CMA CGM has just published its Q2 results—and the biggest takeaway isn’t the headline numbers.

Q1 showed higher shipping volumes but lower group EBITDA.

Q2 reversed that trend.

But not across the whole group.

The most important signal is not the 31% increase in EBITDA.

It is where that recovery did—and did not—appear.

Here are the five signals that matter. 👇

Unless stated otherwise, all changes below compare Q2 2026 with Q2 2025.

1. Q2 reversed the Q1 pressure

Read more

There is too much noise around the new US tariffs.

The old emergency tariffs were struck down.

The White House replaced them almost immediately.

The new duties now touch virtually all US imports.

Yet container volumes have barely fallen—and shipping has seen another rush of early cargo.

So are tariffs reducing trade—or changing when, where and at what cost it moves?

Ten short answers explain what matters now.

1. What exactly changed?

Read more

Together, they capture how the container shipping landscape is evolving — and why it matters for decision-makers.

Written for executives who prefer context over noise.

The Houthis announced a blockade on Saudi-linked shipping on July 20.

Before any attack was confirmed, several tankers changed course.

Two days later, the Saudi-flagged tanker Encelia was hit after leaving Yanbu.

It was the first confirmed Houthi strike on Red Sea shipping since last September.

Ships can still pass through Bab el-Mandeb.

But the real question is no longer whether the route is open.

It is whether global carriers can still rely on it.

The return remains limited

Containership traffic through Bab el-Mandeb increased in H1/2026.

Read more

Maersk and CMA CGM are understood to be studying new ships of up to 24,000 TEU.

MSC is reported to have placed ten firm orders for 20,000 TEU ships, with options for ten more.

The new vessels may not arrive before 2030.

By then, Suez could be fully open again.

Or Cape routing could still be absorbing extra ships.

Carriers cannot know which.

But they may need to order before the answer is clear.

What are they really buying?

One route can change the fleet

Read more

Hapag-Lloyd has raised its 2026 earnings forecast.

Maersk did the same earlier.

Matson also expects a much stronger second quarter.

Yet spot freight rates are beginning to lose momentum.

WCI fell another 4% this week, marking a second consecutive weekly decline.

The signals are not contradictory.

They reflect two different points in the market cycle.

The first half was stronger than expected

Hapag-Lloyd now expects full-year EBITDA of $2.7bn–$3.7bn.

Read more

Hormuz disruption is already raising fuel costs far beyond the Gulf.

Between July 7 and 22, Singapore VLSFO rose more than 20% to around $800 per tonne.

LSMGO increased more than 28% to $1,200.

Prices also climbed in Zhoushan, Rotterdam and Fujairah.

But price is only part of the problem.

Some Singapore bunker deliveries now require up to 20 days’ notice.

The first shock is already global

The Gulf is a major supplier of bunker fuel to Asia.

Read more

The global containership fleet has reached almost 34m TEU, up 5.4% in a year.

Normally, more ships should mean more space and lower freight rates.

Yet carriers withdrew 10–15% of scheduled capacity on major east–west trades in H1/2026.

In 2019, the range was only 6–8%.

When a carrier blanks a sailing, that week’s departure—and its capacity—is removed from the trade.

The ships exist. But not all of their capacity reaches the market.

The gap is widening

Asia–US East Coast shows the change clearly.

Scheduled capacity grew 46% between 2019 and 2026.

But withdrawn capacity more than tripled, from 274,000 TEU to 863,000 TEU.

The same pattern appeared on Asia–Europe, Asia–Med and the US West Coast.

Some cancellations still come from congestion, delays or disrupted schedules.

But their wider use points to a structural change in how carriers manage supply.

Capacity now has two layers

The fleet sets the maximum capacity carriers could offer.

The schedule decides how much they actually offer each week.

Carriers can cancel a voyage when bookings weaken, move the cargo to another ship and keep the remaining vessels fuller.

This is faster than selling, scrapping or laying up ships.

It cannot remove the new capacity.

But it can delay when that capacity reaches the market.

The control is not unlimited

Blank sailings will not stay at the same level.

