In 2025, global container traffic reached approximately 994 million TEU, recording a 6.5% increase compared with the previous year. The figure confirms the port industry’s ability to handle substantial volumes despite geopolitical tensions, route diversions and supply chain instability.
However, higher traffic volumes do not automatically result in greater port competitiveness. Handling more containers is a quantitative achievement. Managing them without increasing congestion, waiting times, costs and operational uncertainty is a far more complex capability.
For companies, the number of TEU handled by a port is therefore only a starting point. Assessing the actual reliability of a port requires an analysis of its infrastructure, intermodal connections, technology, terminal organisation and service continuity.
Global container traffic continues to grow
TEU stands for Twenty-foot Equivalent Unit and is the standard unit used to measure container capacity and port throughput. A twenty-foot container corresponds to one TEU, while a forty-foot container generally equals two TEU.
According to Drewry’s Global Container Terminal Operators Annual Review and Forecast 2026/27, ports worldwide handled 994 million TEU in 2025, 6.5% more than in 2024. The main global terminal operators recorded even stronger average growth of 8.9%, increasing their share of the global market from 48.8% to 49.9%.
The report also recorded a 23% increase in capital expenditure among the operators analysed. Investments focused on portfolio expansion, infrastructure upgrades, automation and digital capabilities. This clearly shows that increasing traffic volumes requires investment capable of supporting the entire operating system. Source: Drewry.
Higher volumes can also lead to greater congestion
An increase in global container traffic does not necessarily improve service quality. If berth, yard, gate and inland connection capacity remains unchanged, growth can quickly turn into congestion.
When too many containers must be handled using insufficient infrastructure, vessel waiting times, cargo dwell times and queues at terminal gates increase. The consequences may include delivery delays, additional storage costs and lower operational predictability.
Considered in isolation, throughput can therefore be a misleading indicator. A port handling a large number of TEU is not automatically efficient. High volumes may result from a favourable geographical position or a concentration of shipping services, while the port may still experience problems involving access times, operating procedures or inland cargo transfers.
Real growth means increasing throughput while maintaining control, speed and service regularity.
Infrastructure must match demand
Port competitiveness depends first of all on the physical capacity of the port. Water depth, quay length, berth availability and crane specifications determine which vessels can be accommodated and how efficiently they can be handled.
Yard organisation is equally important. Sufficient space is needed to manage cargo flows without creating bottlenecks, but that space must also be used effectively. Poor planning can generate unnecessary container movements, slow down operations and increase equipment use and energy consumption.
Refrigerated cargo requires sufficient reefer plugs and effective monitoring systems. Dangerous goods need dedicated areas and specific procedures. Customs services, health inspections, warehouses and inspection facilities must also be capable of supporting actual operating volumes.
Port infrastructure therefore involves much more than cranes and quays. It includes the complete set of facilities, services and expertise needed to keep cargo moving.
Intermodal connections determine a port’s actual capacity
A container that is quickly unloaded from a vessel but remains blocked at the terminal for several days cannot be considered an efficient operation. Port performance also depends on the ability to move cargo towards the next stage of its journey.
Road and rail intermodal connections consequently play a central role. A port that is properly connected to major logistics corridors can expand its catchment area, reduce pressure on road transport and improve the regularity of cargo flows towards warehouses, inland terminals and manufacturing facilities.
In contrast, inadequate inland infrastructure can create a bottleneck even when quayside operations perform efficiently. A port’s actual capacity must be assessed by considering the complete system: sea, terminal, road, rail and final destination.
For companies, this means looking beyond the geographical distance of a port and comparing the time and reliability of the entire transport route.
Technology and data for better operational coordination
The growth of container traffic makes it impossible to manage terminals through fragmented or predominantly manual processes. Digital technologies make it possible to schedule vessel calls, coordinate equipment, organise yards and monitor cargo flows in real time.
Terminal Operating Systems integrate many of the activities required to handle containers. Appointment systems can distribute truck arrivals more evenly throughout the day, while the advance exchange of documents can reduce errors and inspection times at terminal gates.
However, automation and digitalisation are not objectives in themselves. Investing in technology without redesigning procedures and responsibilities merely creates a more expensive version of existing inefficiencies.
Technology generates value when it improves operational visibility, enables faster decisions and creates genuine integration between terminals, shipping lines, road carriers, rail operators, freight forwarders and authorities.
How to assess port efficiency
Choosing a port based solely on a ranking of the highest container volumes is a mistake. Companies should examine indicators directly connected to service quality, including:
frequency and reliability of maritime connections;
availability of direct services to the required destination;
vessel and truck waiting times;
loading and unloading productivity;
average container dwell time at the terminal;
quality of road and rail connections;
availability of equipment for special or refrigerated cargo;
congestion levels and operational continuity;
efficiency of customs and documentation procedures;
ability to manage traffic peaks and unexpected disruptions.
These factors have a greater impact on shipment cost and reliability than a port’s annual throughput figure alone.
From growth to port competitiveness
Port growth is measured through traffic volumes. Competitiveness emerges from the ability to transform those volumes into a stable, connected and predictable service.
For companies, choosing a competitive port means reducing unproductive handling, limiting waiting times and having alternatives available when the original schedule changes. It also means receiving reliable information and working with operators capable of coordinating the different stages of the shipment.
Farosped supports companies in organising domestic and international shipments, assessing routes, ports, connections and operating conditions according to cargo requirements and final destination.
Handling more is growth. Handling better, while ensuring continuity and efficiency throughout the logistics chain, is competitiveness.