Strong shipping earnings are encouraging owners to invest, while changes in trade networks, vessel productivity and geopolitical risk are reshaping the returns those investments may deliver. At the macroeconomic panel of the Marine Money China Ship Finance Forum in Shanghai on 3 November, speakers from liner shipping, tanker research and debt finance examined whether today’s choices of ships, assets and financing structures will suit the markets in which they eventually operate.

Roberto Giannetta, Chairman of the Hong Kong Liner Shipping Association, offered a particularly striking assessment: from an investment perspective, the era of ultra-large containerships may have reached its peak, with operational flexibility becoming more valuable. Ralph Leszczynski, Global Head of Research at Banchero Costa, questioned the ordering response to exceptionally strong earnings. Michael James Kay, Head of Debt Solutions, Asia Pacific, at DNB Carnegie, argued that investments should withstand normalised earnings, normalised asset values and more conservative leverage.

Moderated by Huay Yee Kwan, Partner at Stephenson Harwood, the discussion connected current profitability with the conditions required for long-term returns. It raised practical questions about which ships fit emerging trade networks, what income can support an investment over time, and where risks accumulate within a transaction.

Large ships need networks that can support them

Giannetta’s argument centred on the relationship between vessel size and the network a ship serves. With future trade patterns uncertain, owners need room to change routes and enter new markets. As ships become larger, their commercial performance depends increasingly on having the right combination of cargo volumes, port capabilities and service arrangements.

He pointed to Asia–Europe services affected by diversions. Some ultra-large containerships reduce port calls to maintain their rotations, concentrating cargo at fewer gateways. When several ships of more than 20,000 TEU arrive in succession, the resulting workload can place additional pressure on terminals. Waiting time can then affect subsequent calls and later sailings. Economies of scale at sea therefore need to be assessed alongside cargo handling, transhipment and the time required to complete the whole service.

Other trade corridors offer opportunities for different vessel sizes. Giannetta highlighted the potential for ships of 8,000–10,000 TEU and 2,000–4,000 TEU in particular markets. In his investment framework, a fleet’s ability to serve a wider range of ports and adapt to new cargo flows becomes an increasingly important source of commercial flexibility.

Announcements made two days after the forum illustrated the different requirements shaping fleet investment. On 5 November, Maersk confirmed in its third-quarter results that it had ordered 26 dual-fuel containerships, each of 18,600 TEU, for delivery in 2029–2030. On the same day, Pacific International Lines announced an order for seven 1,400-TEU methanol-ready containerships at Huanghai Shipbuilding, intended for its intra-Asia and Pacific Islands network and for connecting smaller ports with major transhipment hubs.

These projects address different fleet renewal and network needs. For an investor, the choice of vessel size requires a detailed view of where cargo will originate, which ports can handle the ship, whether volumes can sustain the proposed service frequency, and how readily the vessel could be redeployed if trade patterns change.

Dispersed trade changes where growth occurs

For Giannetta, the more difficult question in liner shipping concerns the changing structure of demand. The industry has considerable experience of managing excess capacity. Supply-chain resilience, geopolitics and regionalisation now require operators to reassess where cargo moves and how services should connect it. Regional markets and specialised corridors are gaining importance alongside the traditional east–west mainlanes.

In his assessment, Chinese companies, capital and production facilities are helping develop connections across Southeast Asia, the Middle East, Latin America and Africa. Cargo flows may become more geographically dispersed while retaining substantial links to China. Understanding that process requires following the connections between raw materials, equipment, components, manufacturing locations and final markets.

A shift in production can initially generate imports of machinery and intermediate goods before supporting additional finished-product exports. The viability of a shipping service then depends on cargo in both directions, port capabilities, transhipment connections and customer requirements. Following these relationships helps identify where new services may be needed and what kind of ships can serve them economically.

This places a premium on the ability to adjust fleets and networks. Owners need to consider how many different trades and ports their ships can serve, and how easily capacity and port calls can be rearranged. For an investment intended to operate over many years, the location of growth matters alongside the overall expansion of trade.

Tanker earnings depend on time as well as volume

The tanker discussion examined another important feature of the market: cargo volumes, fleet productivity and earnings can move in different directions.

Leszczynski argued that elevated tanker earnings and secondhand values cannot be explained by oil trade growth alone. Disruption to Middle Eastern transport, changes in the organisation of shipments and the rerouting of Russian oil have all affected the amount of capacity available to the market. Geopolitical developments have consequently become a significant influence on effective supply and earnings.

He used the redirection of some Russian oil exports towards India and China to illustrate how the same cargo can occupy ships for longer. Transfers, waiting and more complicated transport arrangements can further reduce fleet productivity. The time a vessel spends completing a shipment directly affects how much capacity remains available for the next cargo.

