two railroads are virtually tied with one another atop the list of all railroads, outperforming the two eastern US railroads and two Canadian railroads. It’s the second consecutive survey where UP has outpaced most of its competitors, a stark change from only three years ago under former CEO Lance Fritz, who handed the reins over to current CEO Jim Vena in August 2023. In the last pre-Vena survey, only 17.1% of IMCs were satisfied with UP’s performance. In the latest survey, 80% were satisfied, up from 53.7% during the same period of 2024. UP received an overall score of 4 out of 5 points in the latest survey. BNSF received a 4.1 out of 5, although the difference was less than a tenth of a point. <div class="wrapper-narrow"><dynamic-object type="jocchartid" resource-id="6d0852c5-f4fb-408d-8368-5b064b1cbb8b"></dynamic-object></div>Canadian Pacific Kansas City (CPKC) struggled for the second consecutive survey, receiving an overall score of 2.7 out of 5 points, while 58.9% of respondents voted it the lowest-performing railroad. While IMCs generally praised CPKC on the high quality of its Mexico Midwest Express service between Mexico and Chicago, most respondents said the railroad struggled on other routes. Common complaints included the railroad providing good customer service for top partners such as Schneider in the US and Consolidated Fastfrate in Canada, but not paying enough attention to other IMCs. “CPKC is not customer-focused. Our marketing contact cannot help us with service issues,” one IMC wrote in the survey. “Working with the CPKC is very frustrating trying to get things done.” Contact Ari Ashe at <a href="mailto:ari.ashe@spglobal.com">ari.ashe@spglobal.com</a>. </div>

Union Pacific Railroad (UP) and J.B. Hunt Transport Services were voted the top railroad and domestic intermodal provider, respectively, for the second half of 2025, according to the latest Journal of Commerce Intermodal Service Scorecard released Tuesday. Overall, more than 90% of respondents were satisfied with domestic intermodal service between July 1 and Dec. 31, 2025, according to the survey of more than 145 shippers and asset-based and non-asset-based intermodal marketing companies (IMCs). The ISS is published twice a year. Railroads saw the biggest improvement, with 91.3% of respondents satisfied with performance during last year’s peak season, up from 77.5% during the same period of 2024. Intermodal providers overall, whether asset- or non-asset-based, also received higher scores. Just under 94% of shippers were satisfied with IMC performance, up from 90.9% during the peak season of 2024. The survey included 100 respondents who were shippers. “In the last six months our volume has been slipping, but Hunt has always provided sufficient equipment,” one shipper wrote in the survey. “They have gone so far as offering to reduce accessorial charges when we run into problems receiving loads at destination, which is a sign that they value our business.” J.B. Hunt received 55.9% when shippers were asked to name the best IMC in the second half of 2025. Asset-light and non-asset IMCs came in second with 29% of the vote. That category encompasses asset-light providers such as Alliance Shippers and C.H. Robinson Worldwide, who own some containers, and pure non-asset IMCs such as Mode Transportation and Uber Freight, among many others. Shippers were asked to grade their IMC partners on a five-point scale, with five being the highest. J.B. Hunt received at least 4 out of 5 points in all categories except for pricing, while the asset-light and non-asset IMCs received at least 4 out of 5 in all categories except technology. J.B. Hunt received an overall grade of 4.6 out of 5, while the asset-light and non-asset IMCs received a score of 4.5. “It’s pretty rare when you can pick up the phone and be able to speak with the president of any company, but this is commonplace with InTek Freight and Logistics,” another shipper wrote. “We value long-term relationships with our vendors, and with InTek, it goes beyond a partnership; we feel like they are an extension of our transportation department.” Schneider received the second-best overall score among large asset-owning intermodal providers at 3.7 out of 5; the category consists of providers with more than 10,000 privately-owned containers. UP wins again for best railroad Union Pacific edged out rival BNSF Railway for the top railroad for the second consecutive survey, although the two railroads traded first and second place in all the key performance indicators (KPIs). When choosing among all the Class I railroads, 36.3% of IMCs rated UP as the best railroad, while BNSF received 20.5% of the vote. However, when the KPIs are included, the results show that the two railroads are virtually tied with one another atop the list of all railroads, outperforming the two eastern US railroads and two Canadian railroads. It’s the second consecutive survey where UP has outpaced most of its competitors, a stark change from only three years ago under former CEO Lance Fritz, who handed the reins over to current CEO Jim Vena in August 2023. In the last pre-Vena survey, only 17.1% of IMCs were satisfied with UP’s performance. In the latest survey, 80% were satisfied, up from 53.7% during the same period of 2024. UP received an overall score of 4 out of 5 points in the latest survey. BNSF received a 4.1 out of 5, although the difference was less than a tenth of a point. Canadian Pacific Kansas City (CPKC) struggled for the second consecutive survey, receiving an overall score of 2.7 out of 5 points, while 58.9% of respondents voted it the lowest-performing railroad. While IMCs generally praised CPKC on the high quality of its Mexico Midwest Express service between Mexico and Chicago, most respondents said the railroad struggled on other routes. Common complaints included the railroad providing good customer service for top partners such as Schneider in the US and Consolidated Fastfrate in Canada, but not paying enough attention to other IMCs. “CPKC is not customer-focused. Our marketing contact cannot help us with service issues,” one IMC wrote in the survey. “Working with the CPKC is very frustrating trying to get things done.” Contact Ari Ashe at ari.ashe@spglobal.com .

