Xeneta's maritime freight intelligence platform has published its annual report on the reliability of shipping companies for 2025, an analysis covering over 200 operators in more than 25,000 port pairs, confirming an ever-widening gap between the major players in the sector. Maersk tops the individual ranking with a 56% on-time performance and an average delay of two days, followed by Hapag-Lloyd with 52% and an average delay of three days. At the other end, HMM ranks last with only a 15% on-time arrival rate and an average delay of 8.5 days.
The most significant data from the report is the joint performance of both shipping companies within the Gemini cooperation, which reached an 81% on-time performance with an average delay of just 0.4 days, a figure that places it in a unique category compared to other alliances and independent operators. Xeneta points out that the reliability of partnerships not linked to Gemini maintained by both companies remains significantly below the standards achieved within this optimized structure.
Divergences between shipping companies and alliances
The report highlights notable differences among operators that share alliances or cooperation agreements. MSC, the largest global operator by fleet capacity with 924 vessels and 6.9 million TEUs, recorded a 25% on-time performance and nearly five days of average delay, ranking among the lowest in the classification. However, its transatlantic partner, ZIM, achieved considerably better results, with a 36% on-time arrival rate, placing it among the top three global operators.
Within the Premier Alliance, ONE (26%) and Yang Ming Lines (27%) posted figures aligned with the collective performance of the alliance (26%), while HMM (15%) stand out with notably lower reliability. In the case of the Ocean Alliance, both COSCO (35%) and CMA CGM (33%) achieved better individual results than as a group (26%), which, according to Xeneta, constitutes valuable information for shippers when selecting specific services from these shipping companies outside the alliance structure or on routes where they act as the main vessel operators.
The Far East-Europe corridor, a test of endurance
The route between the Far East and Europe, considered the most demanding in global maritime trade due to the majority diversion of traffic around the Cape of Good Hope, offered an even more polarized picture. Maersk maintained leadership with a 58% on-time performance and an average delay of 1.7 days, followed by Hapag-Lloyd with 51%, albeit with a higher average delay of 4.3 days. Wan Hai Lines placed third with 39%, improving by eight percentage points over its global average, while COSCO (33%) completed the upper half of the table.
Results deteriorated significantly in the lower part of the classification. CMA CGM, which adopted one of the most proactive strategies regarding the Red Sea among major shipping companies, recorded only a 16% on-time performance on this route, below its usual standards. ZIM fell from third place globally to fifth on this corridor, with 25%, a decline attributed by Xeneta to the operational limitations stemming from the Israeli operator's relationship with the conflict in the Middle East. At the bottom, HMM recorded a 5% on-time performance with an average delay of 15.2 days, and ONE a 10% with 11 days of delay.
Gemini, in a category of its own among alliances
The alliance ranking brought no surprises regarding the monthly data published throughout the year, but it did allow for conclusions about the strategic decisions made by each cooperative structure. Gemini led with an 81% on-time performance, sustained by a strategy based on fewer port calls, the use of vertically integrated terminals, a wide system of secondary connections (shuttles), and a concentration of market share in North America.
Xeneta points out that, although the alliance experienced a 12% decline in on-time performance compared to the first quarter — attributable to the maturation of schedules and episodes of congestion at northern European ports — the initial promise of 90% on-time arrivals has proven to be an idealistic goal in the current context. Nonetheless, Gemini also distinguished itself by its commitment to a minimum number of canceled voyages (blank sailings): Maersk and Hapag-Lloyd announced only 18 cancellations throughout 2025, including just two on the Far East-North America route and nine on the Far East-Europe route, the latter focused during the Chinese Golden Week. In comparison, the Premier Alliance, with a similar global capacity volume — slightly over a million TEUs — announced 84 cancellations just on the Far East-North America route and 181 globally.
Premier Alliance and Ocean Alliance, in sustained decline
The Premier Alliance closed 2025 in second to last place with a 26% on-time performance and 4.3 days of delay. Xeneta documents how the alliance resorted during the first quarter to strategic cancellations of voyages and repeated postponements of service start dates to mitigate delays inherited from its predecessor, THE Alliance, which closed 2024 with a 22% on-time performance. These schedule manipulations proved unsustainable: the initial surge of 36% in the first quarter plummeted to 21% in the fourth, with weeks where the alliance fell below 20%. In the last weeks of 2025, Premier partners recorded their worst data, between 11% and 13% on-time performance.
The report identifies structural factors behind these results. The eight services of the alliance on the Far East-Europe route employ vessels of 17,000 TEUs with an average of 17 vessel spaces and 14 port calls per service, compared to the 10,500 TEUs of its routes to North America. This concentration of capacity, combined with storms on the southern coast of Africa, congestion at northern European ports, and uncertainty over the Suez Canal, creates what Xeneta describes as a demonstration of how hyper-extended network connectivity and capacity concentration aggravate external reliability issues.
The Ocean Alliance completed the lower end of the table with a 26% on-time performance, extending a steady decline that started in the third quarter of 2023, when the alliance recorded a 50% on-time arrival rate. Xeneta notes that during 2025, there were no signs of recovery nor adjustments in schedules that benefited other competitors.
On a positive note, MSC —analyzed independently of its occasional participation in Premier Alliance services due to the size of its global network— improved by 17% in on-time performance compared to the first quarter, achieving an average annual rate of 27%. Xeneta suggests that its bet after the dissolution of the 2M alliance for the independent expansion of its network, rather than diversified partnerships, may have favored smoother daily operations.
Performance by commercial routes
The analysis by commercial corridors reveals common patterns. The Far East-Middle East route proved to be the most problematic corridor for most alliances: Premier Alliance recorded an 11% on-time performance with six days of delay, Ocean Alliance an 11% with 5.3 days, and MSC barely a 3% with 9.4 days of delay.
Gemini achieved its best performance in Europe-North America (87% on-time, 0.5 days delay) and its worst result in Far East-Europe (68%, 1.1 days), although even this last figure far exceeded the best result of any other competitor. Non-alliance services, which ranked second globally with a 34% on-time performance, achieved their best mark on the west coast of South America (57%) and the worst in Far East-Europe (25%).
Red Sea: operational uncertainty for shippers
Regarding a potential widespread return of routes through the Red Sea, Xeneta warns that the situation is too dynamic to confidently determine which shipping company offers the safest option. The geopolitical decisions that condition these traffics depend on unpredictable actors, and both shipping companies and insurers continuously adjust their positions from voyage to voyage. CMA CGM, for example, has unexpectedly reduced several weeks of scheduled sailings through the canal to adapt to sudden changes from one day to the next in its FAL1, FAL3, and MEX services.
Xeneta recommends shippers prioritize services where their preferred shipping companies operate as vessel operators to limit their exposure to risk, identify alternative options in their port pairs, and maintain daily updates on the available information regarding the status of the routes.