It’s expected ~40 cancellations between July 20 and August 23, equal to around 5% of scheduled departures.

The monthly total is forecast to fall from 55 in June to 37 in August.

With rates still more than 75% above last year, carriers have an incentive to restore sailings and add extra loaders.

The number of cancellations will change.

The ability to adjust supply will remain.

🧭 Maritime Analytica View

For shippers, fleet size and published schedules no longer tell the full story.

Actual departures show the space that can really be used.

For investors, the orderbook should not be translated directly into market supply.

For carriers, blank sailings protect utilisation—but too many weaken reliability and create room for competitors.

Blank sailings may soften the coming supply cycle.

They cannot cancel it.

The fleet sets the maximum capacity.

The schedule decides how much reaches the market.

Hormuz disruption pushed more US energy cargoes toward Panama.

Daily traffic rose close to the canal’s practical limit of 36–40 transits.

Auctioned slot prices nearly tripled, from around $135K to $400K.

One company reportedly paid $4M for a single passage.

The canal became more valuable—but its limits became more visible.

Panama’s answer is not simply more transits.

It is a bigger trade system around the canal.

Energy is changing the route

The canal already moves around 1m barrels of LPG per day, much of it from the US Gulf Coast to Asia.

Read more

More than 230 containerships were ordered in the first half of 2026.

Only around 25% had dual-fuel propulsion.

In the first half of 2025, the share was 62%.

At first glance, that looks like a move away from alternative fuels.

But the deeper change is in ship size.

The fuel transition is moving into a harder part of the fleet.

The order mix is changing

Recent ordering was dominated by ships above 10,000 TEU.

Read more

More than 1,100 containerships, totalling nearly 9m TEU, are due in 2027 and 2028.

That should make carriers cautious about buying ships now.

Yet second-hand prices remain firm.

Only ~130 ships changed hands in H1/2026, down from ~200 a year earlier.

The fall was not caused by weak demand.

Many owners simply preferred strong charter income to selling.

The future fleet is large. The ships available today are not.

The right ships are hard to find

Read more

There is too much noise around whether Hormuz is open.

Dubai has a more practical question:

How can trade keep moving when the strait becomes unreliable?

Jebel Ali handled around 15.6m TEU last year.

But every ocean-going ship calling there must first pass through Hormuz.

DP World is now exploring a new port and additional container capacity at Fujairah.

Fujairah sits outside the strait.

On paper, that gives Dubai a bypass.

But a second gateway does not automatically create a second trade system.

Can Dubai bypass Hormuz—or would the bottleneck simply move inland?

The plan

DP World is reportedly in talks to develop a new multipurpose port in Fujairah and a container terminal at the emirate’s existing harbour.

Read more

Freight rates have started to soften.

Some carriers are testing shorter Suez routings.

And nearly 9m TEU of new capacity is due in 2027–2028.

Yet containership charter rates remain exceptionally strong.

• 8,500-TEU vessel still commands around $76,000 per day.

• 5,600-TEU ship costs about $64,000.

• 4,000-TEU ship costs around $55,000.

Carriers are still competing for tonnage.

So why is the charter market refusing to turn?

Two prices. Two clocks.

Freight rates price the next container slot.

Read more

There is too much noise around freight rates.

Hormuz remains disrupted.

Carrier revenues are rising.

And spot rates are still far above last year.

Yet the market has now fallen for two consecutive weeks.

The reason is not that the crisis is over.

It is that the peak season may have arrived early—and may now be fading early.

The cargo did not disappear. It moved sooner.

Now carriers are trying to remove capacity before rates follow demand lower.

So has the 2026 peak already passed?

The market has started to turn

Read more

Together, they capture how the container shipping landscape is evolving — and why it matters for decision-makers.

Written for executives who prefer context over noise.

Container traffic is returning to the Red Sea.

Capacity through Bab el-Mandeb rose 32% in the first half.

Maersk is restoring Suez routings across three different service structures.

Yet June recorded only 229 containership transits.

Before the crisis, there were 545.

