Key findings
Comparing schedule versions received from 18 September to 8 October 2026, HiFleet found that Shanghai calls remain a key focus of service revisions by several liner operators, and that reinstatements continue to outnumber omissions. The sample contains 39 confirmed Shanghai call cancellations - 21 direct omissions and 9 replacements - against 49 confirmed additions or reinstatements. Of the 21 omissions, 8 left Busan as the next call (38%) and 5 left Ningbo (24%).
Ningbo was retained in both schedule versions in 21 of the 39 cancelled calls, while 2 records omitted Shanghai and Ningbo in the same revision. Marsk's schedules received on 3 October retain Shanghai calls in 1-10 October for 42 vessels, indicating that plans for Shanghai calls continue to be revised.
Data scope and methodology
International media have recently focused on container port congestion in Shanghai and Ningbo, particularly how long it may last. Changes between successive schedule versions show how carriers are revising their port rotations, providing an important indicator of whether pressure on port operations is feeding through to liner service networks.
This analysis compares schedule versions received by HiFleet between 18 September and 8 October
2026. The sample covers Maersk, Mediterranean Shipping Company (MSC), Ocean Network Express (ONE), ZIM, Evergreen Line, Emirates Shipping Line (ESL), TS Lines and Pacific International Lines, among other operators. It examines the omission, addition and replacement of Shanghai calls within port rotations, and the implications for subsequent calls at Ningbo, Busan, Qingdao and other ports.
For this analysis, a Shanghai call omission means that the revised schedule links the preceding port directly to the following port, with no replacement port inserted in Shanghai's position. A replacement call means that another port takes Shanghai's place in the rotation.
Shanghai call additions outnumber omissions in the latest versions
The comparison identified 39 confirmed Shanghai call cancellations, against 49 confirmed additions or reinstatements of Shanghai calls. Of the 39 cancellations, 21 are direct omissions: the revised schedule links the preceding port directly to the following port with no replacement call, a substantive reduction in the number of calls in the rotation. A further 9 records replaced Shanghai with another port, and 9 reflect wider rewrites of the rotation in which the Shanghai leg was restructured or withdrawn.
Busan overtakes Ningbo as the next call after a Shanghai omission
Of the 21 direct Shanghai call omissions, 8, or 38%, left Busan as the next port of call, while 5, or 24%, left Ningbo as the next port. These 5 records do not, however, mean that Ningbo replaced Shanghai. In 21 of the 39 cancelled Shanghai calls, Ningbo appeared in both schedule versions, showing that it was already part of the relevant rotations; the revised schedules simply shortened the rotations by omitting Shanghai ahead of Ningbo.
The changes do not show a uniform shift of calls to Ningbo. In 2 records, Shanghai and Ningbo were omitted in the same schedule revision, while 13 of the cancelled calls belonged to rotations that included neither port in either version. The picture is mixed: many services continued to call at Ningbo after omitting Shanghai, while a minority removed both ports or never served Ningbo.
Additions and early-October Shanghai calls point to normalisation
Schedule versions received from 19 September onward show 49 Shanghai calls being added or reinstated. Maersk's schedules received on 3 October retain Shanghai calls with ETAs between 1 and 10 October for 42 vessels. Against the omissions recorded in the same period, this indicates that plans for Shanghai calls remain fluid, with reinstatements continuing to outnumber omissions.
The additional calls represent changes to planned schedules. They do not, on their own, establish that container port congestion in Shanghai or Ningbo has ended. The actual impact must be assessed alongside anchorage waiting times for a berth, berth operations and AlS-derived arrival and departure data.
Knock-on changes at Qingdao, Ningbo and other ports
Of the 9 records in which other ports replaced Shanghai, the inserted ports were led by Qingdao (3) and Ningbo (3); one revision inserted two ports. Changes to Shanghai calls thus affected rotations along China's east coast and through Northeast Asian, Middle East and trans-Pacific points. Shippers, freight forwarders and port operators need to examine the preceding port, the following port and any newly added calls, rather than simply checking whether Shanghai has disappeared from the schedule.
Call omissions and replacement calls represent two different types of adjustment. Omissions reduce the number of calls and revise the sequence between the preceding and following ports. Replacement calls retain an alternative regional or transshipment call. The coexistence of both patterns indicates a reconfiguration of service networks rather than a simple one-for-one substitution between ports.
Implications for market participants
Cargo owners and freight forwarders with shipments originally booked for import, export or transshipment via Shanghai should recheck booking confirmations, customs clearance cut-off times, ports of loading and discharge, and onward connections. Changes to port rotations may require document amendments, transshipment or inland repositioning. Operational arrangements should follow the carrier's latest notices and booking system updates.
For ports and shipping service providers, the key issues to monitor are whether Ningbo calls remain in place, whether more Shanghai calls are reinstated, and whether the additional Qingdao and Ningbo calls continue. The 49 additions recorded from 19 September onward provide a further schedule signal of calls being restored. HiFleet recommends combining schedule-version comparisons with AlS positions, actual port arrivals and departures, anchorage waiting times for a berth, and port operating conditions to distinguish planned revisions from actual execution.
Limitations of the analysis
Schedule comparisons establish which calls have changed, but cannot by themselves attribute those changes to congestion, weather, market demand or a carrier's internal operational considerations. Findings such as the 39 Shanghai call cancellations and 49 additions are limited to schedule data received by HiFleet from 18 September to 8 October 2026. Each comparison is made between consecutive versions of the same vessel and operator, typically received about a week apart, and voyages whose planned Shanghai ETA had already passed when the later version was received are treated as executed rather than cancelled. Maersk's early-October Shanghai calls come from the schedules received on 3 October, cited as a standalone snapshot of planned ETAs rather than as part of the version-to-version difference; neither set of information represents all carriers, all services or the calls ultimately made.
Further monitoring should examine whether later schedules reinstate Shanghai, whether Ningbo calls are retained, and whether actual AlS tracks match planned port rotations. Cross-checking successive schedule versions against actual port call data is essential to distinguish short-term omissions and temporary replacement calls from sustained network changes.
Frequently asked questions
What do the 21 direct Shanghai call omissions mean?
In these records, Shanghai was removed from the revised schedule, linking the preceding port directly to the following port without inserting a replacement call. This reflects a reduction in the number of calls in the rotation; it does not, by itself, identify the reason for the change.
Has Ningbo fully replaced Shanghai?
No. In 5 of the 21 direct omissions, Ningbo became the next call after Shanghai was omitted, while in 8 the next call was Busan. However, 21 of the 39 cancelled Shanghai calls kept Ningbo in both schedule versions, showing that it was already the next call on many services. Only 2 records omitted both Shanghai and Ningbo. The changes therefore cannot all be characterised as Ningbo replacing Shanghai.
How does HiFleet monitor schedule changes in the Yangtze River Delta?
HiFleet compares successive schedule versions and combines them with global AlS positions, vessel tracks, port data, weather and route information to track differences between planned calls and actual execution. This provides a verifiable data basis for cargo owners, freight forwarders, carriers and port-related businesses.
