articles Ratings /ratings/en/research/articles/231208-container-shipping-overcapacity-will-test-discipline-in-2024-12933588 content esgSubNav
In This List
COMMENTS

Container Shipping: Overcapacity Will Test Discipline In 2024

COMMENTS

Table Of Contents: S&P Global Ratings Corporate And Infrastructure Finance Criteria

COMMENTS

CreditWeek: What Are The Risks And Opportunities Of The Data Center Boom?

COMMENTS

Instant Insights: Key Takeaways From Our Research

COMMENTS

U.S. Holiday 2024 Sales Outlook: Consumers Will Trim Trees And Spending This Season


Container Shipping: Overcapacity Will Test Discipline In 2024

In the container shipping industry it isn't only vessels that are roiled by waves. Since 2020, container liners have been buffeted by peaks and troughs in trade volumes starting with a pandemic-driven dip, then an e-commerce-fueled spike, and, latterly, another fall (and persistent weakness) triggered by cost-of-living pressures, sluggish consumer demand, and excess retail inventories.

Now liners face another challenge. The supply of new mega ships, and the capacity they will add, is poised to outstrip demand growth over the coming years, putting huge new pressure on freight rates that recently corrected (possibly to a new post-pandemic normal) from all-time highs both sooner and more precipitously than S&P Global Ratings expected.

That rate correction led to a quicker-than-forecast decline in industry-wide earnings over 2023. And it promises further profitability challenges in 2024, when container liners will have to contend with reduced rates, looming overcapacity, and lingering operating-cost inflation.

Sooner, Faster, And Sharper

A correction had been expected, though its timing, speed, and magnitude surprised. In just a few weeks, in September and October 2022, freight rates tumbled from the unprecedented highs of 2021 and 2022, dragged down by a slump in demand for consumer durables and the rapid decongestion of maritime ports. Since then, rates have remained firmly anchored at levels close to their (challenging) historical norms, not least due to industry overcapacity.

The Shanghai Containerized Freight Index (SCFI) has averaged 980 in 2023, year-to-date. That is down 71% from its average of 3,410 in 2022, and 74% on the average of 3,772 in 2021, but remains about 20% above its pre-pandemic average of 810 in 2019, according to Clarksons Research, a provider of shipping data and intelligence.

The decline in rates has not been homogenous. Container rates plunged most severely on the main lanes of Asia-Europe, Transatlantic, and the Transpacific. Non-main routes such as North-South and regional trade routes such as intra-Asia experienced a varying pace of decline. Even though year-to-date average freight rates remain above their 2019 averages on most routes they are on a downward trend (see chart 1).

Chart 1

image

Profit Pressures In The New Normal

Container liners' results for the first-nine-months of 2023 reflect the normalization of global supply chains, weaker cargo volumes, and the resulting severe correction in freight rates. During that period, A.P. Moeller Maersk S/A (Maersk), Hapag-Lloyd AG, and CMA CGM S.A. all posted a 47% to 48% year-on-year decline in revenue in their container shipping segments (see table 1). This reflects a low-single-digit drop in transport volumes for all liners and, more importantly, falls of 50%, 45%, and 46% in Maersk's, Hapag-Lloyd's and CMA CGM's respective average year-on-year freight rate/revenue per TEU (twenty-foot equivalent unit). The freight rate decline has been spread over 2023 but accelerated in the third quarter. Strict cost management has only marginally helped to offset declining revenue, leading to a significant plunge in reported EBITDA (see table 1). We expect this trend to persist in the coming months when consumer demand is likely to remain subdued and contracted freight rates are renegotiated based on considerably lower spot levels. Accordingly, our base-case forecast for 2023 includes a significant deterioration in S&P Global Ratings-adjusted EBITDA for all liners compared to the record highs of 2022 and 2021 (see table 1).

