<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">DSV today became the latest top 10 freight forwarder to post market-beating growth in ocean container traffic as the consolidation of the fragmented global logistics industry gathers pace.
 </div>

DSV today became the latest top 10 freight forwarder to post market-beating growth in ocean container traffic as the consolidation of the fragmented global logistics industry gathers pace.

<div>DSV today became the latest top 10 freight forwarder to post market-beating growth in ocean container traffic as the consolidation of the fragmented global logistics industry gathers pace.The Danish group’s container traffic grew 9 percent in the second quarter to 216,044 20-foot equivalent units, outpacing market growth between 3 and 5 percent.First-half volume also increased by 9 percent to 412,014 TEUs, while the overall market again grew by 3 to 5 percent.DSV’s strong ocean performance echoes similar market-beating increases at other top 10 forwarders as they continued to gain market share from smaller rivals. DB Schenker’s first-half volume was up...

DSV today became the latest top 10 freight forwarder to post market-beating growth in ocean container traffic as the consolidation of the fragmented global logistics industry gathers pace. The Danish group’s container traffic grew 9 percent in the second quarter to 216,044 20-foot equivalent units, outpacing market growth between 3 and 5 percent. First-half volume also increased by 9 percent to 412,014 TEUs, while the overall market again grew by 3 to 5 percent. DSV’s strong ocean performance echoes similar market-beating increases at other top 10 forwarders as they continued to gain market share from smaller rivals. DB Schenker’s first-half volume was up 8.5 percent at close to 990,000 TEUs, Kuehne+Nagel grew 8.2 percent to almost 1.9 million TEUs, and Panalpina matched DSV with traffic growing 9 percent to 402,000 TEUs. But DSV, ranked sixth in the JOC’s Top 40 Global 3PLs in 2013 , outperformed its leading rivals in air freight, boosting first-half volume by 11 percent 136,763 metric tons. Panalpina and Kuehne+Nagel matched the market growth of around 4 percent, while DB Schenker was up just 2.6 percent. DSV said “top line growth and increased productivity” in air and ocean freight helped to drive second quarter profit to 701 million Danish crowns ($126 million) from 680 million crowns in the same period in 2013. The ocean and air units increased operating profit before special items to 398 million crowns from 351 million crowns, but “fierce” price competition squeezed European land transport profit to 242 million crowns from 269 million crowns last time. Net revenue rose to 12.2 billion crowns from 11.4 billion crowns, with ocean and air freight contributing 41 percent. “We are gaining market share in a highly competitive market and are seeing a positive development in both earnings and cash flow despite an adverse currency effect,” CEO Jens Andersen said. Andersen said streamlining and cost management initiatives launched this year will help consolidate DSV’s position among the most profitable global freight forwarders. “We still see good possibilities for growth, both organically and through acquisitions,” he said. Contact Bruce Barnard at brucebarnard47@hotmail.com .

Air Cargo

Forwarding

Logistics Technology News

DSV posts market-beating volume growth as logistics sector consolidates

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">The US price index for LTL trucking, bolstered by new contracts, is as high as it’s ever been, but the truckload sector is stuck in a two-year trough. </div>

The US price index for LTL trucking, bolstered by new contracts, is as high as it’s ever been, but the truckload sector is stuck in a two-year trough.

Feature image

<div class="phx-topic">US less-than-truckload (LTL) pricing has flatlined, but at the highest point on record, according to the US Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS). The current BLS long-distance LTL producer price index (PPI) of 259 has remained stable from February through April, level with its previous pandemic-era peak in June 2022. The BLS uses pricing data from December 2003 as its base (100) for calculating the LTL and truckload PPIs. <div class="wrapper-narrow"><dynamic-object type="jocchartid" resource-id="9014abeb-369b-4328-97ae-ee1793647b6e"></dynamic-object></div>The April reading is 4.9% higher than a year ago and 12.1% higher than July 2023 when the <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/yellows-collapse-already-pushing-ltl-rates-higher-as-capacity-tightens-5216052">collapse of Yellow</a> into bankruptcy set LTL costs climbing for the next 22 months. The LTL PPI is a measure of the total “selling price” LTL customers pay carriers for services, including accessorial fees and fuel surcharges as well as base LTL trucking rates. It’s a metric tracking the total cost of LTL services to shippers, rather than base rates. The LTL PPI flatlined from September through December 2024 before jumping 5.8% from December to January and climbing another 0.8% in February to its current plateau. The jump in early 2025 most likely corresponds with new rates set by contract renewals. The PPI corresponds closely with contractual rate increases reported by LTL carriers in recent first-quarter earnings reports and in interviews with the Journal of Commerce. Most carriers reported annualized rate increases in the <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/us-ltl-rates-rising-despite-falling-volumes-more-cautious-shippers-5996463">mid-single-digit percentage range</a> in the first quarter. New contract agreements are still coming into effect. To date, tariff-related variations in demand have had little effect on the US LTL market. The rebound in LTL pricing stands in contrast to the performance of the truckload sector, where pricing is still close to the bottom of a trough first entered in June 2023. <div class="wrapper-narrow"><dynamic-object type="jocchartid" resource-id="ca91266b-e12d-4977-9e6a-03d09f9b08f0"></dynamic-object></div>The BLS long-distance truckload PPI of 175.2 fell just less than 1 percentage point in April and is down 2.6% from January and 24.6% from its pandemic-era peak in May 2022. The basic explanation for the LTL/truckload divergence is capacity. The loss of Yellow put more than 300 LTL terminals on the market; not all of them have been sold or returned to service. The LTL sector as a whole added only 83 terminals in 2024, bringing its total to 3,216 facilities, according to SJ Consulting Group. That’s a 2.7% gain over 2023. The truckload sector <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/large-truckload-carriers-make-capacity-cuts-but-trucks-reenter-the-market-6004177">still has excess capacity</a>, with about 37% more carriers with active operating authorities than in 2019, data from the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration shows. Contact William B. Cassidy at <a href="mailto:bill.cassidy@spglobal.com">bill.cassidy@spglobal.com</a> </div>