And only seven ships above 16,000 TEU used the route.

The return is real.

But the transit count is not the most important signal.

The bigger question is what happens to global capacity if Suez normalization accelerates.

Read more

Last year, Istanbul Bridge completed one China–Europe Arctic voyage in about 21 days.

This summer, Sea Legend plans eight sailings with seven ships.

The service will run from August 12 to September 30.

It is the first serious attempt at a near-weekly Arctic container service.

MSC, however, says the route is too risky and unnecessary.

So, is this a real liner product—or only a seasonal niche?

What has changed?

The ships range from 1,528 to 4,890 TEU.

Cargo from several Chinese ports will be consolidated at Ningbo-Zhoushan.

European coverage includes Felixstowe, Rotterdam, Wilhelmshaven and Gdynia.

The final vessel is expected in Europe on October 27.

The service is small compared with normal Asia–Europe networks.

But 8 scheduled departures test something one voyage cannot: repeatability.

Why could small ships work?

Asia–Europe services normally use ships of up to 24,000 TEU.

Sea Legend’s largest vessel carries only 4,890 TEU.

Smaller ships need less cargo to sail full.

They also make weekly frequency easier during a short Arctic season.

The target cargo includes EVs, batteries, solar equipment, and reefers.

This is a premium speed product, not a mass-market service.

Does the pricing make sense?

Transit time is advertised at around 20–22 days.

Forwarder quotes suggest rates of about $4500 per TEU.

That is roughly twice current ocean rates to Northern Europe.

But it is still around $500 cheaper than China–Europe rail.

The real product is not simply the Arctic route.

It is a time-saving option positioned between ocean freight and rail.

Why does MSC still say no?

MSC already has the fleet, scale and network to move cargo without the Arctic.

The shorter route solves no major network problem for the company.

But it adds ice risk, remote waters and limited rescue capacity.

It also brings Russian permits, possible icebreaker dependence and geopolitical exposure.

For Sea Legend, the route creates a product larger carriers do not offer.

For MSC, it adds risk without enough commercial value.

Is the route really greener?

Sea Legend says the shorter route could cut CO₂ emissions by around 50%.

A shorter distance can reduce fuel consumption.

But research suggests the advantage narrows with realistic speeds and routing.

Ships also emit black carbon, which accelerates Arctic melting.

A spill or breakdown would be difficult to manage in such remote waters.

Lower voyage emissions do not automatically make the route sustainable.

What will decide whether it works?

Schedule reliability comes first.

Sea Legend must also fill a ship every week.

Insurance, permits and Arctic support must still leave a margin.

All eight voyages must be completed safely.

The service must also return in 2027.

That test becomes harder if Suez services fully normalise and freight rates fall.

🧭 Maritime Analytica View

This is not an Arctic replacement for Suez.

It is a controlled test of a seasonal express niche.

Sea Legend is testing whether customers will pay more for speed.

MSC has decided that the speed is not worth the risk.

The key number is not the advertised 20-day transit time.

It is cargo utilisation after the full Arctic cost is included.

One ship proved the passage.

Eight sailings will test the product.

The Arctic becomes a liner route only if the ships arrive safely, close to schedule—and customers return next year.

Cargo is tracked in real time.

Payments move in seconds.

Data flows across global systems.

But original trade documents can still spend 10–14 days inside a courier envelope.

An eBL can move in minutes.

So why is adoption still slower than it should be?

The technology is no longer the only barrier.

Misunderstanding is.

Here are 10 myths still slowing eBL adoption in 2026.

1️⃣ Myth: An eBL is just a PDF

Reality:

A normal PDF displays information.

An eBL must function as a digital original.

That means the current holder can be identified, control can be transferred, and the document’s integrity and history can be verified.

2️⃣ Myth: eBLs are only about speed

Reality:

Speed gets the attention.

Control creates the trust.

Who holds the original?

Who can transfer it?

How can the next party verify it?

That is the real foundation of an eBL.

3️⃣ Myth: Every party must join the same platform

Reality:

That model can become an adoption barrier.