Similar constraints appear in liner shipping disclosures. In its third-quarter announcement on 5 November, Maersk said the Asian typhoon season had intensified port congestion and absorbed substantial vessel capacity. Global average port waiting time peaked at 16.6 hours, the highest level since January 2023. Resilient cargo demand and slower vessel turnaround can act together to support market conditions.

Leszczynski also discussed China’s energy inventories and purchasing patterns. Stocks give a major buyer some flexibility over when to purchase, while subsequent replenishment can change the volume of cargo entering the seaborne market. Tanker demand therefore needs to be assessed through consumption, sourcing decisions, inventory movements and transport distances together.

The support provided by longer voyages and reduced productivity can change as transport conditions improve. Shorter routes, less waiting or faster turnaround allow the same fleet to move more cargo. Assessing the durability of current earnings requires understanding how much demand comes from the quantity of goods shipped and how much comes from the additional time needed to move them.

Today’s orders will meet tomorrow’s market

High earnings improve owners’ cash positions and encourage further ordering. Leszczynski’s concern was the time separating those decisions from their consequences: profits are being earned today, while a new ship may enter service three or four years later and then operate through several market phases.

He recalled that tanker investment had previously been shaped by fleet renewal requirements and expectations surrounding the long-term energy transition. Strong spot earnings now provide another incentive to order. Investors need to judge how much of today’s disruption will remain when those ships are delivered, and what trading conditions the additional capacity will face.

This brings the timing of investment returns into focus. Owners commit cash during construction and take on operating expenses and debt service after delivery. Revenue depends on cargo availability, trading patterns, employment arrangements and the wider market. A higher purchase price increases the sensitivity of returns to each of these variables, while strong current cash flow gives owners more scope to prepare financing and secure employment.

An ordering programme should therefore be considered alongside the existing fleet, potential disposals and retirements, future charters and financing commitments. Examining funding requirements and income sources year by year makes it easier to assess how expansion will change a company’s ability to withstand the next phase of the cycle.

China’s role requires a closer look at correlated risk

Kay offered a framework for understanding China’s presence across a shipping transaction. A single financing project may involve a Chinese shipyard, a Chinese lessor or bank, cargo destined for China, and a charterer whose business depends on Chinese demand.

China’s shipbuilding and financing capabilities provide substantial resources to global shipping. For lenders, the next step is to establish where each connection sits within the transaction, how concentrated the exposures are, and how closely they might respond to the same economic developments.

On the asset side, that means assessing the yard, delivery risk and residual value. On the cash-flow side, it requires analysis of the charterer, cargo and underlying trade. On the funding side, it involves the reliability of capital providers and the availability of alternatives. Bringing these factors into a combined stress test gives a clearer picture of how the project would behave under adverse conditions.

The principle applies across markets. A company may own many ships, serve several customers and operate on multiple routes while still depending on a common source of industrial demand. Its financing may also mature within a narrow period. As a fleet grows, identifying those shared influences becomes essential to understanding how much diversification it actually provides.

For international owners, a deeper understanding of China consequently includes both the opportunities in construction, finance and cargo, and the way those relationships enter their own asset and income structures. Broader commercial engagement calls for more detailed analysis at the level of the individual project.

Operational flexibility requires financial capacity

Towards the end of the panel, the moderator asked what advice the speakers would give an owner making a five-year capital commitment. Giannetta returned to adaptability. In his view, stronger performers will be those that preserve sufficient flexibility to respond when market changes arrive.

That flexibility extends to technology and ports. He saw green shipping corridors as a source of signals about future fuel availability, infrastructure and operating standards. When evaluating a route or port, owners increasingly need to consider the energy and services their ships will require, alongside the cargo available. Vessel specification, fuel choice and network planning are becoming more closely connected.

Kay approached the same issue through financing. A five-year commitment made today should be tested against normalised earnings, normalised asset values and more conservative loan-to-value assumptions. A transaction that remains viable under those conditions has a stronger basis for coping with the range of outcomes a shipping cycle can produce.

Those assumptions translate into decisions about liquidity, amortisation, charter coverage and the freedom to adjust a fleet. Operational flexibility needs financial capacity behind it: a ship may be capable of moving to another trade, but its owner must also be able to fund the transition.

The panel’s discussion leaves owners with several connected investment questions. What trade network will a new ship serve? Which transport conditions support the earnings used in its valuation? Do apparently separate commercial relationships depend on the same underlying demand? How much room will the company retain to adjust when conditions change?

Today’s profits and investment opportunities will ultimately be realised through years of operation. Choosing a ship also commits capital to the ports, cargo flows, energy arrangements and financing conditions that support it. Assessing those connections together provides a clearer view of the market an expanding fleet will eventually have to navigate.