US less-than-truckload (LTL) pricing has flatlined, but at the highest point on record, according to the US Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS). The current BLS long-distance LTL producer price index (PPI) of 259 has remained stable from February through April, level with its previous pandemic-era peak in June 2022. The BLS uses pricing data from December 2003 as its base (100) for calculating the LTL and truckload PPIs. The April reading is 4.9% higher than a year ago and 12.1% higher than July 2023 when the collapse of Yellow into bankruptcy set LTL costs climbing for the next 22 months. The LTL PPI is a measure of the total “selling price” LTL customers pay carriers for services, including accessorial fees and fuel surcharges as well as base LTL trucking rates. It’s a metric tracking the total cost of LTL services to shippers, rather than base rates. The LTL PPI flatlined from September through December 2024 before jumping 5.8% from December to January and climbing another 0.8% in February to its current plateau. The jump in early 2025 most likely corresponds with new rates set by contract renewals. The PPI corresponds closely with contractual rate increases reported by LTL carriers in recent first-quarter earnings reports and in interviews with the Journal of Commerce. Most carriers reported annualized rate increases in the mid-single-digit percentage range in the first quarter. New contract agreements are still coming into effect. To date, tariff-related variations in demand have had little effect on the US LTL market. The rebound in LTL pricing stands in contrast to the performance of the truckload sector, where pricing is still close to the bottom of a trough first entered in June 2023. The BLS long-distance truckload PPI of 175.2 fell just less than 1 percentage point in April and is down 2.6% from January and 24.6% from its pandemic-era peak in May 2022. The basic explanation for the LTL/truckload divergence is capacity. The loss of Yellow put more than 300 LTL terminals on the market; not all of them have been sold or returned to service. The LTL sector as a whole added only 83 terminals in 2024, bringing its total to 3,216 facilities, according to SJ Consulting Group. That’s a 2.7% gain over 2023. The truckload sector still has excess capacity , with about 37% more carriers with active operating authorities than in 2019, data from the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration shows. Contact William B. Cassidy at bill.cassidy@spglobal.com

Trucking News

Truckload

Surface

US LTL pricing maintains record high as truckload slumps

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">Importers can get a fairly good sense of how to proceed over the next few months based on developments to date, but things will get fuzzy when the separate cooldown periods for tariffs on China and the rest of the world expire this summer, writes Lars Jensen. </div>

Importers can get a fairly good sense of how to proceed over the next few months based on developments to date, but things will get fuzzy when the separate cooldown periods for tariffs on China and the rest of the world expire this summer, writes Lars Jensen.

<div class="phx-topic">How should one think about planning their supply chain to and from the US during the upcoming peak season? The easy answer would be to simply state that everything is unpredictable and hence you must resort merely to short-term tactical actions. And while there is some truth to the unpredictability and need for a tactical approach, this does not mean the imminent peak season is completely unpredictable. <div class="wrapper-narrow float-right-element"><img src="/images/phoenix/6008658_0.1.jpg"></img></div>Let us start with what we know, then follow up with what further developments will likely be. On that basis, it will emerge that some elements are indeed partially predictable. Presently, we know that reciprocal tariffs on countries other than China are on pause until July 9. We also know that the <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/capacity-crunch-beckons-on-eastbound-trans-pacific-after-us-china-deal-6002956">US tariffs on China are lowered to 30% and Chinese tariffs on the US are at 10% until Aug. 14.</a> We know that carriers reduced capacity from Asia to the US West Coast by 18% from the US tariffs announcement on April 2 until the announced pause in China tariffs. The capacity from Asia to the US East Coast was adjusted down by 7%. We know that various carriers and forwarders have reported a cut of 20% to 40% in bookings from China due to the tariffs. We know that following the partial pause in China tariffs, carriers have seen a surge in cargo bookings. Not much has been forthcoming in terms of data yet, but <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/china-us-ocean-bookings-surge-since-weekend-trade-deal-hapag-lloyd-6004653">Hapag-Lloyd has mentioned a roughly 50% increase in bookings from China</a>. Not compared to the recent slump, but compared to the situation before April 2. These are all elements we know to be factually true. Then there are elements we can predict with a good degree of certainty. Spot rates in the short term will rise sharply. The carriers cannot physically un-blank the blank sailings rapidly. This takes a little while. That means right now demand exceeds the capacity available, which inevitably will cause a sharp spike in spot rates. This will continue until enough capacity has been brought back into the trans-Pacific. Given the sharp rise in spot rates, it is also inevitable that carriers will indeed place more capacity into the trade. One way to do that is to blank sailings on other ex-Asia trades, such as Asia-Europe, Asia-Indian subcontinent and Asia-South America. This is likely to happen, especially where spot rates on those trades have been trending downwards. The blank sailings out of Asia for the past four weeks are simply a fact already. But that also means we will now see a four-week period of significant blank sailings on the backhaul from the US to Asia. This also means the ability of carriers to reposition empty containers back to China is reduced. This reduced amount of repositioning will “hit” China some three to four weeks into the future. Given the two deadlines of July 9 and Aug. 14, it is very predictable that US importers will attempt to fast-track part of their peak season cargo where possible. This means the main part of the trans-Pacific peak will be from June to mid-August. The drop in empty container repositioning will come to fruition in the middle of this period. This could lead to sporadic and temporary equipment shortages. Will the surge in Chinese exports lead to congestion at US ports? This is very likely, although it is a matter of nuance in terms of how severe it will be. The main factor is how quickly the carriers can bring more capacity into the trans-Pacific. If it happens rapidly, there will be a significant problem. But if it happens more gradually, the impact will be less severe. But it will nonetheless put pressure on truck, rail and chassis availability as we get towards the middle of June. <h3>Post-pause uncertainty </h3>Where the predictions become much more problematic is when we get to the expiry of the pause on reciprocal tariffs. The latest statements from the US government imply that the US will announce the new reciprocal tariffs within the next two to three weeks. But what the level will be and whether it will only come into force on July 9 is not known. The same applies for the Aug. 14 deadline with China. If the tariffs revert to high levels, we should expect cargo volumes to once again drop sharply, in part because shippers will look to the past track record of the trade war and conclude that “wait-and-see” appears to be the best strategy under the circumstances. And if this subsequently leads to yet another round of cargo declines followed by a cargo surge and spot rate hikes, this might be an acceptable risk. It should also be noted that the rate spike we are seeing now and in the coming week entails a much lower cost than if the importers had chosen to move cargo subject to the 145% tariffs. All in all, the plan – insofar as there is a medium-term plan – would have to be one that assumes potentially another stop-start cycle of container cargo movements to the US. Contact Lars Jensen at <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/lars.jensen@vespucci-maritime.com">lars.jensen@vespucci-maritime.com.</a></div>