Table 1

Container liners' reports for the first-nine-months of 2023 reflect a sudden return to a post-pandemic normal
Revenue Y/Y growth Volumes Y/Y growth Freight rate/Revenue per TEU Y/Y growth Freight rate/Revenue per TEU Y/Y growth Reported EBITDA Reported EBITDA Management EBITDA guidance§ S&P Global Ratings-adj. EBITDA base case§ S&P Global Ratings-adj. EBITDA§
First-nine-months 2023 First-nine-months 2023 First nine-months 2023 Third-quarter 2023 First-nine-months 2023 First-nine-months 2022 Full-year 2023 Full-year 2023 Full-year 2022
A.P. Moeller Maersk S/A (1) -48% -3.5% -50% -58% $6.7 bil. $27.7 bil. $9.5-11.0 bil. (lower end of range) $8.0-11.0 bil. (higher end of range) $37.2 bil.
Hapag-Lloyd AG (2) -47% -0.8% -45% -58% €4.1 bil. €15.6 bil. €4.1-5.0 bil. €4.0-6.0 bil. €19.3 bil.
CMA CGM S.A.(3) -47% -1.5% -46% -52% $8.0 bil. $27.6 bil. N/A $9.0-9.5 bil. $33.3 bil.
(1) Financials for Maersk Ocean segment. (2) Financials for Liner Shipping segment. (3) Financials for Container Shipping segment. §Consolidated group EBITDA. Y/Y--Year-on-year. Sources: Company financial statements. S&P Global Ratings.

Trade Volumes On A Slow Path To Recovery

The container shipping sector will enter 2024 weighed down by ongoing weak consumer demand that has persisted since the second half of 2022. Furthermore, industry indicators and container liners' financial reports suggest that there will be little immediate respite, with continued softness in transported volumes expected to maintain pressure on freight rates. We expect macroeconomic risks and geopolitical risks will weigh on global trade next year. Economic issues include cost inflation (headlined by elevated and volatile energy prices), interest rate hikes, and diminishing disposable incomes. Geopolitical uncertainty, which was previously due principally to the ongoing conflict in Ukraine, has increased with the outbreak of the latest war between Israel and Hamas, and could exacerbate already sluggish consumer sentiment and spending.

We incorporate single-digit year-on-year volume growth in third-quarter 2023 and expect a similar scenario through the fourth quarter, based on a favorable comparison against low volumes in late 2022. On that basis, we expect global container shipping demand, as measured by boxes shipped, to increase marginally, if at all, over 2023, and subsequently expand at a low-single-digit rate in 2024-2025. This is in line with our projected global GDP growth of 3.0%-3.3% per year and is comparable with Clarksons Research's outlook (see chart 2). Even modest volume gains would be a significant improvement on 2022, when volumes fell almost 4.0%.

Chart 2

image

The Capacity Glut Threatens Rates

We expect significant deliveries of new ships will heap further pressure on freight rates. New vessel orderbooks currently equate to 27% of the total global fleet, up from an all-time low of 8% in October 2020, according to Clarksons Research, whose data suggests container liners' total capacity will increase 7%-8% in 2023 and 2024, all else being equal (see chart 3).

Delivery schedules for new vessels indicate that capacity growth will be lumpy. This is notably due to additions of ultra-large containerships, many of which were ordered years ago by ship owners looking for economies of scale and better environmental performance. The timing of large vessel deliveries alongside cumulative supply growth will have a significant bearing on the prospects for a rebound in rates--particularly on the Asia-Europe and Asia-U.S. lanes where mega-containerships tend to find a home.

Chart 3

image

Capacity Management Could Narrow The Supply-Demand Imbalance

Freight rates have fallen since 2022 to levels that are generally close to their historical averages, and we expect they will remain under pressure.

Liners will have to react to the difficult market conditions if they are to protect their currently robust creditworthiness. Efforts to limit freight rate declines have, so far, been slow, insufficient, and largely failed amid a challenging market backdrop due to a combination of soft demand, the release of tonnage parked at congested ports following the resolution of pandemic-induced supply chain issues, and accelerating deliveries of ultra-large containerships. Inflation, meanwhile, has increased operating expenses.

