Is it really possible that the world’s major container-shipping lines are showing ever-wider differences in reliability—even after years of consolidation?
If you’re in logistics or web-design for the shipping industry (hello Tic Creative client work), this might sound odd: the leading 20 container carriers are supposed to be converging in quality—after all, mergers, alliances and digitalisation should make service levels more uniform, right? But new data from Sea‑Intelligence shows the opposite. The service reliability gap—essentially the difference in on-time arrivals between the best and worst carriers—has been steadily widening since about 2016.
During 2011-16, carriers’ reliability scores were getting closer together (with narrow spreads) as the industry battled over-capacity and low rates. But post-2016, and especially through the pandemic disruptions, that convergence reversed. The gap widened significantly and remains elevated through 2024-25.
What does this mean for shippers, for carriers, and for anyone designing content around global supply-chains or container transport? It means one size doesn’t fit all anymore. The name of the carrier matters again. The service promise has variation. For your clients in container sales, rentals or transport, this is a story to tell: reliability becomes a differentiator. Let’s unpack the findings, the implications for stakeholders, the risks and what it means for your content/strategy thinking.
Setting the Scene – What’s ‘Schedule Reliability’?
Schedule reliability in container shipping means the percentage of vessels arriving on time or close to schedule. Analysts at Sea-Intelligence used a three-month rolling average across the top 20 carriers (by size) to track monthly performance from 2011 to 2025.
From 2011 to 2016 the gap between the most reliable carrier and the least reliable was gradually shrinking—a sign that carriers were under pressure to keep service quality up even as rates were compressed and capacity ballooned. But from 2016 onward, instead of converging, performance diverged. The gap grew as carriers pursuing different strategies, vessels, trades and geographies dealt with varying pressures (mega-ships, port congestion, labour issues, geopolitical disruptions).
The Trends – What the Data Reveals
- 2011–2016: Relatively narrow spread in reliability scores.
- Post-2016: Sharp widening of the gap.
- Peak during pandemic: The most extreme divergence came during COVID-19 supply-chain chaos.
- 2024-25: The gap remains elevated despite signs of global reliability improving (for example, global schedule reliability hit ~65.2% in Sept 2025).
In simpler terms: if you’re booking cargo now, picking “any top carrier” no longer guarantees “top service”. Two carriers of similar size might deliver very different reliability. One might be near the 80% on-time mark, another down in the 50s or 60s.
Why Has the Gap Widened?
Several contributing factors:
- Differing fleet strategies: Some carriers employ large mega-ships or operate longer loops with more port calls, increasing delay risk.
- Port congestion & hinterland issues: Delays vary by region. Carriers operating in congested ports or weak hinterlands will struggle more.
- Geopolitical/supply-chain shocks: Pandemic after-effects, war zones, labour disruptions; carriers react differently.
- Cost pressure & trade-off choices: Some carriers may prioritise cost over schedule, accepting slower transit if cheaper, others prioritise premium reliability.
- M&A and alliances didn’t homogenise performance: The expectation that consolidation would standardise service hasn’t held. The data shows reliability variation persists despite fewer carriers.
Implications for Shippers & Logistics Managers
- Carrier choice matters again: Don’t rely on “top 20 global carrier” as shorthand for reliability.
- Pricing vs service trade-off: Lower freight costs may come with lower reliability. Shippers must balance cost, transit time risk and reliability.
- Contracting & KPIs: Include schedule-reliability metrics in carrier contracts; monitor and benchmark across carriers.
- Visibility & contingency planning: With variability so wide, shippers need better visibility and fallback plans (extra buffer time, alternate carriers).
- Content & marketing angle: For your clients (container rental, sales, logistics start-ups), emphasise reliability as a differentiator. Use content to explain why your service/supply-chain partner list matters.
Implications for Carriers & Terminals
- Brand differentiation: Carriers that consistently deliver higher reliability can charge a premium and attract shippers who pay for reliability.
- Operational investment: Focus on vessel punctuality, port dwell time, digital tracking, etc.
- Data transparency: Sharing reliability performance can become a competitive edge.
- Terminal/port partnerships: Carriers may partner selectively with ports/terminals that deliver faster turnarounds, reducing variability.
Lessons for Web Design & Content Strategy (Your turf)
- Storytelling around “Reliability Gap”: Craft content that explains in simple terms the divergence in carrier performance—why it matters.
- Interactive Visuals: Use charts/maps showing reliability ranges over time for carriers; create engaging web modules.
- Client-facing content: For container/rental companies, emphasise how your service ties into reliable carrier networks, how choice of carrier affects end-customer experience.
- Educational pieces: Blog posts, infographics for supply-chain managers explaining “How to evaluate carrier reliability” or “Why two carriers are not equal”.
- UX design for logistics businesses: When building sites for logistics clients, include reliability dashboards, data insights, client login portals that highlight service KPIs.
Risks & Cautions
- Improving global reliability doesn’t mean equal across carriers: Even if industry average improves, disparities remain.
- Data variability: Three-month rolling averages help smooth things, but short-term monthly variations can still mislead.
- Attribution complexity: Delays may be caused by external factors (port, weather) rather than carrier alone; messaging must be careful.
To sum up: the performance gap among the world’s top container carriers has widened significantly since 2016—even as the industry has consolidated. For shippers, this means carrier choice impacts reliability more than ever. For carriers and ports, reliability is a competitive asset. And for you, as a web-designer/content-creator working with clients in the container, shipping or logistics space, this topic offers rich content potential: reliability as a story, a selling point, and a digital narrative.
Imagine two global container carriers, Carrier A and Carrier B, both ranked among the top 20 by capacity. Current data (for example Sept 2025) shows Carrier A achieving ~77% on-time arrival; Carrier B hovering around ~50-55% on-time.
A UK importer books cargo with Carrier B because the rate is £200/TEU cheaper than Carrier A. However, because of lower average reliability, the shipment arrives late—containers are delayed by 5 days, leading to demurrage, missed retail deadlines and extra intermodal costs. The importer’s end-customer (a UK high-street store) is frustrated by late stock. Meanwhile another importer, choosing Carrier A, pays higher freight but gets on-time arrival, smooth inland logistics and no penalty costs. Over several shipments the higher reliability offsets the higher cost.
From a content-marketing angle for your container-rental/sales business: you could build a microsite with a “Reliability Cost Calculator” — show how shipping delays affect total landed cost, how choosing better carrier/terminal combinations lowers downstream costs. You could publish an infographic: “Reliability gap 2016 vs 2025 – what it means for your supply chain”. You could highlight testimonials: “We used to pick cheapest carrier, but after repeat delays we switched and recovered £XXX in avoidable costs”. That content ties your container-sales and rental business into the broader carrier reliability discussion—helping clients understand the ecosystem they’re working in and why your service matters beyond the box.
“In container shipping today, the name on the side of the ship matters almost as much as the size of the ship.”