How should one think about planning their supply chain to and from the US during the upcoming peak season? The easy answer would be to simply state that everything is unpredictable and hence you must resort merely to short-term tactical actions. And while there is some truth to the unpredictability and need for a tactical approach, this does not mean the imminent peak season is completely unpredictable. Let us start with what we know, then follow up with what further developments will likely be. On that basis, it will emerge that some elements are indeed partially predictable. Presently, we know that reciprocal tariffs on countries other than China are on pause until July 9. We also know that the US tariffs on China are lowered to 30% and Chinese tariffs on the US are at 10% until Aug. 14. We know that carriers reduced capacity from Asia to the US West Coast by 18% from the US tariffs announcement on April 2 until the announced pause in China tariffs. The capacity from Asia to the US East Coast was adjusted down by 7%. We know that various carriers and forwarders have reported a cut of 20% to 40% in bookings from China due to the tariffs. We know that following the partial pause in China tariffs, carriers have seen a surge in cargo bookings. Not much has been forthcoming in terms of data yet, but Hapag-Lloyd has mentioned a roughly 50% increase in bookings from China . Not compared to the recent slump, but compared to the situation before April 2. These are all elements we know to be factually true. Then there are elements we can predict with a good degree of certainty. Spot rates in the short term will rise sharply. The carriers cannot physically un-blank the blank sailings rapidly. This takes a little while. That means right now demand exceeds the capacity available, which inevitably will cause a sharp spike in spot rates. This will continue until enough capacity has been brought back into the trans-Pacific. Given the sharp rise in spot rates, it is also inevitable that carriers will indeed place more capacity into the trade. One way to do that is to blank sailings on other ex-Asia trades, such as Asia-Europe, Asia-Indian subcontinent and Asia-South America. This is likely to happen, especially where spot rates on those trades have been trending downwards. The blank sailings out of Asia for the past four weeks are simply a fact already. But that also means we will now see a four-week period of significant blank sailings on the backhaul from the US to Asia. This also means the ability of carriers to reposition empty containers back to China is reduced. This reduced amount of repositioning will “hit” China some three to four weeks into the future. Given the two deadlines of July 9 and Aug. 14, it is very predictable that US importers will attempt to fast-track part of their peak season cargo where possible. This means the main part of the trans-Pacific peak will be from June to mid-August. The drop in empty container repositioning will come to fruition in the middle of this period. This could lead to sporadic and temporary equipment shortages. Will the surge in Chinese exports lead to congestion at US ports? This is very likely, although it is a matter of nuance in terms of how severe it will be. The main factor is how quickly the carriers can bring more capacity into the trans-Pacific. If it happens rapidly, there will be a significant problem. But if it happens more gradually, the impact will be less severe. But it will nonetheless put pressure on truck, rail and chassis availability as we get towards the middle of June. Post-pause uncertainty Where the predictions become much more problematic is when we get to the expiry of the pause on reciprocal tariffs. The latest statements from the US government imply that the US will announce the new reciprocal tariffs within the next two to three weeks. But what the level will be and whether it will only come into force on July 9 is not known. The same applies for the Aug. 14 deadline with China. If the tariffs revert to high levels, we should expect cargo volumes to once again drop sharply, in part because shippers will look to the past track record of the trade war and conclude that “wait-and-see” appears to be the best strategy under the circumstances. And if this subsequently leads to yet another round of cargo declines followed by a cargo surge and spot rate hikes, this might be an acceptable risk. It should also be noted that the rate spike we are seeing now and in the coming week entails a much lower cost than if the importers had chosen to move cargo subject to the 145% tariffs. All in all, the plan – insofar as there is a medium-term plan – would have to be one that assumes potentially another stop-start cycle of container cargo movements to the US. Contact Lars Jensen at lars.jensen@vespucci-maritime.com.

Container lines

Trans-Pacific

North American ports

Maritime

US supply chain planning must involve a mix of the known and unknown

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">The Port of Los Angeles took the top spot for containerized imports in 2024 and edged out Houston and Savannah as the busiest gateway for exports.</div>

The Port of Los Angeles took the top spot for containerized imports in 2024 and edged out Houston and Savannah as the busiest gateway for exports.

