The global container carrier capacity rankings could be heading for a major shake-up. According to the latest Alphaliner data released on September 4, the current rankings remain unchanged: MSC ranks first globally, followed by Maersk in second, CMA CGM in third, and COSCO SHIPPING Holdings in fourth. However, as COSCO SHIPPING Holdings and CMA CGM press ahead with fleet expansion and take delivery of new vessels, the capacity gap between Maersk and its two closest competitors is narrowing rapidly. Shipping consultancy Linerlytica predicts that, if COSCO SHIPPING Holdings maintains its current pace of expansion, it could overtake Maersk as early as 2028. Maersk could then fall out of the global top three and into fourth place, reshaping the global carrier capacity rankings.

Key Highlights 

• Current ranking: Maersk remains the world’s second-largest container carrier. A fall to fourth is a forecast, not its current position. 

• COSCO expansion: COSCO SHIPPING Holdings is accelerating its fleet expansion, with a containership orderbook of approximately 1.89 million TEUs. 

• CMA CGM growth: CMA CGM is also expanding rapidly as new vessels enter service, intensifying competition in the global capacity rankings.

COSCO SHIPPING Holdings Accelerates Fleet Expansion

COSCO SHIPPING Holdings has recently placed another major newbuilding order as it continues to expand its fleet. The company has ordered 18 container ships with a combined capacity of approximately 280,000 TEUs. The order comprises twelve 22,000-TEU LNG dual-fuel mainline container ships and six 3,200-TEU wide-beam feeder vessels, covering both long-haul mainline and regional feeder capacity.

Following the latest order, COSCO SHIPPING Holdings has a containership orderbook of approximately 1.89 million TEUs, equivalent to 52% of its existing fleet. This is the highest ratio among the world’s ten largest container carriers, placing the company at the forefront of industry fleet expansion. According to the latest data as of September 4, Maersk operates approximately 4.75 million TEUs of capacity, compared with around 3.67 million TEUs for COSCO SHIPPING Holdings. The gap therefore remains above 1 million TEUs.

However, COSCO SHIPPING Holdings has expanded its fleet considerably faster than Maersk since 2018. As ships in its substantial orderbook are delivered over the coming years, the capacity gap is expected to narrow further. This faster fleet growth and the scheduled deliveries underpin industry forecasts that COSCO SHIPPING Holdings could overtake Maersk in 2028.

CMA CGM Closes In as Maersk Faces Pressure from Two Rivals

COSCO SHIPPING Holdings is not the only carrier challenging Maersk’s position. CMA CGM, currently ranked third globally, is also closing the gap rapidly, leaving Maersk under pressure from both rivals. The difference in capacity between CMA CGM and Maersk continues to narrow, while CMA CGM’s orderbook is significantly larger than Maersk’s and reflects a more aggressive expansion strategy. Even if COSCO SHIPPING Holdings does not overtake Maersk by 2028, CMA CGM’s continued capacity growth could still upend the current top-three rankings.

By comparison, Maersk has followed a relatively cautious fleet expansion strategy in recent years. Linerlytica data shows that Maersk’s fleet has grown at an annualized rate of only around 2% since 2018, compared with an average of 11.7% among its leading competitors. Over the past several years, Maersk has focused primarily on replacing older vessels and improving the age profile and energy efficiency of its fleet rather than aggressively expanding total capacity. In response to the faster growth of its competitors, Maersk has recently adjusted its strategy by adding chartered tonnage and placing newbuilding orders to close the gap in capacity growth.

Newbuilding Deliveries Could Reshape Rankings but Add Market Risk

The current wave of capacity expansion extends across the container shipping industry rather than being limited to individual carriers. The global containership orderbook currently stands at 14.84 million TEUs, equivalent to 43.1% of the existing fleet. With a large number of new vessels scheduled for delivery in 2027 and 2028, substantial additional capacity is set to enter the global shipping market.

At the same time, if conditions in the Red Sea continue to improve and more Suez Canal services resume, some of the capacity absorbed by diversions around the Cape of Good Hope could be released. This would add further pressure to the global supply of vessel capacity.

This leaves Maersk facing a difficult strategic choice. If it maintains a cautious approach and limits fleet expansion, COSCO SHIPPING Holdings and CMA CGM could continue to gain ground, potentially affecting Maersk’s market share and industry ranking. If Maersk follows its competitors into large-scale fleet expansion, however, ordering at elevated prices ahead of a concentrated delivery cycle could expose the company to substantial asset costs and operating losses if the market enters a period of overcapacity.

Drewry has noted that Maersk’s previously restrained expansion strategy could provide a long-term advantage in managing risk. If overcapacity emerges after 2027, as expected, its relatively asset-light approach and slower pace of expansion could limit its exposure to a market downturn. Maersk could also wait for vessel asset prices to decline before adding capacity at a lower cost and expanding against the market cycle.

Overall, Maersk remains firmly in second place, and a fall to fourth remains an industry forecast rather than an established outcome. However, the rapid expansion of COSCO SHIPPING Holdings and CMA CGM, combined with the upcoming wave of newbuilding deliveries, means the global container carrier rankings could undergo another major reshuffle over the next two to three years.

For cargo owners and freight forwarders, the balance between new capacity and cargo demand is more important than changes in carrier rankings. If capacity growth significantly outpaces demand, competition for cargo will intensify and freight rates could remain under pressure. If risks in the Red Sea persist and effective capacity remains constrained, the impact of new vessel deliveries on rates could be offset, and freight rates may remain relatively stable.

Sources and Disclaimer 

Sources include Alphaliner, Linerlytica, Splash247, and other publicly available shipping industry information. This article is provided for informational purposes only and is intended for the international logistics and freight forwarding industry. Specific arrangements remain subject to the latest notices issued by the relevant authorities and carriers.