Despite record turbulence in the 2026 transpacific eastbound contracting cycle — described by Noatum Logistics’ Stephanie Loomis as the most complicated in her 30-plus-year career — most major US shippers maintain annual ocean freight agreements. Concerns over potential opening of the Strait of Hormuz are driving interest in six-month deals with indexing, yet big BCOs remain anchored to one-year terms. Global Shippers’ Association President Mark Chadwick confirms continued use of one-year fixed rates for air cargo, having abandoned two-year contracts. Index-linked agreements remain rare due to carrier resistance and commercial incentives on both sides. The Suez Canal disruption and China outbound ecommerce peak serve as key reference points for flexibility triggers.
Despite another turbulent contract season, most major US shippers continue to favour annual ocean freight agreements over shorter-term or index-linked alternatives, executives.
Transpacific contracting hits record complexity
Stephanie Loomis, head of procurement, pricing and commercial relations, ocean product, at Noatum Logistics, told The Loadstar this year’s transpacific eastbound contracting cycle had been the most challenging of her career.
“By far, in my 30-plus-year career, the most complicated and confusing transpacific eastbound contract season,” she said.
She explained that for decades, ocean freight contracting had been relatively straightforward: carriers maintained aligned pricing structures, base rates across lanes were consistent, and the bunker adjustment factor (BAF) — though quarterly — had not caused dramatic cost shifts by lane or region. “Now, of course, that’s been completely thrown out the window,” Ms Loomis stated. “You’ve got very different methodologies, carrier by carrier; some are implementing these high emergency fuel surcharges, some want to change their bunker monthly.”
Ms Loomis confirmed many shippers still preferred annual-rate tenders, but calculating those rates had become significantly more complex amid diverging carrier pricing models. She added: “I am hearing in the market that there are a lot of shippers that are worried about the potential if the war were to finally really end, if we see an opening of the Strait of Hormuz — that will change dramatically the capacity and the vessel routings, and that could impact spot rates, so I have heard more shippers and importers looking at shorter-term deals, six months more indexing.”
Big BCOs hold firm on one-year terms
However, she noted that the “big BCOs in the United States”, for the most part, remained committed to annual contracts.
That view was echoed by Mark Chadwick, president of the Global Shippers’ Association (GSA), speaking to The Loadstar on the sidelines of TIACA’s Executive Summit in Warsaw.
“If you’re a big enough shipper,” he said, “you can impose one-year rates and avoid peak season surcharges and all this other stuff.”
Mr Chadwick acknowledged that exceptional market events required flexibility: “If there’s a massive thing happens, like when the Suez Canal was kind of closed down, there has to be some flexibility.” He emphasized that GSA continues pursuing one-year rates: “We’re still going for one-year rates. If you listen to the consultants, everybody should be doing short-term rate negotiations, but we’re not really seeing that. We’ve seen that even through turbulent times, one-year rates, as long as you’re open to some flexibility, it pays off.”
Air cargo shifts to annual fixed rates
The same principle increasingly applies to air cargo procurement.
“That’s completely absurd now,” Mr Chadwick said of the two-year airfreight contracts the GSA once negotiated. “We try and do one-year fixed rates, and then in situations like at the moment, if there’s a sustained and significant change in the market, we’ll have discussions, and we’ll try to make some adjustments. When the ecommerce bubble really kind of skyrocketed the rates, we had to have discussions on China outbound, but other than that, we try and keep to one-year rates.”
Index-linked contracts remain rare
Despite persistent volatility across both ocean and air freight markets, index-linked contracts remain uncommon.
“Agreeing on which index is the first problem,” Mr Chadwick explained. “The carriers are interested in indexing when it’s in their favour, and when it’s not, then they just don’t want to touch it. And we know there are companies out there that index, but whenever we approach the carriers, they’ve said they’d rather carry on as they are. They’re not coming to us offering index solutions.”
He added that both carriers and shippers often had commercial reasons to avoid strict index-based pricing: “If carriers see that they can make a killing in the market, they might not want to wait for the index to tell them they can,” he said, while shippers may be able to secure rates below index levels from carriers pursuing market share.
Instead, Mr Chadwick suggested indices serve as market indicators rather than automatic pricing mechanisms: “One thing I propose for air freight is, instead of indexing and moving your price based on the index, an index that indicates a trend at which you trigger a discussion,” he said. “Like we saw with the China outbound in the ecommerce peak, all of the indices showed that rates were through the roof. That gave us the kind of the openness to have a conversation to talk about that price, rather than us being tied to ‘if it goes in 10% your rates go up 10%’.”
Source: The Loadstar
Compiled from international media by the SCI.AI editorial team.