US West Coast ports regained some North American import market share last year, in part driven by labor uncertainty at ports along the East and Gulf coasts that encouraged some shippers to shift their cargo to Pacific gateways. The Port of Los Angeles maintained its position as the number one port for North American imports, with 15.5% of the total market share — up from 14.7% in 2023, according to PIERS, a sister product of the Journal of Commerce within S&P Global. The Port of Long Beach edged out the Port of New York and New Jersey to secure the second-largest market share for North American imports last year, returning to second place with 13.7% after two years of slipping to third. Los Angeles brought in 5.35 million TEUs in imports last year, up 20.6% compared with 2023. Similarly, Long Beach increased import volumes 24.4% to 4.72 million TEUs. Volumes at New York-New Jersey rose 11.2% to 4.43 million TEUs. Overall, ports on the West Coast secured 49.8% of North American import share last year, up from 47.8% in 2023. The East Coast saw its share dip to 38.1% from 40.6% the year prior, while the Gulf Coast trimmed just under half a percentage point to 9%. Overall, North American imports reached 34.57 million TEUs in 2024, up 14.3% year over year. Los Angeles tops in exports, too Meanwhile, the 2024 export market also showed some notable shifts in market share. Los Angeles climbed into the top spot for outbound containers, moving out 1.49 million TEUs, or 10.1% of the total market share, according to PIERS. That’s the largest export market share of any North American port since at least 2019. The Port of Houston, which tied Savannah for first place in exports in 2023, secured the second spot with 1.42 million TEUs, or 9.65%, in 2024. Savannah slipped to third with 1.37 million TEUs, or 9.3% of the total export market. The ports of New York-New Jersey and Long Beach took the fourth and fifth slots, respectively, with NY-NJ securing a 9.2% share of the export market and Long Beach 8.2%. The export market share held by Atlantic ports moved down to 45.6% last year from 47.9% in 2023, while West Coast ports secured 35.5% of outgoing shipments, up slightly from 35% in 2023. Gulf Coast ports moved 15.8% of 2024 exports, down from 16.1% in 2023. In total, North American exports reached 14.76 million TEUs in 2024, up 3.5% from 2023. Contact Laura Robb at laura.robb@spglobal.com .Journal of Commerce Top 25 North American Container Ports by Imports Annual containerized imports, in laden TEUs Volume Market Share 2024 Rank Port Coast 2023 2024 2023 2024 1 Los Angeles West 4,441,330 5,356,680 14.7% 15.5% 2 Long Beach West 3,804,356 4,729,552 12.6% 13.7% 3 New York-New Jersey East 3,990,107 4,438,854 13.2% 12.8% 4 Savannah East 2,402,328 2,739,628 7.9% 7.9% 5 Houston Gulf 1,746,381 1,888,853 5.8% 5.5% 6 Vancouver, BC West 1,601,919 1,821,755 5.3% 5.3% 7 Manzanillo West 1,486,642 1,698,437 4.9% 4.9% 8 Virginia East 1,398,872 1,543,471 4.6% 4.5% 9 Northwest Seaport Alliance1 West 1,078,005 1,289,198 3.6% 3.7% 10 Charleston East 1,220,386 1,245,723 4.0% 3.6% 11 Oakland West 800,432 937,538 2.6% 2.7% 12 Lazaro Cardenas West 660,314 760,195 2.2% 2.2% 13 Montreal2 East 759,353 750,466 2.5% 2.2% 14 Veracruz Gulf 513,827 606,852 1.7% 1.8% 15 Miami East 513,075 513,209 1.7% 1.5% 16 Philadelphia East 410,063 472,973 1.4% 1.4% 17 Prince Rupert West 369,459 400,267 1.2% 1.2% 18 Port Everglades East 319,370 356,857 1.1% 1.0% 19 Altamira Gulf 318,521 350,372 1.1% 1.0% 20 Baltimore East 504,981 347,975 1.7% 1.0% 21 Jacksonville East 306,383 317,884 1.0% 0.9% 22 Mobile Gulf 285,287 291,119 0.9% 0.8% 23 Halifax2 East 280,332 265,260 0.9% 0.8% 24 Ensenada West 221,182 221,182 0.7% 0.6% 25 Wilmington, Del. East 182,780 194,006 0.6% 0.6% Total US Ports in Top 25 23,404,136 26,663,520 79.0% 77.1% Total Canada Ports in Top 25 3,011,063 3,237,748 10.2% 9.4% Total Mexico Ports in Top 25 3,200,486 3,637,038 10.8% 10.5% TOTAL TOP 25 NORTH AMERICAN PORTS BY IMPORTS 29,615,685 33,538,306 97.9% 97.0% Total US Imports 23,985,173 27,658,025 79.3% 80.0% Total Canada Imports 3,011,063 3,237,748 10.0% 9.4% Total Mexico Imports 3,263,223 3,684,051 10.8% 10.7% TOTAL NORTH AMERICAN IMPORTS 30,259,459 34,579,824 100.0% 100.0% Rankings include container ports in Canada, Mexico and the US, omitting ports in US territories and possessions. US TEU count includes all international containerized ocean borne cargo loading at US ports. Lakes cargo data as available. 1Combined volumes of Seattle and Tacoma, members of The Northwest Seaport Alliance. 2Volumes include empty containers. Sources: Mexico: Ministry of Communications and Transportation; Canada: Port authorities; US: PIERS (www.piers.com), a sister product of the Journal of Commerce within S&P Global, and port authorities © 2025 S&P Global. Journal of Commerce Top 25 North American Container Ports by Exports Annual containerized exports, in laden TEUs Volume Market Share 2024 Rank Port Coast 2023 2024 2023 2024 1 Los Angeles West 1,291,997 1,494,201 9.1% 10.1% 2 Houston Gulf 1,342,941 1,424,311 9.4% 9.6% 3 Savannah East 1,336,121 1,376,887 9.4% 9.3% 4 New York-New Jersey East 1,284,976 1,354,421 9.0% 9.2% 5 Long Beach West 1,282,437 1,207,036 9.0% 8.2% 6 Virginia East 987,515 974,259 6.9% 6.6% 7 Vancouver, BC West 754,747 794,724 5.3% 5.4% 8 Montreal2 East 779,111 735,376 5.5% 5.0% 9 Charleston East 702,974 655,498 4.9% 4.4% 10 Oakland West 615,315 644,463 4.3% 4.4% 11 Northwest Seaport Alliance1 West 588,744 636,507 4.1% 4.3% 12 Jacksonville East 490,792 489,227 3.4% 3.3% 13 Manzanillo West 328,490 332,782 2.3% 2.3% 14 Port Everglades East 289,411 322,412 2.0% 2.2% 15 Altamira Gulf 292,493 285,266 2.1% 1.9% 16 Miami East 288,050 248,986 2.0% 1.7% 17 Halifax2 East 265,831 244,013 1.9% 1.7% 18 New Orleans Gulf 232,601 237,536 1.6% 1.6% 19 Veracruz Gulf 268,792 229,422 1.9% 1.6% 20 Mobile Gulf 159,856 159,148 1.1% 1.1% 21 Baltimore East 208,094 143,773 1.5% 1.0% 22 Prince Rupert West 125,254 130,910 0.9% 0.9% 23 Philadelphia East 91,384 97,784 0.6% 0.7% 24 Wilmington, NC East 106,733 96,553 0.7% 0.7% 25 Ensenada West 66,816 63,091 0.5% 0.4% Total US Ports in Top 25 11,299,941 11,563,002 79.7% 78.3% Total Canada Ports in Top 25 1,857,843 1,905,023 13.1% 12.9% Total Mexico Ports in Top 25 1,412,778 910,561 10.0% 6.2% TOTAL TOP 25 NORTH AMERICA PORTS BY EXPORTS 14,181,475 14,378,586 99.4% 97.4% Total US Exports 11,304,055 11,765,507 79.3% 79.7% Total Canada Exports 1,857,843 1,905,023 13.0% 12.9% Total Mexico Exports 1,098,590 1,092,088 7.7% 7.4% TOTAL NORTH AMERICAN EXPORTS 14,260,488 14,762,618 100.0% 100.0% Rankings include container ports in Canada, Mexico and the US, omitting ports in US territories and possessions. US TEU count includes all international containerized ocean borne cargo loading at US ports. Lakes cargo data as available. 1Combined volumes of Seattle and Tacoma, members of The Northwest Seaport Alliance. 2Volumes include empty containers. Sources: Mexico: Ministry of Communications and Transportation; Canada: Port authorities; US: PIERS (www.piers.com), a sister product of the Journal of Commerce within S&P Global, and port authorities. © 2025 S&P Global.

