A.P. Moller–Maersk reported a third-quarter net profit of USD 3.047 billion on 5 November 2026, up 178% year on year, and raised its full-year earnings guidance for the third time. Higher freight rates and constrained effective capacity drove a sharp recovery in profitability. Yet the results fell short of analysts’ expectations, while Ocean’s volume growth and margins lagged selected peers. The figures show how strongly Maersk has benefited from market conditions, alongside continuing questions about its relative operating performance.

One Quarter of Profit Exceeds the Previous Full Year

The scale of the recovery is evident in the bottom line: Maersk’s net profit for July–September exceeded the USD 2.915 billion earned during the whole of 2025. Revenue reached USD 18.095 billion, while EBITDA rose to USD 4.710 billion and EBIT to USD 3.269 billion. Growth in earnings substantially outpaced the increase in revenue.

Net profit for the first nine months reached USD 4.459 billion, an increase of approximately 51.6%, with the third quarter contributing about 68% of that total. Such a concentration of earnings illustrates Maersk’s continuing sensitivity to freight-market conditions. In a business with substantial fixed costs, revenue gains can produce a much larger increase in profit when freight rates rise faster than operating expenses. The durability of that improvement depends on how the relationship between rates and costs develops.

A Third Guidance Increase Still Leaves an Expectations Gap

Maersk raised its full-year underlying EBITDA forecast to USD 14.0–14.5 billion from USD 10.5–12.5 billion, and its underlying EBIT forecast to USD 8.0–8.5 billion from USD 4.5–6.5 billion. It now expects free cash flow above USD 3 billion. The revision followed earlier upgrades on 29 June and 13 August, reflecting the third-quarter performance and improved visibility for the remainder of the year.

Investors’ expectations had already moved higher. Visible Alpha estimates published on Maersk’s investor-relations website as of 4 November showed a median third-quarter EBITDA forecast of USD 5.669 billion. The reported result was approximately 16.9% below that figure. Net profit was around 22.6% below the median forecast of USD 3.939 billion. Strong growth against the previous year, a sequential improvement and an earnings miss can therefore occur together: each uses a different benchmark.

This distinction helps explain why a substantial guidance increase can coexist with scrutiny of earnings delivery. During a rapidly strengthening market, management forecasts may require repeated revisions while analysts incorporate higher spot rates into their own models. The results provide a test of how much of that market improvement has reached realised revenue and profit, and how quickly it has done so.

Effective Capacity Constraints Drive Higher Rates

Maersk linked the stronger third-quarter market to congestion, severe weather in Asia and network disruption associated with the closure of the Strait of Hormuz. According to the company, global average port waiting times peaked at 16.6 hours during the quarter, their highest level since January 2023. Maersk CEO Vincent Clerc said trade demand remained resilient, with investment in electrification, energy and artificial-intelligence infrastructure generating industrial cargo flows alongside consumer-related demand. Demand exceeded available vessel space on certain routes.

The effects were visible in both revenue and costs. Maersk’s average loaded freight rate reached USD 3,287 per forty-foot equivalent unit, up approximately 46.5% year on year and around 20% from the second quarter. Loaded volumes, however, declined 0.8% year on year. Unit costs at fixed energy prices increased 4.8%, reflecting the expense of congestion and network adjustments. Ocean EBIT nevertheless reached USD 2.591 billion, compared with USD 935 million in the second quarter.

Broadly stable cargo volumes can still coincide with tighter vessel availability. Longer port stays and slower vessel turnaround reduce the number of transport tasks a fleet can complete. When demand remains resilient, that loss of productivity can raise the price of available slots. Congestion also increases carriers’ operating costs, so its effect on profitability depends on the balance between additional freight revenue and the expenses incurred in maintaining service. For Maersk this quarter, the revenue benefit outweighed those pressures.

As Xinde Maritime previously reported following Maersk’s second-quarter results, management and analysts have differed over the persistence of this pricing environment. Management has emphasised port and inland-infrastructure bottlenecks, while the market continues to assess the impact of new vessel deliveries. Third-quarter earnings again demonstrate the influence of congestion on current supply and demand. Improved port productivity and a gradual return to Suez routings could subsequently release capacity that disruption has absorbed.

Peer Comparisons Reveal Differences in Volumes and Margins

Vespucci Maritime CEO Lars Jensen drew attention to Maersk’s relative performance in an analysis published on 5 November, comparing its volume development and margins with Ocean Network Express and COSCO SHIPPING Holdings. The companies’ disclosures show that Maersk Ocean’s margins, despite their substantial recovery, remained below the corresponding figures reported by those two peers for July–September 2026.