Global trade involves carriers, forwarders, banks, shippers, consignees and agents using different systems.

Digital originals need to move across those counterparties — not remain trapped inside one closed network.

4️⃣ Myth: Banks will not accept digital trade documents

Reality:

Banks do not need paper for its own sake.

They need confidence in the document’s integrity, control, transfer history and legal context.

Acceptance depends on the governing law, document type and transaction structure — but live digital trade finance transactions are already happening.

5️⃣ Myth: eBLs are only relevant to large carriers

Reality:

Carriers are central to adoption.

But the operational pain is shared.

Freight forwarders chase documents.

Importers wait for cargo release.

Exporters face payment delays.

Banks manage document risk.

SMEs pay courier costs they can rarely absorb efficiently.

6️⃣ Myth: The import side is too complicated

Reality:

It can be complicated.

But that is not an argument for keeping paper.

It is an argument for making receipt, verification and transfer simpler for the consignee and every party that follows.

The receiver experience matters as much as the issuer experience.

7️⃣ Myth: Paper is safer

Reality:

Paper is familiar.

That does not make it safer.

It can be lost, damaged, delayed, copied or delivered to the wrong place.

Sometimes the cargo arrives before the original document does.

Digital originals replace physical possession with verifiable digital control.

8️⃣ Myth: Adoption must reach 100% before value appears

Reality:

Companies do not need to digitalise every shipment at once.

They can start with one customer.

One lane.

One carrier.

One document flow.

Value can begin long before the entire market is ready.

9️⃣ Myth: eBLs remove the bill of lading

Reality:

They do not remove the document.

They do not remove its commercial role.

The bill of lading can still act as evidence of the contract of carriage, receipt of the goods and, where applicable, a document of title.

What changes is how the original is created, controlled, transferred and verified.

🔟 Myth: This is only a shipping issue

Reality:

It is also a trade finance, logistics, documentation, working-capital and customer-experience issue.

A delayed original can slow cargo release.

It can delay payment.

It can create storage costs, administrative work and uncertainty across the entire transaction.

Where Enigio fits?

Enigio is built around a simple principle:

The digital original should move — not every user onto the same platform.

Only the issuer needs to be connected to Enigio.

The recipient can receive and manage the document without first becoming a customer or joining the same closed network.

The document remains familiar and human-readable, while also carrying structured data, transfer history and trusted verification.

Any document. All the data. To anyone.

🧭 Maritime Analytica — Final Words

The industry does not need another isolated digital layer.

It needs original trade documents that can move with the same speed, control and certainty as cargo, data and capital.

That will not happen by waiting for every company, bank and carrier to join the same platform.

It will happen when digital originals become easier to receive, verify and transfer than paper.

The next phase of eBL adoption will therefore be decided by practicality.

Not promises.

Not pilots alone.

Real workflows that work across real counterparties.

👉 Explore Enigio’s eBL solution

📧Interested? Just reply to this email.

In 2000,

Maersk had 644,000 TEU of fleet capacity.

CMA CGM had only 142,000 TEU.

Maersk controlled 20% of global capacity.

CMA CGM held just 3.5%.

Today,

Maersk has around 4.71m TEU.

CMA CGM has around 4.38m TEU.

The gap has narrowed to about 340,000 TEU.

And CMA CGM’s orderbook is around 557,000 TEU larger.

Rodolphe Saadé has set his sights on the number-two position by the end of 2027.

But the real question is not who ranks second.

It is what each company can turn scale into.

A gap closed over decades

Maersk did not stand still.

Read more

Hapag-Lloyd has sharply raised its 2026 outlook.

• EBITDA guidance moved from $1.1–3.1bn to $2.7–3.7bn.

• EBIT moved from a possible $1.5bn loss to a range of $0.1–1.1bn profit.

Demand is strong.

Freight rates have held up.

And the shares jumped.

But the most important signal is hidden inside the new range.

• The lower end rose by $1.6bn.

• The upper end rose by only $0.6bn.

So what exactly has Hapag-Lloyd become more confident about?

The downside changed most

This is not a call for unlimited upside.

Read more