Container Shipping News

Trans-Atlantic

Port News

USWC recovered import market share last year amid East, Gulf coast labor woes

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">Strained relationships between London and Brussels have plagued trade negotiations over the past five years around complex issues including tariffs, regulations, fishing rights and the movement of people.</div>

Strained relationships between London and Brussels have plagued trade negotiations over the past five years around complex issues including tariffs, regulations, fishing rights and the movement of people.

<div class="phx-topic">The trade deal hammered out between the UK and the European Union is being hailed by business groups and the logistics industry as a positive step toward reducing border frictions that have been in place since Britain formally left the EU in 2020. But even as the ink dries on the EU-UK Trade and Cooperation Agreement signed Monday, business leaders are urging both sides to ensure the streamlined cross-border measures agreed to are implemented in full. “It is now down to government to work out the most practical solutions,” Steve Parker, director-general of the British International Freight Association (BIFA), said in a statement. “We hope that the announcement will significantly simplify border processes and consequently contribute to increased volumes of goods traded between the UK and the EU,” he added. A statement from the UK’s Port of Dover, which handles one-third of all UK-EU trade volume, said it will be working with the governments of the UK, France and the European Commission “to implement this deal effectively and maximize shared prosperity [on] either side of the English Channel.” “An improvement in border processes will not only restore confidence for businesses and investors but also drive economic growth and supply chain resilience, and we are pleased to see these objectives recognized in [the] agreement,” the port noted. <h3>Removing trade barriers </h3>Strained relationships between London and Brussels have plagued trade negotiations over the past five years around complex issues including tariffs, regulations, fishing rights and the movement of people. But the agreement has left the industry optimistic that barriers to trade have been removed. Helen Dickinson, CEO of the British Retail Consortium, said the deal would benefit retail businesses and consumers in both the UK and continental Europe. “As well as supporting growth for exporters to the UK’s biggest export market, retailers operating in the EU will also see a huge reduction in the unnecessary processes, paperwork and administrative burden when exporting goods, supporting our competitiveness abroad,” Dickinson said in a statement Tuesday. <h3>Eliminating food inspections </h3>A key part of the UK-EU agreement is a plan to establish a UK-EU Sanitary and Phytosanitary Zone that will remove routine border checks on agri-food products. British goods such as dairy, fish, eggs and red meat currently require checks of all paperwork and up to 30% physical checks. The Sanitary and Phytosanitary deal will remove these checks entirely, which Parker said will cut costs, complexities and delays that are disrupting trade flows between the two trading bodies. “BIFA members, and the importers and exporters they serve, will be breathing a sigh of relief following practical commitments to improve regulatory cooperation,” Parker said. Dickinson agreed, noting that the removal of border checks for agri-food will be good news for retailers and consumers on both sides of the channel, streamlining border processes, lowering costs and improving the speed and reliability of food imports. Data from consultancy MDS Intermodal shows that UK imports of fresh produce in metric tons, particularly fruit and vegetables, have fallen 17% since 2017, with a switch away from the EU as a source of fresh produce to non-EU and Mediterranean sources. Also agreed to Monday was the linking of the UK and EU emissions trading schemes. Following Brexit, the UK could no longer participate in the <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/european-parliament-approves-shipping-ets-but-stakeholders-wary-5202492">EU Emissions Trading System</a> (ETS) and had to establish its own smaller and more volatile trading scheme. A UK government statement said linking the two measures would create a more stable market and allow the UK to avoid being charged under the EU Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM), a policy aimed at ensuring imported carbon-intensive goods face similar carbon costs as those produced within the EU. CBAM is in a transitional phase and will be implemented next year. The deal with the EU is the third major trade agreement reached by the UK in the past month following deals with India and the US. Contact Greg Knowler at <a href="mailto:greg.knowler@spglobal.com">greg.knowler@spglobal.com</a>. </div>

The trade deal hammered out between the UK and the European Union is being hailed by business groups and the logistics industry as a positive step toward reducing border frictions that have been in place since Britain formally left the EU in 2020. But even as the ink dries on the EU-UK Trade and Cooperation Agreement signed Monday, business leaders are urging both sides to ensure the streamlined cross-border measures agreed to are implemented in full. “It is now down to government to work out the most practical solutions,” Steve Parker, director-general of the British International Freight Association (BIFA), said in a statement. “We hope that the announcement will significantly simplify border processes and consequently contribute to increased volumes of goods traded between the UK and the EU,” he added. A statement from the UK’s Port of Dover, which handles one-third of all UK-EU trade volume, said it will be working with the governments of the UK, France and the European Commission “to implement this deal effectively and maximize shared prosperity [on] either side of the English Channel.” “An improvement in border processes will not only restore confidence for businesses and investors but also drive economic growth and supply chain resilience, and we are pleased to see these objectives recognized in [the] agreement,” the port noted. Removing trade barriers Strained relationships between London and Brussels have plagued trade negotiations over the past five years around complex issues including tariffs, regulations, fishing rights and the movement of people. But the agreement has left the industry optimistic that barriers to trade have been removed. Helen Dickinson, CEO of the British Retail Consortium, said the deal would benefit retail businesses and consumers in both the UK and continental Europe. “As well as supporting growth for exporters to the UK’s biggest export market, retailers operating in the EU will also see a huge reduction in the unnecessary processes, paperwork and administrative burden when exporting goods, supporting our competitiveness abroad,” Dickinson said in a statement Tuesday. Eliminating food inspections A key part of the UK-EU agreement is a plan to establish a UK-EU Sanitary and Phytosanitary Zone that will remove routine border checks on agri-food products. British goods such as dairy, fish, eggs and red meat currently require checks of all paperwork and up to 30% physical checks. The Sanitary and Phytosanitary deal will remove these checks entirely, which Parker said will cut costs, complexities and delays that are disrupting trade flows between the two trading bodies. “BIFA members, and the importers and exporters they serve, will be breathing a sigh of relief following practical commitments to improve regulatory cooperation,” Parker said. Dickinson agreed, noting that the removal of border checks for agri-food will be good news for retailers and consumers on both sides of the channel, streamlining border processes, lowering costs and improving the speed and reliability of food imports. Data from consultancy MDS Intermodal shows that UK imports of fresh produce in metric tons, particularly fruit and vegetables, have fallen 17% since 2017, with a switch away from the EU as a source of fresh produce to non-EU and Mediterranean sources. Also agreed to Monday was the linking of the UK and EU emissions trading schemes. Following Brexit, the UK could no longer participate in the EU Emissions Trading System (ETS) and had to establish its own smaller and more volatile trading scheme. A UK government statement said linking the two measures would create a more stable market and allow the UK to avoid being charged under the EU Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM), a policy aimed at ensuring imported carbon-intensive goods face similar carbon costs as those produced within the EU. CBAM is in a transitional phase and will be implemented next year. The deal with the EU is the third major trade agreement reached by the UK in the past month following deals with India and the US. Contact Greg Knowler at greg.knowler@spglobal.com .

