September
Market Report

Demand / Timing

A stronger September import forecast does not extend into Q4

NRF and Hackett raised September’s forecast from 2.16 million to 2.31 million import TEU, an increase of 150,000 TEU from the August outlook. Meanwhile, the combined October–December forecast fell by about 80,000 TEU. The revision strengthens the near-term arrival story without establishing a stronger holiday selling season.

The July actual was 2.30 million TEU, above the earlier estimate. August remains an estimate and September a forecast. Recent disruption is part of the explanation for the changed calendar; it cannot account for every additional container.

Macro / Orders and replenishment

US manufacturing orders are growing more slowly

August’s ISM manufacturing reading remained above 50. New orders, imports and order backlogs all expanded more slowly than in July, while supplier deliveries slowed further. Customers still described inventories as too low. That combination supports continued inbound orders while warning against extrapolating the recent pace.

The distinction for an importer is between freight already committed and the next round of purchasing. Cargo waiting at origin can sustain tight departures even as new demand loses momentum. We would expect space to ease as the backlog clears and more usable departures return. The calendar alone is a weak guide this year.

The larger vessel delivery wave arrives in 2027–28

Alphaliner’s adjusted full-year newbuilding forecast rises from about 1.6 million TEU in 2026 to 3.5 million in 2027 and 5.7 million in 2028. That is the future supply risk. It should not be used to explain September as though all those ships were already available.

Some capacity has been added now. Alphaliner’s August measure of Far East–North America weekly nominal capacity, including Canada, was about 5% above a year earlier. Looking specifically at the US, the 25 August eeSea outlook put September scheduled capacity at 2.24 million TEU versus 2.26 million in August, approximately 1% lower. Within that total, West Coast capacity was expected to rise 2.5% to 1.46 million TEU. That is a redistribution of scheduled space, not evidence of a broad transpacific withdrawal.

Alphaliner’s 24 August survey put commercially idle capacity at only 0.6% of the global cellular fleet, leaving little spare tonnage to cover disruption. Carriers can increase a gateway’s capacity with larger ships and changed rotations, but that may also remove calls at other ports. What matters to the exporter is whether the additional space can be loaded at its origin.

Terminal operations / Bigger batches

Larger Long Beach calls concentrate more work into each visit

MSC’s announced Long Beach upsizing illustrates both sides. The first roughly 24,000-TEU weekly call was expected around 22 September. TTI said a call could exchange as much as 35,000 TEU across discharge and loading; that figure is not 35,000 import TEU.

Removing Oakland from the rotation can simplify stowage and reduce rehandling. Long Beach gains capacity, but it also has to coordinate a larger batch of cargo with railcars, truck appointments and available yard space. The ship’s lower unit cost does not make those receiving windows any wider.

Terminal capacity depends on more than cranes and acreage. A busy yard needs imports collected and empties repositioned before it can absorb the next large discharge. Bigger ships make coordination with rail and trucking more important, even when monthly volume appears manageable.

Empties / The extra work

Empty returns keep using terminal and trucking capacity

An import container is not finished with the terminal system when the goods are delivered. Where import and export flows are imbalanced, more equipment has to return empty. Those moves still use gates, chassis, yard slots and vessel handling.

July’s LA–Long Beach reporting ties restricted empty returns to occupied chassis and fewer dual transactions, where a driver drops an empty and collects an import in the same visit. Losing that turn adds another trip and keeps equipment tied up. The problem is the speed of the container cycle, even when the chassis fleet itself has not changed.

July also brought street restrictions around the Vincent Thomas Bridge project, including corridors used by overweight containers, and crane problems at Long Beach Container Terminal. LBCT expected improvement by the end of August. These explain part of the July dwell increase; they are not a claim that the same equipment problems remain unresolved in September.

The draft limit is holding at 48 feet

The Canal has postponed the planned October reduction to 47.5 feet. The current 48-foot limit remains, below the normal 50-foot allowance for the larger locks. That removes one further tightening from the immediate outlook; it does not restore normal conditions.

Two separate constraints matter. Draft limits restrict how much weight a ship can carry. Booking availability affects when it can transit. A vessel that needs to shed weight faces a different commercial problem from one that can carry its load but must wait for a slot.

A ship's size alone does not establish its loss

Our screening model illustrates the difference. At a 48-foot limit, the additional weight reduction is about 730 TEU-equivalent for one 13,100-TEU design, versus around 160 to 170 for the two mid-size designs shown. The 5,000-TEU design has no additional weight reduction in this scenario.

These are weight equivalents at an assumed 12 tonnes per laden TEU, not a count of boxes left behind. The comparison starts from each design's feasible loading under the normal 50-foot limit. A ship already drawing less than 48 feet would have no draft-related cargo reduction from this limit.

