Return of the Red Sea Signals a Potential Earthquake in Global Shipping Operational Disruptions Redraw Routes and Pressure Prices in 2026

NYN | Reports and Analyses 

Over the past two years, the container shipping market has undergone an unprecedented shift, as operations by Sana’a forces in the Red Sea forced shipping companies to reroute around the Cape of Good Hope, avoiding Bab el-Mandeb and the Suez Canal. This shift was not merely a change in route but a comprehensive repricing of transport risks, extending voyage times, increasing costs, and creating a costly yet predictable “new normal.”

Potential Return: Question of Timing, Not Feasibility

With increasing market talk about a possible gradual return to the Red Sea, ING Group in the Netherlands views this issue as “the key factor to monitor” in 2026. The question is no longer: will shipping lines return? Rather: when, at what pace, and how will this affect prices, capacity, and schedules when the first major company moves, potentially triggering others to follow.

Suez Canal: The Longstanding Trade Artery

Historically, the Suez Canal has been a cornerstone for East-West trade, particularly container flows to Europe. Rerouting this artery around Africa added miles and operational days, increased fuel consumption and emissions, and forced supply chains to readjust inventory and schedules.

Profit Paradox: Lower Efficiency, Higher Prices

Despite the higher costs of rerouting, shipping companies benefited from artificially constrained capacity, which revived prices and profit margins after they fell post-pandemic. Thus, the Red Sea’s return is good news for operational efficiency but concerning for a sector accustomed to pricing power derived from longer routes.

Moment of Truth: One Decision Can Trigger the Chain

ING warns that the return decision will not be individual; the industry operates on competitive symmetry. If one major company deems the risks acceptable, others will quickly follow to avoid losing the advantage of time and cost. This “herd behavior” could make the return sudden and disruptive, with potential port congestion and repositioning of empty containers.

Major Lines: Between Anticipation and Testing

Companies such as Maersk and Hapag-Lloyd maintain cautious optimism, linking the return to “permitting conditions.” CMA CGM appears more inclined to test under naval protection. However, movement data through November 2025 confirm that natural momentum has not yet returned, leaving the market between anticipation and limited experimentation.

3,000 Fewer Nautical Miles, 10 Days Faster

A return via the Red Sea shortens the Asia–Northwest Europe route by over 3,000 nautical miles, cutting roughly ten days of sailing. This reduction frees significant global capacity, as less time is lost at sea and ship rotation speeds increase, effectively adding “new ships” to the market without additional deliveries.

Freed Capacity and Incoming Vessels

Freed capacity coincides with new vessels from a large 2026 orderbook, according to Clarkson’s data. Together, these factors suggest a supply surplus that could later pressure prices, though the path will not be linear due to timing sensitivity and insurance requirements.

Phase One: Port Disruptions

ING notes that shorter voyage times may cause ships to arrive “early” compared to schedules built on the longer route, creating port congestion despite steady demand. Empty container flows, road, and rail transport could be affected, and companies may cancel voyages to ease pressure, resulting in transitional price fluctuations.

Peak Seasons Amplify the Effect

If the return coincides with peak periods—such as before the Chinese Lunar New Year—the impact intensifies: early arrivals, higher demand, and capacity stress. If it occurs during seasonal lull, the shock may be absorbed gradually without avoiding initial disruptions.

Phase Two: Price Declines

Once schedules stabilize, ING expects strong downward pressure on prices due to surplus capacity and limited volume growth. Fuel savings may not offset the loss of pricing power. Tools such as slow steaming and accelerating the retirement of older vessels may mitigate the impact but require time.

A Financial Decision

Timing is not only operational but financial. Delaying the return keeps prices supported, while a wide-scale return faces a harsher reality after a period of relatively high profits.

Insurance and Alliances: Brakes on Urgency

Companies fear a “double rebound”—return and then retreat—due to the cost to confidence and schedules. This weighs on new alliances such as Gemini (Maersk–Hapag-Lloyd), promising higher reliability. Insurance premiums and conditions remain practical gateways, likely limiting initial trials before full services with sensitive cargo resume.

Conclusion: From Ports to Prices

ING’s analysis presents a clear paradox: the Red Sea’s return promises higher operational and environmental efficiency but will begin with operational disruption, potentially ending in broad price declines that reshape industry profits in 2026.

The critical question remains: will the return occur with manageable disruption and gradual stability, or sequential confusion followed by wide price pressure after two years of unexpected recovery?