Transport, Trade and Regulation News

Supply chain

UK-EU trade deal designed to ease Brexit-driven border frictions

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">Under their current configuration, the newest round of tariffs targeting China’s maritime industry will add $7 billion in costs for US ports, according to one estimate. </div>

Under their current configuration, the newest round of tariffs targeting China’s maritime industry will add $7 billion in costs for US ports, according to one estimate.

<div class="phx-topic">US ports face almost $7 billion in tariff costs under the Trump administration’s proposed levy on Chinese container cranes, according to the American Association of Port Authorities (AAPA), which has joined other stakeholders in calling for a delay to allow a domestic crane industry to develop before cutting China out of the market.AAPA delivered the estimate in prepared comments ahead of a hearing on Monday on the new tariffs at the United States Trade Representative (USTR). The USTR in April unveiled the proposed tariffs on Chinese-made cranes, containers, chassis and similar equipment as part of its one-year-old investigation into China’s dominant market share of the maritime, logistics and shipbuilding industries. The investigation, begun under the Biden administration at the request of several US trade and manufacturing unions, has already resulted in <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/scaled-back-ustr-port-tariff-to-hit-chinese-carriers-hardest-5987549">a new tariff</a> to be assessed on Chinese ships and ocean carriers calling the US beginning in October. AAPA said 44 of the 55 cranes currently on order by US ports are being made in China. Over the next 10 years, US ports need to purchase another 151 container cranes, with 121 of those due to come from China, AAPA said. Those current and future orders total about $2.5 billion, AAPA said. If the tariffs on container equipment — up to 100% — are added to existing tariffs on Chinese imports, US ports will pay $6.7 billion in tariffs, according to the group. As an example, AAPA said the Port of Houston is scheduled to receive eight cranes from Shanghai Zhenhua Heavy Industries (ZPMC), China’s leading manufacturer, in the spring of 2026. Houston would be forced to pay $304 million in tariffs on that order if the fees are imposed, AAPA said, adding “that means over $300 million not invested in infrastructure projects at one of the nation’s largest ports.” AAPA asked that any cranes ordered before April be exempt from the tariffs. “American ports need these cranes now, but they simply cannot afford [the] unexpected costs,” AAPA said. “They cannot back out of these purchases.” <h3>‘Significant strain’</h3>The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey said its marine terminal operators, which have over 70 cranes, are currently planning to purchase more. With ZPMC the source for over half of the port’s cranes, the tariffs would “result in a significant strain on the local and national maritime industry,” the port said.Even if a port did not contract with ZPMC, orders with other crane manufacturers in Europe and Asia would also likely face the tariffs because part of their manufacturing is done in China or uses Chinese components, the National Association of Waterfront Employers (NAWE) said in its prepared comments to the USTR.While the Biden administration earmarked $20 billion in incentives last year for developing US crane manufacturing, AAPA and NAWE said that effort will take a long time to develop due to the lack of skilled welders and the reliance on Chinese manufacturers for subassemblies and other crane components. Both groups urged the USTR to delay the implementation by two to three years to allow a US-based crane industry to develop. “Currently, existing suppliers have a lead time of about two years for new orders of STS cranes,” AAPA said. “We can therefore assume that it will take at least that long for the first American STS cranes to roll off the assembly line, and that is if final investment decisions in new factories were made today.” Contact Michael Angell at <a href="mailto:michael.angell@spglobal.com">michael.angell@spglobal.com</a>. </div>

US ports face almost $7 billion in tariff costs under the Trump administration’s proposed levy on Chinese container cranes, according to the American Association of Port Authorities (AAPA), which has joined other stakeholders in calling for a delay to allow a domestic crane industry to develop before cutting China out of the market. AAPA delivered the estimate in prepared comments ahead of a hearing on Monday on the new tariffs at the United States Trade Representative (USTR). The USTR in April unveiled the proposed tariffs on Chinese-made cranes, containers, chassis and similar equipment as part of its one-year-old investigation into China’s dominant market share of the maritime, logistics and shipbuilding industries. The investigation, begun under the Biden administration at the request of several US trade and manufacturing unions, has already resulted in a new tariff to be assessed on Chinese ships and ocean carriers calling the US beginning in October. AAPA said 44 of the 55 cranes currently on order by US ports are being made in China. Over the next 10 years, US ports need to purchase another 151 container cranes, with 121 of those due to come from China, AAPA said. Those current and future orders total about $2.5 billion, AAPA said. If the tariffs on container equipment — up to 100% — are added to existing tariffs on Chinese imports, US ports will pay $6.7 billion in tariffs, according to the group. As an example, AAPA said the Port of Houston is scheduled to receive eight cranes from Shanghai Zhenhua Heavy Industries (ZPMC), China’s leading manufacturer, in the spring of 2026. Houston would be forced to pay $304 million in tariffs on that order if the fees are imposed, AAPA said, adding “that means over $300 million not invested in infrastructure projects at one of the nation’s largest ports.” AAPA asked that any cranes ordered before April be exempt from the tariffs. “American ports need these cranes now, but they simply cannot afford [the] unexpected costs,” AAPA said. “They cannot back out of these purchases.” ‘Significant strain’ The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey said its marine terminal operators, which have over 70 cranes, are currently planning to purchase more. With ZPMC the source for over half of the port’s cranes, the tariffs would “result in a significant strain on the local and national maritime industry,” the port said. Even if a port did not contract with ZPMC, orders with other crane manufacturers in Europe and Asia would also likely face the tariffs because part of their manufacturing is done in China or uses Chinese components, the National Association of Waterfront Employers (NAWE) said in its prepared comments to the USTR. While the Biden administration earmarked $20 billion in incentives last year for developing US crane manufacturing, AAPA and NAWE said that effort will take a long time to develop due to the lack of skilled welders and the reliance on Chinese manufacturers for subassemblies and other crane components. Both groups urged the USTR to delay the implementation by two to three years to allow a US-based crane industry to develop. “Currently, existing suppliers have a lead time of about two years for new orders of STS cranes,” AAPA said. “We can therefore assume that it will take at least that long for the first American STS cranes to roll off the assembly line, and that is if final investment decisions in new factories were made today.” Contact Michael Angell at michael.angell@spglobal.com .

