Massive newbuild deliveries are reshaping ocean freight through 2030. Here's how freight forwarders should adjust carrier strategies and protect margins.
You locked in a twelve-month rate agreement with your main carrier in Q4. By February, spot rates on the same trade lane had dropped 30%. Your shipper clients noticed immediately and started asking why they were paying contract rates when spot was available. Sound familiar? This is the operating reality for ocean freight forwarders right now — and it is going to get more complicated before it stabilises.
The root cause is structural, not cyclical. Between 2020 and 2022, carriers placed the largest vessel orderbook in the history of container shipping. Those ships are being delivered in waves through 2028. According to Alphaliner data, the global containership orderbook as of early 2025 represents over 20% of existing deployed capacity — a figure that dwarfs anything seen in the post-2008 era. The supply surge is real, it is measurable, and it will continue to pressure rates for years.
For freight forwarders, this is not a passive market development you can wait out. It changes how you negotiate with carriers, how you structure quotes to clients, and how you need to manage your own P&L per shipment.
The post-pandemic freight boom triggered a capital spending cycle that the industry has not seen before. Carriers, flush with record profits, ordered aggressively across all vessel classes — ULCVs above 20,000 TEU on the Asia–Europe trades, as well as mid-size tonnage for transpacific and intra-Asia routes.
New capacity delivery does not arrive uniformly. Much of the orderbook bunches in 2025 and 2026, with a secondary wave continuing to 2028. Meanwhile, demand growth projections from bodies like the IMF and WTO remain modest — global trade volume growth in the low-to-mid single digits. The arithmetic is straightforward: supply is growing faster than demand, and that imbalance tends to compress rates.
The Red Sea disruptions that began in late 2023 temporarily absorbed significant capacity through longer routing around the Cape of Good Hope — effectively removing several million TEUs of effective supply from the market. That buffer has masked the underlying glut. As and when Red Sea routing normalises, that absorbed capacity floods back, and rate pressure resumes with force.
The commercial and operational landscape for the carriers you work with daily has changed substantially since 2024. The two biggest shifts:
For a forwarder, this is not just structural trivia. It affects which contracts deliver consistent space, which alliances blank sail most aggressively when rates soften, and where your allocation commitments sit in a carrier's commercial priority stack. Volume commitments you made under the old alliance configurations may now be serviced differently — or not at all at the same reliability level.
Carriers are not passive actors. They learned from 2015–2016 that undisciplined capacity deployment destroys freight economics for everyone, including themselves. Blank sailings — the deliberate withdrawal of scheduled voyages to manage supply — have become a standard tool, and carriers are more sophisticated about deploying them counter-cyclically.
This creates a market dynamic that is harder to read than simple supply-demand curves suggest. On a typical Asia–North Europe corridor, carriers may blank 20–30% of sailings during soft demand periods, propping up spot rates artificially. Then, when cargo volumes tick up even marginally, they flood the market with capacity, rates spike, and you end up with a shipper who locked in a spot rate three weeks ago that now looks expensive compared to today's market.
For your rate management, expect:
Consider a forwarder handling 200 FCL per month on the India–US East Coast trade. In 2024, they signed a twelve-month VCA (Volume Commitment Agreement) with a carrier at $3,200 per 40HQ, committing 150 boxes per month to secure allocation. By mid-2025, spot rates on that lane had dropped to $2,400 in certain periods as new capacity entered the market. Their shippers — who track platforms like Xeneta and Freightos — pushed back on the contracted rate differential.
The forwarder's problem is not just one quarter of margin squeeze. It is the commercial relationship with the shipper, the renegotiation with the carrier, and the internal P&L tracking to understand exactly which jobs are profitable. If they cannot see job-level margin in real time, they are always reactive — defending decisions made months ago with data they did not have at the time.
There is no single right answer on carrier strategy in a glut environment, but several approaches reduce exposure:
The intuition to consolidate volume with one or two carriers for better rates is understandable, but it creates allocation risk when that carrier blank sails or shifts priorities. Maintaining qualified relationships with three to four carriers per trade lane gives you options when reliability matters more than the rate.
Annual VCAs that made sense in a tight market look different in a 20%-oversupplied one. Negotiate quarterly reviews into long-term agreements, or negotiate shorter commitment windows with a slightly worse base rate. The optionality is worth more than the rate differential in a declining rate environment.
Carriers often bundle these together. It is worth negotiating for guaranteed allocation at a rate-adjustable basis — you secure the space, but retain some ability to adjust pricing as market moves. This is harder to get, but not impossible with carriers who want long-term forwarder relationships over transactional volume.
In a glut market, the cheapest carrier is rarely the best decision — especially on time-sensitive cargo. Maintaining your own record of on-time delivery and rolling performance by carrier and port pair gives you defensible data when negotiating, and a clear input for routing decisions on valuable cargo.
Rate compression from a capacity glut does not have to mean margin compression — but only if you have systems that surface the problem in time to act. The most common failure point for forwarders in soft markets is discovering that a trade lane or a customer relationship is unprofitable only at invoice stage, weeks after the shipment has moved.
Real-time job-level P&L is the operational tool that changes this. When you can see estimated versus actual cost at the booking stage — factoring in carrier charges, local charges, surcharges, and overheads — you can make pricing decisions with current information rather than last month's tariff. Using a modern freight forwarding software platform that connects your quotation, booking, and costing workflows in a single record makes this possible without additional headcount.
Separately, freight billing automation reduces the gap between job completion and invoice, which matters for cash flow when your margins on individual shipments are thinner. In a competitive rate environment, DSO becomes a more critical lever than it was when rates were buoyant.
Not in a straight line. Carriers will continue to manage capacity through blank sailings and slow steaming, which creates periodic rate spikes even in a structurally oversupplied market. The underlying pressure is bearish because of the orderbook, but do not expect a smooth decline — volatility will remain high, and specific trade lanes will behave differently depending on regional demand and alliance routing decisions.
It depends on your trade mix and client base. For customers with predictable, high-volume cargo flows, a structured VCA with quarterly rate review provisions can work. For customers with variable volumes or commodity-sensitive cargo, shorter commitments or index-linked pricing gives you and your shipper better alignment with actual market conditions. The mistake is defaulting to the same contracting approach regardless of market conditions.
Transparency and speed. Shippers who have visibility into rate indices will notice the gap quickly. If you cannot renegotiate with the carrier, at minimum you need to be proactive with your shipper — explain the contracted versus spot dynamic, what the tradeoff was (allocation certainty, transit time reliability), and what you are doing to close the gap going forward. Forwarders who stay silent until a shipper raises it lose the commercial conversation by default.
If managing job-level margins, carrier performance data, and rate volatility across your trade lanes feels like it requires more spreadsheet work than your team can sustain, that is a system problem, not a people problem. Book a demo with Shipmnts to see how the platform connects quotation to final billing — giving you the P&L visibility you need to stay profitable when ocean rates are moving against you.
Tariff deadlines trigger booking surges that overwhelm freight forwarder ops. Learn how to frontload client inventory efficiently and protect your...
five ways you can save some money on Freight Forwarding.
Two years after India-UAE CEPA took effect, freight forwarders on both sides are navigating surging volumes, new CoO rules, and shifting commodity...
Be the first to know about new insights and technology to grow your global trade & forwarding business.