Separate the existing transit bill from the added cost

A ship using Panama already has a canal transit cost. The case for an additional surcharge should identify what changed: extra booking expense, waiting time, a rerouting cost or earnings lost on cargo that could otherwise have been carried. Existing tolls should not be presented again as a new disruption cost.

For weight-related losses, the relevant commercial measure is the lost contribution after avoided costs, not simply the gross freight value of every theoretical slot. A draft calculation by itself supplies neither the actual load lost nor that contribution.

Perspective

Challenge the amount as well as the label

Our view is that a canal headline is an inadequate basis for accepting a blanket surcharge. The carrier should be able to connect the requested recovery to the affected voyage, the additional cost and the volume over which it is spread.

The public notice and vessel model do not establish actual over-recovery. They do show why a uniform charge deserves scrutiny: the operational impact varies considerably, while collections can reach millions of dollars on a single voyage. Where that explanation is missing, there is a clear basis to push back on the amount.

Drayage / Capacity is also productivity

Delayed empty returns reduce the number of imports a truck can collect

Mid-August spot drayage readings were about 12% above a year earlier on the East Coast and 17% on the Gulf. Norfolk and Savannah were among the stronger increases, at 23% and 19%. These are market readings, not a uniform increase on every move.

Fuel, labor and equipment each contribute to the drayage increase. Higher diesel costs raise the cost of a trip; fewer available drivers limit the trips offered; a chassis tied to an empty cannot collect another import. Savannah also handled roughly 1,000–1,500 more daily gate transactions in late July than in June, increasing the work competing for local capacity.

The loss of dual transactions makes those constraints more expensive. A driver who cannot return an empty and collect an import in one visit may need a separate trip, while the chassis remains occupied. That reduces turns per driver and per chassis. Drayage rates can therefore rise before a port reaches a general congestion crisis.

Truckload / Price levels and direction

Truckload prices eased in August but remained well above November

JOC’s preliminary August shipper-paid truckload reading fell about 1.5% from July. It was the first monthly decline in nine months, but the reading remained roughly 42% above November. Seasonal easing is real. So is the much higher starting point for the next contract.

RXO reported second-quarter truckload spot rates up 32.4% year over year excluding fuel and forecast roughly 43% growth in the third quarter. That separate forecast points to further pressure on trucking budgets despite the summer’s monthly easing.

DAT’s contract data show the transmission into budgets. New dry-van contracts were 14.4% above the rates they replaced in July. A shipper can therefore see a lower weekly spot quote while its next annual or off-cycle contract still becomes more expensive.

Gateway economics / China & Taiwan to Chicago

Chicago IPI rates narrow the West Coast’s price advantage

September Chicago IPI offers from China and Taiwan ranged from about $9,850–$10,500 via the West Coast and $10,700–$12,700 via the East Coast. The representative difference was about $1,500 per 40-foot, smaller than the roughly $2,600 ocean-only East Coast premium.

The West Coast still had the lower through price in this sample. But part of its ocean advantage was used by the inland move, and July’s rail dwell shows why price and delivery need to be considered together. A separate transload into domestic equipment has different costs and conditions from keeping the ocean container on an IPI move.

The same US operating issues affect cargo from India and other Asian origins, but the through prices need to be obtained for those origins. The economic choice also depends on the receiving location and whether the carrier will provide the intended inland move.

Q4 fuel schedules include both reductions and increases

Across four reviewed fuel schedules, West Coast changes for a 40-foot dry container range from a reduction of about 15% to an increase of about 2%. East Coast changes range from a cut of about 8% to an increase of about 6%.

Schedule C falls $23 per 40-foot to West Coast North America and $41 to the East Coast. Schedule D rises $10 and $46 respectively for local port delivery; its West Coast IPI charge rises $112, or 8.2%. Schedules A and B show West Coast reductions of $152 and $75.

The dollar impact depends on the charge and shipment terms. These are changes in individual fuel components, not all-in freight prices. A lower bunker charge can be offset elsewhere in the quote.

August fuel prices turned upward despite the Q4 relief

Singapore's average VLSFO price rose from $751.50 in July to $825 in August, an increase of 9.8%. Houston rose 4.5% and Rotterdam 2.8%. These monthly movements cover a different window from the quarterly references above. They show why a lower announced Q4 charge should not be read as evidence that fuel is still getting cheaper.

Perspective

Test the level of the charge, not just its quarterly change

A surcharge can fall in line with an index and still sit above the cost allocated to the shipment. The useful procurement question is whether the starting level and the adjustment both reconcile to fuel cost. Accepting a modest reduction without examining that starting point leaves the larger question unanswered.