Rail News

North-American rail

Intermodal providers

Surface

UP, J.B. Hunt voted best intermodal providers in H2 ’25: JOC survey

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">But the recommendations will not include guidance on handling empty container returns, as port stakeholders see it as a separate issue.</div>

But the recommendations will not include guidance on handling empty container returns, as port stakeholders see it as a separate issue.

<div class="phx-topic">A stakeholder group looking at truck appointment systems at Port of New York and New Jersey marine terminals is expected to release its recommendations this month, which steer clear of how those systems address empty container returns. The management of empty returns has been critical for the port’s truckers, but something that other stakeholders said was outside of the group’s legal limits. Beth Rooney, port director for the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, said at a state of the port event last week that one of her priorities in 2026 is drafting a plan for “moving forward” on 11 final recommendations from the Appointment Systems Working Group (ASWG). “We’re going to step out with draft work plans for how we as a council and hopefully many of you would be willing to help advance those initiatives,” Rooney said to event attendees. ASWG was formed in June 2024 under the auspices of the Council for Port (CPP) Performance, the Port Authority-led discussion group established in 2014 to address stakeholder concerns about cargo operations. The AWSG was formed because “appointment challenges and system outages have presented elevated traffic issues,” the CPP said in July 2024 meeting minutes. One of the main problems the working group identified was the difficulty some truckers face when making a double-move appointment for an empty container return and an import retrieval. The problem was especially bad in the wake of the pandemic due to the high number of empty containers left at the port. Rooney said that even though AWSG sought to include empty container returns in its draft recommendations, the final set will not include any references to the issue. Instead, those will be addressed in a separate set of recommendations. The commercial terms governing empty container handling by truckers became the main hangup for others in the AWSG. Marine terminal operators and ocean carriers also warned the group’s draft recommendations veered into legal and anti-trust issues by requiring marine terminals to offer empty return appointments or that ocean carriers compensate truckers for off-dock empty container returns. Sustainable Terminal Services, a consortium of NY-NJ terminal operators, said in a December letter the AWSG’s draft recommendations “raised significant legal and federal regulatory concerns” by imposing “commercial and financial terms and requirements on particular parties on a collective basis.” The Ocean Carrier Equipment Management Association (OCEMA) was also prepared to withhold support for the AWSG recommendations unless references to empty container returns were removed or a disclaimer was included to say the recommendations were not the CPP’s consensus view. “OCEMA remains committed to working with other stakeholders to find ways to create efficiencies and improve operations in the port,” OCEMA’s letter said. “If this is to be done successfully through the CPP, there needs to be clarity as to the scope of inquiry.” <h3>Off-dock empty returns </h3>The AWSG was formed in response to the growing pains stemming from the rollout of appointment systems, and especially how they impacted truckers during the pandemic. Port Liberty New Jersey rolled out a half-day appointment system in 2016, while APM Terminals started its full-day system in 2020. By November 2024, APM added the ability to make double-move appointments and reported gate processing improvements, CPP minutes show. By March 2025, APM reported truckers were using up to 80% of the available appointments for returning empty containers. APM’s ability to offer double-move appointments, though, depends on how much space it has for empty containers, which itself depends on how quickly they are removed by ocean carriers. To help manage its empty container inventories, APM also began directing some truckers to “off-dock empty storage” in February 2025, meeting minutes show. Truckers say directing empties to the site just outside the port district adds to traffic and makes it difficult to even meet single-move appointments. But Rooney said the recommendations can’t direct marine terminals on offer double-move appointments for all empties or require paying for an off-dock move. “The CPP has no authority to force anyone to do anything,” Rooney said. “That becomes a contractual issue that we can’t delve into.” Instead, the separate, sector-specific recommendations say ocean carriers should proactively and constantly manage their empty container inventory and regularly evacuate to ensure balance in the port area. Lisa Yakomin, president of the Association of Bi-State Motor Carriers, which represents the port’s drayage carriers, said in a statement to the Journal of Commerce that her group’s members look to bring the issue of empty container management before the Federal Maritime Commission and will look to have the issue addressed in standardized container handling contracts administered by the Intermodal Association of North America. Contact Michael Angell at <a href="mailto:michael.angell@spglobal.com">michael.angell@spglobal.com</a>. </div>

