A Region Reshuffling Its Lanes

From January through late March 2026, containerized freight flows in and out of the Middle East told a story of remarkable resilience and rapid reorientation. Total booking volumes held steady even as individual ports swapped fortunes dramatically. Carrier market share flipped. Cargo that once flowed through Jebel Ali found new footing in Jeddah and the Israeli ports of Haifa and Ashdod.

The disruption shares DNA with the Red Sea Crisis of 2023–2024, but it is not a replay. New variables — land bridge alternatives, fuel availability constraints, direct manufacturing delays, and secondary surcharges — have added layers of complexity that are reshaping how supply chain practitioners need to think about true all-in freight cost.

"The destinations changed. The demand didn't."

That simple observation from the data is the core finding. Booking volumes for Middle East origin and destination freight remained broadly consistent, what changed was where that freight was going and which carriers were carrying it.

Origin & Destination Volumes: Still in the Game

The outbound picture

Middle East origin bookings tracked on a 7-day rolling average hovered between roughly 6,000 and 8,500 TEUs per day through most of January and February, with sharp daily spikes to 10,000–12,000 TEUs. By late March the rolling average had climbed back toward the 7,000–8,000 TEU range after a soft patch in early-to-mid March — a dip that appears tied to carrier reconfiguration activity rather than a collapse in shipper demand.

Middle East Origin Bookings (Daily/7-Day Rolling Avg) 

*Interactive: Scroll or hover to see daily TEU volumes

The inbound picture

Middle East destination bookings told a more nuanced story. The rolling average peaked near 19,000 TEUs/day in late January, then drifted lower through February and into early March, settling around 10,000–12,000 TEUs by mid-March before recovering. The overall trajectory is softer than the origin side, consistent with evolving uncertainty around which ports are operationally available for inbound cargo.

Middle East Destination Bookings (Daily/7-Day Rolling Avg) 

*Interactive: Scroll or hover to see daily TEU volumes

Key Takeaway

Neither origin nor destination demand collapsed. Carriers and shippers absorbed route uncertainty and kept freight moving — at a cost. The resilience of the demand signal is the single most important data point for anyone trying to forecast Middle East freight over the next 90 days.

Jebel Ali Out. Jeddah In.

The most dramatic shift in the data is the near-complete collapse of Jebel Ali as a leading origin port between February and March 2026. The UAE's flagship port — typically the dominant hub for Middle East outbound freight — fell from 44,176 TEUs in February to just 8,442 TEUs in March, an 81% decline in a single month.

That volume did not evaporate. It migrated — overwhelmingly to Saudi Arabia's Red Sea gateway, Jeddah, which surged from 31,317 TEUs in February to 69,495 TEUs in March, becoming the clear top origin port by a significant margin.

‍

The Saudi consolidation story is striking: Jeddah, King Abdullah Port, and even smaller Saudi facilities all gained volume. Israeli ports — Haifa and Ashdod — also held or grew, adding to the picture of a region pivoting its export infrastructure toward the Red Sea coast and the Eastern Mediterranean.

Where Cargo Is Landing Has Also Changed

On the inbound side, the same Jebel Ali story repeats: the port fell from 107,043 TEUs as the top destination in February to just 20,826 TEUs in March — an 81% drop. Again, that volume reshuffled rather than disappeared.

Jeddah again emerged as the leading destination in March at 85,791 TEUs, more than doubling from its February level. Ashdod jumped from 46,413 to 57,038 TEUs, becoming the number-two destination — a meaningful signal of Israel's growing role in absorbing inbound Middle East cargo flows.

‍

Ports in Qatar (Hamad), Iraq (Umm Qasr), and the UAE (Jebel Ali, Mina Khalifa) saw steep declines as destinations. Meanwhile Salalah in Oman grew 85% and smaller Saudi ports like Aqaba and King Abdullah continued to take on greater throughput — rounding out a clear pattern of Saudi and Israeli infrastructure absorbing diverted flows.

CMA CGM Takes the Crown on Origins. MSC Holds Destinations.

The origin side: a carrier upset

In February, MSC led Middle East origin carrier volume at 70,734 TEUs, followed closely by Maersk at 69,840, with CMA CGM trailing in third at 50,956. By March, the rankings had flipped entirely. CMA CGM surged to 58,202 TEUs — the #1 position — while MSC fell to 48,085 and Maersk to 49,764. CMA CGM's ability to adapt its Middle East origin services faster than competitors is the defining carrier story on the outbound side.

The destination side: MSC's stronghold

On the inbound side, MSC maintained its commanding lead despite overall volume declining from February's exceptional levels. MSC moved 106,649 TEUs into Middle East destinations in March, down from a dominant 172,571 in February but still well ahead of Maersk (71,716) and CMA CGM (65,280). MSC's network depth — and presumably its service coverage into the Saudi ports now absorbing the most inbound volume — appears to be the structural advantage keeping it at the top of destination carrier rankings.

The gap between MSC's destination dominance and CMA CGM's origin surge is worth monitoring. CMA CGM's ability to capture outbound share suggests aggressive network adaptation; if that extends to inbound services, the destination carrier rankings could converge quickly in Q2.

How This Mirrors — and Diverges From — the Red Sea Crisis

The current disruption shares recognizable characteristics with the Red Sea Crisis. Supply chain practitioners navigating both events will find familiar dynamics alongside genuinely new complications.

The new variables matter because they move the disruption upstream, into production capacity and fuel supply, rather than staying purely in the maritime logistics layer. A shipper who experienced the Red Sea Crisis as a transit time and rate problem may face a qualitatively different challenge here — one where the cargo may not be manufactured on time in the first place, or where the "alternative" port comes with a secondary surcharge that restructures the economics of the entire shipment.

The Real Risk Is the All-In Cost

The most important framing from this data set is the all-in cost waterfall. Base freight rates are only the first line. In a disruption environment, the cascade of additional costs can dwarf the original rate — and many shippers won't see the full picture until detention clocks are already running.

Detention and demurrage exposure is particularly acute in a rerouting scenario where cargo terminates at an alternate port — a carrier practice increasingly common in this disruption. When a box lands in Jeddah instead of Jebel Ali, the shipper's inland transport, customs documents, and port handling arrangements all require amendment. Those amendments cost time and money, and the D&D clock often doesn't pause while they happen.

Practitioners who manage freight in the Middle East corridor right now need visibility across the full cost waterfall — not just the spot rate — to make defensible decisions about routing, carrier selection, and inventory positioning.

What to Watch in Q2 2026

The booking data through late March points to several signals worth tracking closely over the coming weeks:

• Jeddah throughput capacity limits
• CMA CGM's destination service expansion
• Israeli port volume sustainability
• Jebel Ali recovery trajectory
• Hapag-Lloyd's network response
• Land bridge utilization growth
• Secondary surcharge normalization
• YoY US import trends (currently −2.7%)

The port winners of March 2026 are not guaranteed to be the port winners of May 2026. Route intelligence needs to be live, not lagged.

The broader global booking picture — with overall TEU volumes year-over-year positive at +3.3% for the week of March 23 — suggests that demand fundamentals remain intact. The Middle East disruption is creating real costs and complexity, but it is not destroying trade flows. It is redirecting them. That distinction matters enormously for how companies should plan inventory, carrier contracts, and buffer stock strategies heading into peak season.

‍