Structural divergence in the container shipping market: charter rates remain elevated, diverging from spot freight rates; Drewry predicts a correction cycle is imminent.

When Freight Rates and Charter Rates Diverge

The global container shipping market is experiencing a rare moment of divergence: spot freight rates have been falling from their highs, while charter rates remain firm, still about 200% above 2019 levels. According to the latest research by Drewry, this divergence is not simply a cyclical mismatch but a projection of deep structural adjustments in global supply chains onto the shipping market. More importantly, the British maritime consultancy believes this state of affairs will persist until the end of 2026, after which the market may see a significant correction.

For researchers observing the global trade and logistics system, this signal deserves to be interpreted over a longer cycle. The split between the charter market and spot freight rates is not merely a numbers game of shipping supply and demand; it reflects the complex interaction among geopolitical disruptions, shipping companies' strategic transformation, environmental regulations reshaping asset values, and the global reconfiguration of manufacturing.

Why the Charter Market Remains "Firm Against the Trend"

Generally speaking, spot freight rates are a barometer of supply and demand in the shipping market, and charter rates usually follow their fluctuations. But in this cycle, the charter market has moved relatively independently. Drewry attributes this to the overlap of multiple factors.

First, fleet supply is squeezed at the physical level. The geopolitical conflict in the Red Sea has caused a large number of container ships to abandon the Suez Canal route and reroute via the Cape of Good Hope. The longer voyages directly reduce vessel turnaround efficiency, effectively removing a portion of the fleet from the global effective capacity pool. Even if cargo demand has not surged, shipping companies still need to charter in additional vessels to maintain their scheduled services and network coverage.

Second, the long-term contract nature of the charter market makes it lag behind short-term freight rate changes. Many liner companies, in order to ensure service stability, choose to lock in time charter contracts of 2 to 3 years. This "capacity-locking" behavior still supports charter rate levels when spot prices fall, because the anchoring effect of the contracts weakens the immediacy of transmission from the spot market.

In addition, environmental regulations are becoming a new variable. The International Maritime Organization (IMO) and the EU Emissions Trading System (EU ETS) are pushing the shipping industry to accelerate decarbonization, and market demand for energy-efficient, dual-fuel, and environmentally compliant vessels has risen significantly. The limited supply of compliant vessels creates a scarcity premium, thereby pushing up charter rates for specific vessel types.

Reshaping Fleet Ownership: Liner Companies' "Vertical Control"

A data point in the Drewry report that is easy to overlook deserves deeper examination: the share of liner companies' owned fleets has risen from 54% at the end of 2019 to 64% at the beginning of October 2025. This structural change has profoundly altered the competitive dynamics of the charter market.

Global major liner operators such as MSC and CMA CGM have in recent years purchased large numbers of secondhand vessels, bringing a large amount of assets originally owned by non-operating owners (NOO) into their own fleets. This is equivalent to "removing" available capacity from the open charter market, weakening the bargaining power of independent owner-lessors, while liner companies' control over capacity deployment has significantly strengthened.From the perspective of global supply chain management, this is not merely asset expansion, but a continuation of vertical integration in the shipping industry. Liner companies are attempting to hedge against external market volatility by expanding their owned fleets, ensuring higher service reliability during periods of tight capacity. However, this practice also weakens the liquidity of the charter market, making charter rate pricing more susceptible to the behavior of a few major players.

The result of this structural change is that even as spot freight rates weaken, charter rates can remain at high levels. Fewer and fewer vessels are available for charter in the market, while demand-side players are willing to pay premiums to lock in scarce capacity. In name, this is a "hot charter market," but in reality, it reflects a collective defense by supply chain participants against uncertainty.

The Rise of Environmental Regulations and the "Green Premium"

The advancement of IMO and EU ETS regulations is turning environmental compliance capabilities into core pricing factors for vessel assets. Drewry's analysis points out that the market's interest in vessels with high fuel efficiency, dual-fuel power, and compliance with carbon intensity indicator requirements is steadily rising. Such vessels can not only reduce operators' compliance costs but also become more competitive capacity options in a context where customers are increasingly concerned about the carbon footprint of supply chains.

The resulting "green premium" is particularly evident in the charter market. Older, high-emission vessels face discount pressure, while new environmentally friendly vessels can command relatively higher charter rates. This divergence will further drive the renewal of fleet structures and accelerate the retirement or retrofitting of older vessels.

For global manufacturing and trading enterprises, this trend means that the long-term center of gravity of transportation costs may shift. The green transformation of the shipping industry will inevitably be transmitted to freight rates, prompting shippers to reassess supply chain cost structures and more actively participate in the procurement of green shipping solutions.

2026: Moderate Improvement and the Eve of a Correction

Drewry has provided relatively clear short-term forecasts: within 2026, most vessel types of no more than 8,500 TEU will see year-on-year improvements in charter rates, but global average freight rates may fall by about 16%. These forecasts may seem contradictory on the surface, but upon deeper analysis, they precisely reflect the structural tension between the charter market and the freight market.

The improvement in charter rates is based on the continued tightness of current capacity, limited supply of environmentally compliant vessels, and liner companies' reliance on long-term contracts. The decline in average freight rates, on the other hand, stems from slowing demand growth, narrowing profit margins, and the concentrated delivery of newbuilding orders that will gradually release additional capacity in 2026.

Drewry also pointed out that the market will eventually face a correction. The key variables triggering the correction include: continued slowdown in demand growth, making carriers unwilling to renew current charters at high costs after they expire; newly delivered vessels gradually filling the capacity gap; and the possible resumption of navigation through the Suez Canal, as vessels returning to traditional routes will significantly release effective capacity. Once these conditions mature simultaneously, the supply-demand pattern of the charter market will reverse, and the current high charter rate levels will become unsustainable.

The Market "Divergence" from a Global Supply Chain PerspectiveUnderstanding this divergence cannot be confined to the shipping industry alone. The split between charter rates and spot freight rates is essentially an outward manifestation of the global supply chain undergoing autonomous restructuring under multiple shocks.

Geopolitical conflicts are forcing changes in trade routes, while shipping companies are reducing uncertainty by strengthening vertical control. Environmental regulations are accelerating the redistribution of asset values, while cargo owners have no choice but to seek a new balance between cost and sustainability. In this process, the shipping market is no longer merely an intermediary for cargo transport, but has become a barometer for pricing global trade risk.

For enterprises, this market state means that traditional capacity procurement strategies may fail. Short-term spot freight rates are no longer a reliable reference anchor, and locking in costs through long-term charters also carries hidden high risks. The real challenge lies in how to design more resilient logistics contract structures in an environment where freight rates are expected to decline while charter rates remain stubbornly high.

The core message conveyed by Drewry's expectation—that a correction will eventually come—may not be a precise judgment of market timing, but rather a firm belief in the cyclical return of the shipping market. No matter how deeply supply chain restructuring proceeds, the laws of supply and demand will ultimately dominate the direction of prices. The only question is how much market participants can proactively adjust their positions and expectations before the correction arrives.

Viewed against a longer globalization cycle, the current elevated charter market may simply be a temporary equilibrium under the dual overlay of geopolitical and green transition pressures. When the Suez Canal returns to smooth operation and newly built vessels are launched one after another, global capacity supply will regain its flexibility. Until then, all participants need to learn to build sufficiently robust operational strategies amid fragmented market signals.

Source: https://en.portnews.ru/news/383257/