A stakeholder group looking at truck appointment systems at Port of New York and New Jersey marine terminals is expected to release its recommendations this month, which steer clear of how those systems address empty container returns. The management of empty returns has been critical for the port’s truckers, but something that other stakeholders said was outside of the group’s legal limits. Beth Rooney, port director for the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, said at a state of the port event last week that one of her priorities in 2026 is drafting a plan for “moving forward” on 11 final recommendations from the Appointment Systems Working Group (ASWG). “We’re going to step out with draft work plans for how we as a council and hopefully many of you would be willing to help advance those initiatives,” Rooney said to event attendees. ASWG was formed in June 2024 under the auspices of the Council for Port (CPP) Performance, the Port Authority-led discussion group established in 2014 to address stakeholder concerns about cargo operations. The AWSG was formed because “appointment challenges and system outages have presented elevated traffic issues,” the CPP said in July 2024 meeting minutes. One of the main problems the working group identified was the difficulty some truckers face when making a double-move appointment for an empty container return and an import retrieval. The problem was especially bad in the wake of the pandemic due to the high number of empty containers left at the port. Rooney said that even though AWSG sought to include empty container returns in its draft recommendations, the final set will not include any references to the issue. Instead, those will be addressed in a separate set of recommendations. The commercial terms governing empty container handling by truckers became the main hangup for others in the AWSG. Marine terminal operators and ocean carriers also warned the group’s draft recommendations veered into legal and anti-trust issues by requiring marine terminals to offer empty return appointments or that ocean carriers compensate truckers for off-dock empty container returns. Sustainable Terminal Services, a consortium of NY-NJ terminal operators, said in a December letter the AWSG’s draft recommendations “raised significant legal and federal regulatory concerns” by imposing “commercial and financial terms and requirements on particular parties on a collective basis.” The Ocean Carrier Equipment Management Association (OCEMA) was also prepared to withhold support for the AWSG recommendations unless references to empty container returns were removed or a disclaimer was included to say the recommendations were not the CPP’s consensus view. “OCEMA remains committed to working with other stakeholders to find ways to create efficiencies and improve operations in the port,” OCEMA’s letter said. “If this is to be done successfully through the CPP, there needs to be clarity as to the scope of inquiry.” Off-dock empty returns The AWSG was formed in response to the growing pains stemming from the rollout of appointment systems, and especially how they impacted truckers during the pandemic. Port Liberty New Jersey rolled out a half-day appointment system in 2016, while APM Terminals started its full-day system in 2020. By November 2024, APM added the ability to make double-move appointments and reported gate processing improvements, CPP minutes show. By March 2025, APM reported truckers were using up to 80% of the available appointments for returning empty containers. APM’s ability to offer double-move appointments, though, depends on how much space it has for empty containers, which itself depends on how quickly they are removed by ocean carriers. To help manage its empty container inventories, APM also began directing some truckers to “off-dock empty storage” in February 2025, meeting minutes show. Truckers say directing empties to the site just outside the port district adds to traffic and makes it difficult to even meet single-move appointments. But Rooney said the recommendations can’t direct marine terminals on offer double-move appointments for all empties or require paying for an off-dock move. “The CPP has no authority to force anyone to do anything,” Rooney said. “That becomes a contractual issue that we can’t delve into.” Instead, the separate, sector-specific recommendations say ocean carriers should proactively and constantly manage their empty container inventory and regularly evacuate to ensure balance in the port area. Lisa Yakomin, president of the Association of Bi-State Motor Carriers, which represents the port’s drayage carriers, said in a statement to the Journal of Commerce that her group’s members look to bring the issue of empty container management before the Federal Maritime Commission and will look to have the issue addressed in standardized container handling contracts administered by the Intermodal Association of North America. Contact Michael Angell at michael.angell@spglobal.com .

