Global container shipping schedule reliability deteriorated sharply in July 2026, reaching its lowest level of the year and its weakest point since February 2025, according to data from Sea-Intelligence.

Overall reliability declined by 6.1 percentage points from June to 56.4%. The result was also 8.8 percentage points below the level recorded in July 2025, indicating a broad deterioration in carriers’ ability to maintain published sailing schedules.

The average delay for vessels arriving behind schedule also increased during the month. Late arrivals were delayed by an average of 6.06 days, up 0.59 days compared with June. This was the longest average delay recorded during 2026 and the highest figure since January 2024. On a year-on-year basis, the average delay increased by 1.34 days.

Sea-Intelligence’s comparison of 13 leading container carriers showed that Maersk delivered the strongest schedule reliability in July, with 73.7% of services arriving on time. It was the only carrier in the group to exceed the 70% threshold.

Hapag-Lloyd ranked second with reliability of 69.3% and was the only other carrier to achieve a result between 60% and 70%. Five carriers posted reliability levels in the 50% to 60% range.

At the lower end of the ranking, Wan Hai recorded schedule reliability of 29.8%, placing it last among the carriers covered by the analysis.

The decline was evident across the entire group. None of the 13 carriers improved their schedule reliability compared with June. MSC registered the largest month-on-month deterioration, with its performance falling by 11.9 percentage points.

The year-on-year comparison was similarly negative, as no carrier recorded an improvement from July 2025. Wan Hai experienced the steepest annual decline, with its schedule reliability falling by 24.4 percentage points.

The July results show that weaker on-time performance was accompanied by longer delays for services that missed their scheduled arrivals. The deterioration affected all major carriers included in the Sea-Intelligence assessment, although the gap between the strongest and weakest performers remained substantial.