Freight Pulse · Issue 36

Flat composite, split market: transpacific up, Asia–Europe down

The global number did not move. Underneath it, one corridor set fresh highs and another fell 10% in a week. The clearest case this year for reading corridors rather than composites.

SeaFreightPrices Market Desk 4 min read

Index levels assessed 3 September 2026. This is the weekly briefing as it was published — it is not updated afterwards. For the current position on your lanes, use the rate explorer.

The week in numbers

Drewry World Container Index, spot, 40ft, week-on-week.
LaneLevelWeek
Composite$4,465flat
Shanghai – Rotterdam$4,092−5%
Shanghai – Genoa$4,368−10%
Shanghai – Los Angeles$7,185+5%
Shanghai – New York$9,587+3%

What moved, and why

  • The composite held at $4,465 per 40ft because the two big corridors cancelled each other out.
  • Shanghai–Genoa fell 10% in a single week and Shanghai–Rotterdam 5%, while Shanghai–Los Angeles rose 5% and Shanghai–New York 3%.
  • The 1 September general rate increase held on both US coasts — the seventeenth on the East Asia to USA lane this year, against roughly six in a normal year.
  • A run of typhoons since mid-July kept Chinese ports congested, tightening effective capacity on both corridors. Carriers omitted calls and rerouted through transhipment hubs, which protects schedules but displaces cargo.
  • Six transpacific blank sailings were announced for the following week, double the week before.

What it meant for a quote

This was the week to stop quoting anything off a global composite. A customer waving an index at you had a 10% move on one corridor and a 5% move the other way on another, inside the same flat headline. Establish which index, which port pair and which basis before conceding a cent.

Sources

  • Drewry World Container Index, assessment for 3 September 2026, and Drewry Container Capacity Insight.
  • FreightWaves, 2 September 2026, citing Freightos rate data.
  • Alba, market update for September 2026, on the general rate increase count.

Figures are as published by the named third parties on the dates given. They are not SeaFreightPrices benchmarks; our own methodology is set out on the methodology page.