Port News

Drayage

NY-NJ port readying to guide terminals on truck appointment systems

Use code GTW595 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 FTW25 at checkout to save 25% on a Silver or Silver Plus annual subscription! 

Subscribe Now - FT to S/SP - Wide Box

SUBSCRIBE AND SAVE 25%

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

Choose a subscription plan that works best for you!

Subscribe Now - Anonymous to S/SP - Wide Box

SUBSCRIBE TODAY

Access Journal of Commerce content for 30 days

Free Trial - Wide Box

START A FREE TRIAL TODAY

Use code GW995 at checkout to save $500 on first year of a Gold subscription!

Subscribe Now - FT to Gold - Wide Box

SAVE $500 ON A GOLD SUBSCRIPTION

Subscribe Now - Anonymous to Gold - Wide Box

START A FREE TRIAL: Access Journal of Commerce content for 30 days

Free Trial - Offer Box

Free Trial

SUBSCRIBE AND SAVE 25%: Use code FTW25 to save 25% 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

SUBSCRIBE TODAY: Choose a subscription plan that works best for you!

Subscribe Now - Anonymous to S/SP - Offer Box

UPGRADE TO GOLD AND SAVE: Use code GTW595 at checkout and save $900 on first year of a Gold subscription!

Upgrade 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

SAVE $500 ON A GOLD SUBSCRIPTION: Use code GW995 and save $500 on the first year of a Gold subscription!

Subscribe Now - FT to Gold - Offer Box

SUBSCRIBE AND SAVE

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

The premier conference for the global container shipping and supply chain community

TPM Conference - Rectangle Box

Attend TPM26

The only editorially independent conference for the breakbulk & project cargo industry

Breakbulk Conference - Rectangle Box

Attend Breakbulk26

The latest port news from the Journal of Commerce spans the globe from North Carolina and Florida to Shanghai and Singapore. Port news includes port automation, terminal construction projects, the future of decarbonization and net-zero shipping, dredging, port hinterland connectivity, labor, disruption, port congestion and cargo flow.

International ports

Longshore labor

Breakbulk ports

Stay informed on port news worldwide with Journal of Commerce. From decarbonization to labor updates, get insights on global developments.

Port News | Journal of Commerce

The Journal of Commerce is the industry’s source for maritime news and analysis about ocean container shipping, logistics, supply chains, global shipping ports, shipping technology solutions and end-to-end connectivity. Coverage tracks the movement of containerized cargo — from origin to destination — handled by marine terminals in the US and abroad, depots, container ports, container lines, drayage, consignees and shippers, forwarders, non-vessel operating common carriers (NVOs) and off-dock warehousing providers, as well as pricing, capacity, volume and reliability on the trans-Pacific, Asia–Europe, North America–Caribbean, Central and South American and intra-Asia trades.

Discover comprehensive trucking news and trends with Journal of Commerce - from trucking LTL to regulation and trucking supply and demand.

Breakbulk News shipping | Journal of Commerce

Breakbulk News

Container shipping news and analysis of ocean container shipping, logistics, supply chains, technology and end-to-end connectivity.

Container Shipping News | Journal of Commerce

News and analysis of ocean containerized cargo movement, logistics, supply chains, technology, and end-to-end connectivity. Maritime news and analysis of containerized ocean cargo movement, breakbulk and roll-on and roll-off shipping from origin to destination.

Latest News

More News & Analysis

HMM profitability falls as carrier warns of growing supply-demand imbalance

GPA names next CEO as Savannah readies for new growth phase

Gemini schedule reliability shows sum greater than its parts: Xeneta