More rigorous and sustainable capacity management will be required if the industry is to avoid economically unviable rates that consign operators to losses. That is particularly the case given that supply and demand imbalances are on course to widen in 2023-2024, before only moderately narrowing in 2025 (see chart 4). Container liners have a range of tools to manage excess supply, many of which have been tested in recent years. They include cancelling routes (known as loop withdrawals), skipping or cancelling stops (blank sailing), slow steaming, re-routing, swift capacity reallocation, and deferral of new vessel deliveries.

There have been signs that supply management in the container shipping industry is on the right track, and we credit consolidation for much of the possibly newfound discipline that has underpinned this improvement. Mergers and acquisitions, which happened in spurts over several years, have increased the market share of the top five players to about 65% today, up from about 30% in 2000. During that time, about half of the top-20 players have been absorbed through deals or defaulted. The upshot has been a widening of the carrying capacity gap between larger and smaller players and market concentration that has laid the foundation for a more rational and efficient industry. That discipline will be tested in 2024 as supply side challenges soar.

Chart 4

image

Our Rate Forecast Hinges On Stringent Supply Side Measures

While strict excess capacity management, assuming it occurs, might provide some relief during 2024, it won't completely avert pressure on freight rates given expectations of sluggish demand and accelerating new tonnage deliveries. Moreover, that outlook, combined with the collapse of rates in late 2022, has shifted the balance of power in the industry toward shippers, setting the stage for a difficult round of annual negotiations for container liners.

Our base-case scenario for 2023 includes an average freight rate (incorporating both spot and contract rates) of about half the 2022 record level. The decline in contract rates is proving initially shallow, cushioned by longer-term, fixed-rate agreements that expire with a time lag. Conversely, the speed and magnitude of the decline in spot rates has been more immediate. The combination of those shifts has meant that the pace of decline in revenue (volume to freight rates) for container liners has been slower than the deterioration in market spot rates, in line with our expectations. The extent of the lag for each liner depends on their exposure to fixed-rate contracts agreed at the previously elevated rates.

In our current base case, we assume average freight rates will decrease further in 2024, as contracted rates are renegotiated based on considerably lower spot levels, before firming at still-economically viable levels, i.e., above their 2019 base. That result should enable container liners to (at least) cover operating costs, which have increased significantly since 2019. Many container liners reported average operating cost increases of up to 30% (excluding fuel) over 2022. Our forecast is contingent on industry players implementing more stringent capacity-containment measures and proactively managing excess supply in the upcoming months. That sort of response is not a given but the industry has demonstrated it can positively react to pressure--as it did shortly after the pandemic's outbreak in 2020, when blank sailing and other measures offset a significant and abrupt decline in trade volumes.

Weakening Balance Sheets And Tightening Liquidity

We forecast that the credit metrics of rated container liners will remain well within the thresholds for our current ratings in 2023, and potentially in 2024, but with diminishing headroom for unforeseen operational setbacks or discretionary spending. This is because our base case takes into account a decline in liners' earnings and cash flows over the next few quarters, in line with dwindling rates.

The backdrop to this forecast remains the spectacularly high freight rates over 2021 and 2022, which delivered exceptional free cash flows and strongly improved credit metrics, leading to multi-notch upgrades for many container shipping companies (see table 2). Container liners used that windfall to diversify away from traditional container shipping, via mergers and acquisitions mainly with logistics services and maritime ports, and to fund shareholder returns. Furthermore, many significantly reduced debt, bolstered financial headroom, and found themselves entering 2023 with unprecedented net cash positions (cash exceeding S&P Global Ratings-adjusted debt) and credit metrics that had improved well beyond their pre-pandemic levels. Despite record-high discretionary spending over the year-to-date, recent financial reports suggest that liners' balance sheets and liquidity positions remain solid, providing a still-ample financial cushion for difficult times ahead (see chart 5).

That said we remain relatively cautious in our assumptions. That is because the uncertainty over future normalized freight-rates reduces the predictability of credit-ratio projections and increases the risk that adjusted EBITDA could underperform, or that financial leverage could overshoot what can be reasonably built into our base case.

