The terminal that looked unstable and still came out ahead
A terminal’s own congestion numbers tell a specific kind of story – a rough month; a recovery; a seasonal pattern that repeats most years. They don’t show how that rough month looks next to the terminal down the coast, or the one across the border, which are competing for the same carrier business. That’s the ...
A terminal's own congestion data reveals a complex story. While it shows how a terminal performed over time, it cannot compare its performance against neighboring terminals. The problem is that most terminal operators have built strong trend lines, but no practical way to build a benchmark that compares terminals against each other. This limit leaves terminal operators without a live, consistent, and ongoing view of how their terminal's performance stacks up against specific competitors.
By using MarineTraffic's Terminal Activity workspace within Container Intelligence, terminal operators can build a benchmark for their own terminal's performance against named peers. For instance, the comparison of Rotterdam World Gateway Terminal, Antwerp Gateway DP World Terminal, and APM Terminals Rotterdam Maasvlakte 2 shows that despite Maasvlakte 2 having a higher waiting time during congested periods, it performed better overall when averaged across the full year.
The April spike at Maasvlakte 2 was a one-off exception, and without a peer comparison, it would have been mistaken for the terminal's general performance. Therefore, it is crucial to use benchmarking to gain a more accurate understanding of a terminal's performance.
Written by urgent.news from Hellenic Shipping News's reporting — not their text. Machine-written — may contain errors; check the original before relying on it.
