As of mid-October 2026, 63% of Asia-Europe shipping capacity now utilizes the Suez Canal, impacting logistics and freight rates.
As of mid-October 2026, about 63% of the capacity deployed by the world's top ten container shipping companies on Far East-Europe routes once again involves the Red Sea and Suez Canal corridor. For China's export logistics sector, this carries a dual implication: shorter voyages may improve transport efficiency, but as more vessels resume transits, effective capacity supply on Asia-Europe routes may also increase, potentially creating new impacts on freight rates, slot availability, and schedule planning.
On October 20, the Suez Canal Authority released data showing that between January and September 2026, vessels operated by relevant carriers transited the Suez Canal 276 times, with a combined net tonnage of 23.3 million tons; in the same period of 2025, the figures were 146 transits and 7 million tons net tonnage. The authority also stated that carriers hope to restore all of their services to Suez routing before March 2027. Current developments indicate that recovery is indeed progressing, though the pace across routes still depends on the sailing schedules actually released by carriers.
According to shipping media outlet The Loadstar, citing Alphaliner data on October 21, among the 46 direct Far East-Europe services operated by the top ten shipping companies between September 15 and October 15, 24 saw vessels transiting via the Red Sea. These 24 services represent about 5.5 million TEU of capacity, accounting for 63% of the 8.7 million TEU total deployed on the relevant routes.
From a route distribution perspective, the Suez recovery is uneven. About 70% of capacity on Far East-Mediterranean routes involves Red Sea transits, compared with 58% on Far East-Northern Europe routes, a gap of 12 percentage points. This means freight forwarders should not simply apply the overall recovery ratio to every shipment when evaluating specific transport plans. Different destination ports and different services may follow different adjustment paces by carrier. Even if a service has resumed Suez transits, that does not mean every voyage on that service has resumed, nor does it mean both directions use the same routing. Some carriers are adopting phased recovery strategies, first sending westbound vessels to Europe via the Bab el-Mandeb Strait, the Red Sea, and the Suez Canal, while keeping return voyages around the Cape of Good Hope, thus shortening part of the voyage while preserving flexibility. Therefore, the 63% figure more accurately means that more and more services are once again including the Suez Canal in their transport arrangements, but there is still a gap before all voyages operate bidirectionally through the canal.
Recent public service notices show that some major carriers have already translated resumed transits into specific service changes. On September 14, 2026, Maersk announced on its website that the AE5, AE11, AE12, and ME2 services operated with Hapag-Lloyd under the Gemini network would switch from routing via the Cape of Good Hope to the Suez Canal. AE5 links Asia and Northern Europe, AE11 and AE12 connect Asia and the Mediterranean, and ME2 links India and Europe. The announcement also specified adjustments for certain voyages; for example, the first adjusted westbound voyage on the AE11 service was scheduled to depart Tanjung Pelepas on September 19. The practical value of such notices for freight forwarders is that once service changes are tied to specific vessel names, voyage numbers, and sailing dates, booking plans, estimated arrival times, and downstream delivery arrangements can be rechecked accordingly. However, the notice also made clear that these route changes still depend on stability in the Red Sea region and whether the conflict escalates further; the safety of vessels, crews, and customers' cargo remains the top priority.
For freight forwarders and exporters, the main concern is whether the Suez Canal recovery will drive down Asia-Europe freight rates. The key point is this: capacity pressure may increase, but shorter transit times should not be simplistically equated with lower freight rates.
During the period when ships rerouted via the Cape of Good Hope, each round voyage took significantly longer. As more services resume Suez transits, the vessel time previously absorbed by those longer detours may be released, allowing the same fleet size to gain more operational rotation space. If cargo volumes do not rise in tandem, effective capacity supply may increase and freight rates may come under pressure. But the shipping market is not determined by capacity alone. Carriers can control supply through blank sailings, port rotation changes, and vessel redeployments; port congestion, cargo volume changes, fuel costs, and geopolitical risks also influence rates. On October 22, 2026, Reuters reported that Kuehne+Nagel CEO Stefan Paul expects most container shipping companies to resume using the Suez Canal by late Q1 to early Q2 of 2027. This shows the market is already discussing broader recovery, but the interaction between recovery pace and capacity control will still shape actual freight-rate trends.
For Chinese freight forwarders, two developments are especially worth watching: first, whether more vessels resume Suez transits; second, whether carriers continue using blank sailings and other measures to control capacity. If the effective capacity growth created by shorter voyages outpaces cargo growth, Asia-Europe freight rates may come under pressure; if carriers continue to manage slot supply tightly, freight rates may not fall significantly even as voyage times shorten.
For freight forwarders and exporters with Europe-bound cargo, the more practical step now is not to rush to judge whether freight rates will rise or fall, but to recheck voyage arrangements shipment by shipment. First, confirm the carrier's latest service arrangement: do not look only at whether the service name has resumed Suez transits, but also verify the specific vessel name, voyage number, estimated sailing date, and port rotation. Second, pay attention to whether the outbound and return directions are consistent. Some services already use the Suez Canal westbound but still route eastbound via the Cape of Good Hope; relying on one-way service information can easily lead to a mistaken view of the full transport cycle. Finally, reassess delivery timing. For export cargo with firm delivery deadlines—especially cargo tied to overseas warehouses, factory production, or customer delivery schedules—estimated arrival dates should be reconfirmed with the carrier or booking agent after any route adjustment, rather than simply using transit-time assumptions from the earlier detour period. Restored carrier services are the trend; when cargo actually arrives still depends on the specific voyage, and shipment-by-shipment verification remains the basis for freight forwarders' operational judgment.