All comparisons cover July–September 2026, equivalent to ONE’s second quarter of FY2026. ONE’s volume growth is calculated from 3.396 million TEU versus 3.323 million TEU a year earlier. COSCO SHIPPING Holdings includes OOCL; its quarterly segment EBIT margin is calculated by subtracting first-half EBIT and revenue from the nine-month totals. A dash indicates that the metric is not presented in this table.

Trade-lane data show further differences in growth. Maersk’s East–West volumes declined 4.3% year on year and North–South volumes fell 0.5%, while intra-regional volumes increased 6.7%. COSCO SHIPPING Holdings reported increases of 12.98% on the Transpacific and 14.64% on Asia–Europe routes. The route classifications are not identical, but Maersk’s slight overall volume contraction during a growing market warrants closer examination of deployment, network coverage and cargo mix.

ONE also benefited from the stronger market. On 4 November, it reported revenue of USD 6.274 billion and net profit of USD 1.318 billion for its second quarter of FY2026, and raised its full-year net profit forecast to USD 2 billion for the financial year ending March 2027. Its comments on cargo growth and improved utilisation illustrate how individual carriers are pursuing growth within the same market environment.

These comparisons identify operating questions without establishing a lasting reversal in competitive position. COSCO SHIPPING Holdings’ container-shipping segment includes related supply-chain activities, and companies differ in business classifications, charter exposure, trade mix and accounting estimates. Maersk extended the estimated useful lives of its vessels from 20 to 25 years from the beginning of 2026, reducing third-quarter depreciation by USD 176 million and consequently affecting EBIT. A fuller assessment requires understanding the causes of the margin differences and their likely persistence.

Logistics and Terminals Improve While Ocean Leads Earnings

Maersk’s Logistics & Services business continued to expand. Third-quarter revenue rose approximately 13% to USD 4.488 billion, while EBIT increased around 19% to USD 259 million. The EBIT margin improved from 5.5% to 5.8%. Landside transport, Air and Project Logistics contributed to the improvement, with Middle East landbridge solutions also supporting business. Alternative routes and inland services can generate additional revenue when customers need help maintaining supply-chain continuity.

Ocean’s EBIT was equivalent to approximately 79% of consolidated group EBIT, illustrating its central role in the current earnings recovery. Logistics growth broadens Maersk’s customer offering, but its longer-term contribution must also be demonstrated through margins, asset utilisation and returns on investment. The latest improvement complements Ocean’s stronger earnings; it does not yet establish that the group has become substantially less sensitive to the shipping cycle.

Terminals requires a distinction between reported and comparable performance. The business delivered record revenue, but reported EBIT declined approximately 14% to USD 493 million. Excluding a concession-related impairment reversal recognised in the prior-year quarter, EBIT increased around 6.5%. Portfolio composition also matters when assessing volumes: COSCO SHIPPING Ports’ total throughput grew 8.43%, while throughput at its controlling terminals increased 2.38%, compared with Maersk’s reported terminal-volume growth of 2.6%. Ownership structures and reporting boundaries limit the conclusions that can be drawn from headline growth rates alone.

Fleet and Port Investment Extend the Competitive Test

Maersk is continuing to allocate capital to future capacity. Its quarterly disclosures confirmed orders for 26 dual-fuel containerships of 18,600 TEU each, scheduled for delivery in 2029 and 2030. The vessels represent a combined nominal capacity of 483,600 TEU. These orders were announced in September, so the quarterly report confirms an existing commitment. Maersk describes them as part of its fleet-renewal programme; the eventual net increase in operated capacity will depend on vessel replacements, charter redeliveries and recycling decisions.

Investment is also proceeding ashore. APM Terminals broke ground on the Laldia greenfield terminal in Chattogram, Bangladesh, in August, with planned annual handling capacity of 900,000 TEU. Its new Suape terminal in Brazil began operations in September, initially adding approximately 400,000 TEU of annual capacity. Investment in ships and terminals can improve the scope for coordinating vessel deployment and cargo flows, while addressing constraints across the wider transport network.

Third-quarter free cash flow of USD 2.389 billion provides support for further investment. Maersk maintained its cumulative capital-expenditure guidance of USD 10–11 billion for the two years 2026–2027. Management must balance the funding opportunities created by current earnings with the market conditions that will prevail when new ships arrive. Capacity that is scarce today may enter service under very different freight-rate and turnaround conditions.

The next tests are operational: whether Ocean volumes return to growth, whether greater network efficiency reduces unit costs, and whether logistics and terminal investments deliver sustained returns. As congestion eases and voyages shorten, the earnings support from elevated freight rates may weaken. Customer relationships and asset productivity would then have a more direct influence on the results. Maersk’s USD 3 billion quarter demonstrates its ability to capture market opportunities; lasting competitive gains will depend on improvements that continue to earn returns as those conditions change.