Port infrastructure

Marine terminals

Ports look to delay proposed US tariffs on Chinese-made cranes

Use code GTW695 at checkout and save $800 on first year of an annual Gold subscription!

Upgrade Subscription - Gold Trials

Become a Gold Subscriber and Save!

Use code MDRW695 at checkout and save $800 on first year of a Gold subscription!

Upgrade Subscription - Wide Box

MEMORIAL DAY SALE

Arm your team with the most trusted information portal for the international container shipping industry.

Group Subscriptions - Wide Box

Get into a group subscription today

Use code MDW25 at checkout to save 25% on the first year of any annual subscription! 

Subscribe Now - Free Trials - Wide Box

Use code MDW25 at checkout and save 25% on any annual subscription!

Subscribe Now - Anonymous - Wide Box

The world of LTL is slow to embrace change. Business anachronisms permeate current supply chain processes. These vestiges of the way things used to work define the LTL freight transportation procurement process of many modern shippers.David Knuth, logistics specialist at IEWC, a global supplier of cable and wire based in Wisconsin, is happy to have modernized the RFP process, automating the entire LTL bidding procedure with Bid$ense, SMC³’s automated truckload and LTL freight transportation sourcing solution. But when prompted, he can still recall what once was.In his previous job, a large part of his duties were consumed by creating an intermodal bid package for carriers. In a spreadsheet, Knuth detailed the company’s volumes lane by lane, taking care to delete any errant keystrokes or misleading data. He would then email out the information to each carrier, taking time to respond to detailed technical questions about the spreadsheet data. Finally, he had to compile all the results, create an algorithm that would compare the carriers on each lane, and award the business.“It was a huge undertaking. It took about four months to do,” Knuth said of the old process. “It was almost a full-time job for that part of the year, every year.”In his new job at IEWC, he sat down with Bid$ense on day one and was amazed at the capabilities. Knuth had never before used a bid tool. SMC³’s latest versions of Bid$ense automate the process even further, taking truckload and LTL RFPs entirely online. The tool draws on RFP best-practices protocols to streamline the bidding communication process, enabling bidding carriers to respond accurately and promptly to shipper requests. The solution also does all the distribution work automatically, electronically submitting shipper bid data to carriers based on their actual service capabilities and performance records. Carriers are alerted with timely prompts for RFP deliverables, so shippers aren’t waiting by the phone for responses.Another benefit of automating the process is the data-cleansing assistance. When Knuth sent spreadsheets to carriers, data errors might cloud the bidding process; he might have to resend data or simply accept a price that did not truly reflect the costs of doing business. Data cleansing is incredibly beneficial, he said.The spreadsheet technique also made bidding analysis an onerous task. Since Bid$ense automates and streamlines the entire RFP process, intensive examination is now simple. SMC³ knows that each bid has more than one best outcome. With uniform responses from each carrier, shippers can quickly rank results and create an unlimited quantity of what-if scenarios to make the optimal procurement decision.Jesse Burnett of Central Garden &amp; Pet experiences many of the same benefits. Founded in 1980, Central Garden &amp; Pet has spent the last three decades growing from a small garden supply company to a provider of a range of products from dog chews and bird seed to soil supplements and natural insecticides. For much of its life, the company shipped these disparate goods via LTL and truckload carriers to retailers throughout the country, relying on each business unit to negotiate directly with their freight transportation providers. This arrangement worked fairly well for a small company, but as Central Garden &amp; Pet expanded, leadership decided to consolidate decision making.Burnett helped centralize the transportation decision making in 2015 with SMC³’s Bid$ense. Before Bid$ense, every business unit operated independently as far as negotiating with carriers.“There were a lot of different things just floating around,” he said. “We didn’t have master agreements in place; no national pricing at all. The pricing from carriers was just all over the place, depending on where you were.”The transformations he saw with Bid$ense were immediate. Burnett has been using the tool about every other year since its implementation at the company. Central Garden and Pet’s $19.6 million 2019 LTL bid saved the company just more than 9 percent when compared to its historical average. For Burnett, though, bid automation extends far beyond savings.“We knew that we weren’t getting the best pricing offer from our carriers just because nothing was centralized,” he continued. “We knew that if we combined everything from all these business units and paired it with one corporate offering, then it would drive some cost benefit with it.”When the company initially decided to centralize bid procurement, executives researched a number of different methodologies and technologies. In the end, though, Burnett found that Bid$ense was both widespread and well known, and that his carrier partners already knew how to use the application. Burnett also highlighted the data-cleansing process as a major benefit, saying the rigorous process ensures that carriers always return the best price.“It definitely has helped drive savings,” he said. “Any time you go out there and you drive that competitiveness with the carriers and they know they’re in a bid environment, it seems to sharpen their pencils.”Transportation procurement is an integral part of the modern supply chain. With Bid$ense, shippers can develop a strategic implementation plan that saves them time and money, but also helps them create strong relationships with their carrier partners. These carriers appreciate the solution’s data-cleansing process; when carriers receive a complete shipment history and future volume forecast, they don’t have to guess on pricing. Carriers that receive more data from shippers get a complete picture of that shipper’s freight, allowing them to accurately plan instead of simply preparing for the worst-case scenario. Clean data presented through an automated system can lead to both bigger shipment savings and a lasting partnership between carrier and customer.Whether customers are looking to streamline over-the-road transportation bidding by automating the RFP process or create an entirely new, centralized sourcing process, Bid$ense has the analytical horsepower to get the job done.SMC³ 2020 Customer Case Study