How much the industry comes to rely on its financial cushion to protect credit quality will be determined by the extent to which rational behavior prevails in 2024 and beyond. Industry players will collectively have to prove their ability to manage the shifting market dynamics if they are to post consistent profits. That will, more particularly, require container liners to demonstrate, in the coming months, that they have the discipline to preserve ample cash reserves and reign in supply excesses. Freight rates will be the ultimate measure of the industry's success, or otherwise, in meeting this challenge. We will closely follow the evolution of rates, while assessing their impact on our base-case forecast and container liners' ability to adhere to our rating thresholds.

Chart 5

image

Table 2

Global container shipping companies rating actions in 2021-Dec. 2023
Shipping company Shipping segment Rating to Rating from Rating action Date

A.P. Moller - Maersk A/S

Container liner BBB+/Stable/-- BBB/Positive/-- Upgrade Sep 14, 2021

CMA CGM S.A.

Container liner BB-/Stable/-- B+/Positive/-- Upgrade Mar 04, 2021

CMA CGM S.A.

Container liner BB/Stable/-- BB-/Stable/-- Upgrade Jul 29, 2021

CMA CGM S.A.

Container liner BB+/Stable/-- BB/Stable/-- Upgrade May 09, 2022

Hapag-Lloyd AG

Container liner BB/Stable/-- BB-/Positive/-- Upgrade Mar 23, 2021

Hapag-Lloyd AG

Container liner BB+/Stable/-- BB/Stable/-- Upgrade Feb 04, 2022

Wan Hai Lines Ltd.

Container liner BB+/Stable/-- BB+/Negative/-- Outlook revision Apr 29, 2021

Danaos Corp.

Containership tonnage provider BB-/Positive/-- B+/Positive/-- Upgrade Aug 20, 2021

Danaos Corp.

Containership tonnage provider BB/Positive/-- BB-/Positive/-- Upgrade Jun 06, 2022

Danaos Corp.

Containership tonnage provider BB+/Stable/-- BB/Positive/-- Upgrade Jun 09, 2023

Global Ship Lease Inc.

Containership tonnage provider BB-/Stable/-- B+/Stable/-- Upgrade Aug 20, 2021

Global Ship Lease Inc.

Containership tonnage provider BB/Stable/-- BB-/Stable/-- Upgrade Aug 01, 2022

Global Ship Lease Inc.

Containership tonnage provider BB/Positive/-- BB/Stable/-- Outlook revision Jun 13, 2023

Navios Maritime Partners L.P.

Dry bulk, containers, crude oil & oil products BB-/Positive/-- B+/Stable/-- Upgrade Jun 18, 2021

Navios Maritime Partners L.P.

Dry bulk, containers, crude oil & oil products BB/Stable/-- BB-/Positive/-- Upgrade Mar 16, 2023
*Ratings as of Dec. 7, 2023.

Table 3

Global shipping companies rated by S&P Global Ratings
Company Shipping segment Rating*

A.P. Moller - Maersk A/S

Container liner BBB+/Stable/--

CMA CGM S.A.

Container liner BB+/Stable/B

Hapag-Lloyd AG

Container liner BB+/Stable/--

Wan Hai Lines Ltd.

Container liner BB+/Stable/--

Danaos Corp.

Containership tonnage provider BB+/Stable/--

Global Ship Lease Inc.

Containership tonnage provider BB/Positive/--

Seaspan Corp.

Containership tonnage provider BB-/Stable/--

MISC Bhd.

Oil and gas BBB+/Stable/-- (SACP bb+)

Nakilat Inc.

Liquefied natural gas (LNG) AA-/Stable/-- (SACP bbb-)

Navios Maritime Partners L.P.

Dry bulk, containers, crude oil & oil products BB/Stable/--

Stena AB

Ferries (pax and cargo) BB/Stable/--

Bahia de las Isletas, S.L.

Ferries (pax and cargo) SD
*Ratings as of Dec. 7, 2023. SD--Selective default. SACP--Stand-alone credit profile.

This report does not constitute a rating action.