SMC3rates_shutterstock_5247046.jpg

Shippers save money, time with automated transportation bidding tools

If there’s one immutable truth in the world of logistics, it’s this: LTL is an inherently complex form of transportation. Tariffs, rates, DIM weights, transit times — it’s enough to confuse even seasoned logistics professionals. The solution to this knowledge gap has historically been on-the-job training or university supply chain education, but for a variety of reasons there is now a pressing need for third-party, remote LTL training that prepares logistics workers for transportation success. Global Scope Can Overlook Local Intricacies In the past, professionals looking to move into a supply chain career learned about the basics of supply chain from universities. However, many of these college supply chain programs are now global in scope, focusing on worldwide supply chain management instead of the intricacies of specialized domestic transportation. And even these programs, which used to be widespread, are becoming less common. LTL is not an industry of broad-brush strokes; supply chain professionals really need a pointillistic understanding of the logistics of LTL in order to excel in the industry. Accelerating Need for Dedicated LTL Education This lack of specified training put the onus on employers to prepare new hires with the LTL knowledge needed to do their jobs. Dedicated LTL study is a necessity, not a luxury. At the same time, changes in LTL and the broader supply chain world are accelerating. The reliance on e-commerce has ballooned since the start of the pandemic, and last-mile LTL shipments and related e-commerce strains on the supply chain won’t diminish once social distancing abates. That genie isn’t going back into the bottle. So supply chain employers need logistics workers that are fully versed in all aspects of the industry, ready to solve unique shipping and delivery problems based on their extensive supply chain knowledge But why care about LTL? It’s been reported that some shippers in today’s world are no longer concerned with what mode is used to ship their goods. A Multimodal Approach Ensures On-Time Delivery This mode agnosticism means supply chain stakeholders have to be well versed in all modes of transportation. As unforeseen weather events and other disruptions, such as protests, become more common, savvy logistics employees will need to be armed with familiarity of all modes, not just the most popular, to ensure that freight is delivered on time, without damage, and in the most financially expedient way possible. Offerings like SMC³’s LTL online education courses cover a wide range of topics from LTL basics and operations to more advanced concepts like pricing analytics and transportation law. The company also has plans to continually refresh content, adding new expert presenters and taking the feedback of students to make the courses even better as time goes on. Learn more about&nbsp;<a href="https://logisticstrainingcenter.com/smc3-courses/" rel="noreferrer" class="joc_admin__link">SMC³’s LTL Online Education program</a>&nbsp;and view the 2021 hybrid schedule, featuring live industry experts,&nbsp;<a href="https://www.smc3.com/onlinelearning2021/" rel="noreferrer" class="joc_admin__link">here.</a>

SMC3rates_shutterstock_5247046 (1).jpg

Filling the Supply Chain Education Gap with LTL Education Courses

UPGRADE TO GOLD AND SAVE: Use code GTW695 at checkout and save $800 on first year of a Gold subscription!

Upgrade Subscription

MEMORIAL DAY SALE: Use code MDW25 at checkout to save 25% on first year of any annual subscription!


Subscribe Now - Free Trials - Offer Box

Subscribe Today

GET INTO A GROUP SUBSCRIPTION: Arm your team with unlimited Journal of Commerce content

Group Subscriptions - Offer Box

Group Subscriptions

MEMORIAL DAY SALE: Use code MDW25 at checkout and save 25% on any annual subscription!

Subscribe Now - Anonymous - Offer Box

MEMORIAL DAY SALE: Use code MDRW695 at checkout and save $800 on first year of a Gold subscription! 

Upgrade Subscription - Offer Box

Monthly publication providing an editorial deep dive into global supply chain news

Journal of Commerce Magazine - Rectangle Box

Journal of Commerce Magazine

An in-depth analysis of transport trends in the multipurpose and heavy-lift fleet segment

Breakbulk Report - Rectangle Box

Breakbulk Quarterly

Customers scoring their intermodal partners to identify the best service providers

Intermodal Service Scorecard - Rectangle Box

Intermodal Service Scorecard

A must-attend conference for shippers & logistics providers moving goods inland

Inland Conference - Rectangle Box

Attend Inland25

A premium access index of savings using domestic intermodal vs. OTR 

ISI Report - Rectangle Box

Intermodal Savings Index

An extensive dashboard of charts organized by trade lane, mode, and topic

Gateway - Rectangle Box

Gateway

A premium access outlook critical to shippers and transportation providers

QI Report - Rectangle Box

Quarterly Intelligence

Explore today’s cutting-edge global logistics technology news and analysis by the Journal of Commerce. Coverage includes logistics technology startups, logistics technology solutions, venture capital, management and impact, freight forwarder technology and the latest supply chain and logistics technology.

Our logistics technology news include logistics technology startups, solutions, and the impact of technology on logistics and supply chain management.

Logistics Technology News | Journal of Commerce

The Journal of Commerce’s supply chain news and analysis impacting the management of end-to-end supply chains reports on supply chain strategies, cargo visibility, inventory trends, sourcing, customs certification and contract logistics. Supply chain news coverage also delves into refrigerated shipping advancements and management of inventory status, regulatory updates and government funding projects.

Stay informed with the latest regulation news and trade updates. Explore comprehensive transportation news and trade regulations today.

Transport, Trade and Regulation News | Journal of Commerce

A thorough cool cargoes news by Journal of Commerce. Learn about the latest trends in refrigerated cargo transportation, weight capacity, technology, and more.

Cool Cargo News | Journal of Commerce

Cool Cargo News

Journal of Commerce keeps you informed on the latest last mile news with comprehensive coverage of carriers, logistics, and last mile transportation solutions.

Last Mile News | Journal of Commerce

Last Mile News

Discover the latest industrial real estate news and trends. Covering projects, real estate supply chain, logistics, pricing, cross dock facilities, and more.

Industrial Real Estate News | Journal of Commerce

Industrial Real Estate News

Stay updated on supply chain strategies, cargo visibility, inventory trends and more with our comprehensive supply chain news and analysis.

Latest News

Intermodal Savings Index

Shippers save money, time with automated transportation bidding tools

More News & Analysis

US LTL pricing maintains record high as truckload slumps

US supply chain planning must involve a mix of the known and unknown

USWC recovered import market share last year amid East, Gulf coast labor woes