Primary Credit Analysts:Izabela Listowska, Frankfurt + 49 693 399 9127;
izabela.listowska@spglobal.com
Varvara Nikanorava, Frankfurt (49) 69-33-999-172;
varvara.nikanorava@spglobal.com
Aliaksandra Vashkevich, Frankfurt + 49 693 399 9178;
Aliaksandra.Vashkevich@spglobal.com
Secondary Contacts:Stuart M Clements, London + 44 20 7176 7012;
stuart.clements@spglobal.com
Rachel J Gerrish, CA, London + 44 20 7176 6680;
rachel.gerrish@spglobal.com

No content (including ratings, credit-related analyses and data, valuations, model, software, or other application or output therefrom) or any part thereof (Content) may be modified, reverse engineered, reproduced, or distributed in any form by any means, or stored in a database or retrieval system, without the prior written permission of Standard & Poor’s Financial Services LLC or its affiliates (collectively, S&P). The Content shall not be used for any unlawful or unauthorized purposes. S&P and any third-party providers, as well as their directors, officers, shareholders, employees, or agents (collectively S&P Parties) do not guarantee the accuracy, completeness, timeliness, or availability of the Content. S&P Parties are not responsible for any errors or omissions (negligent or otherwise), regardless of the cause, for the results obtained from the use of the Content, or for the security or maintenance of any data input by the user. The Content is provided on an “as is” basis. S&P PARTIES DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, ANY WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE OR USE, FREEDOM FROM BUGS, SOFTWARE ERRORS OR DEFECTS, THAT THE CONTENT’S FUNCTIONING WILL BE UNINTERRUPTED, OR THAT THE CONTENT WILL OPERATE WITH ANY SOFTWARE OR HARDWARE CONFIGURATION. In no event shall S&P Parties be liable to any party for any direct, indirect, incidental, exemplary, compensatory, punitive, special or consequential damages, costs, expenses, legal fees, or losses (including, without limitation, lost income or lost profits and opportunity costs or losses caused by negligence) in connection with any use of the Content even if advised of the possibility of such damages.

Credit-related and other analyses, including ratings, and statements in the Content are statements of opinion as of the date they are expressed and not statements of fact. S&P’s opinions, analyses, and rating acknowledgment decisions (described below) are not recommendations to purchase, hold, or sell any securities or to make any investment decisions, and do not address the suitability of any security. S&P assumes no obligation to update the Content following publication in any form or format. The Content should not be relied on and is not a substitute for the skill, judgment, and experience of the user, its management, employees, advisors, and/or clients when making investment and other business decisions. S&P does not act as a fiduciary or an investment advisor except where registered as such. While S&P has obtained information from sources it believes to be reliable, S&P does not perform an audit and undertakes no duty of due diligence or independent verification of any information it receives. Rating-related publications may be published for a variety of reasons that are not necessarily dependent on action by rating committees, including, but not limited to, the publication of a periodic update on a credit rating and related analyses.

To the extent that regulatory authorities allow a rating agency to acknowledge in one jurisdiction a rating issued in another jurisdiction for certain regulatory purposes, S&P reserves the right to assign, withdraw, or suspend such acknowledgement at any time and in its sole discretion. S&P Parties disclaim any duty whatsoever arising out of the assignment, withdrawal, or suspension of an acknowledgment as well as any liability for any damage alleged to have been suffered on account thereof.

S&P keeps certain activities of its business units separate from each other in order to preserve the independence and objectivity of their respective activities. As a result, certain business units of S&P may have information that is not available to other S&P business units. S&P has established policies and procedures to maintain the confidentiality of certain nonpublic information received in connection with each analytical process.

S&P may receive compensation for its ratings and certain analyses, normally from issuers or underwriters of securities or from obligors. S&P reserves the right to disseminate its opinions and analyses. S&P's public ratings and analyses are made available on its Web sites, www.spglobal.com/ratings (free of charge), and www.ratingsdirect.com (subscription), and may be distributed through other means, including via S&P publications and third-party redistributors. Additional information about our ratings fees is available at www.spglobal.com/usratingsfees.

 

Create a free account to unlock the article.

Gain access to exclusive research, events and more.

Already have an account?    Sign in