Port Congestion Briefing — Week of Feb 3–7, 2026

60-second executive take

What worsened: Yard density remains the leading risk signal this week, with Rotterdam (MVII) near full, Ningbo (MSICT) above 90%, and several secondary hubs showing multi-day berth delays.
What improved / held stable: Some gateways remain workable on the landside despite pressure (e.g., Antwerp Q869 truck turnaround is stable; Hamburg is operational but weather adds friction).
What to watch: Winter conditions in Northern Europe, terminal-level divergence in Shanghai and Ningbo, and a nationwide 24-hour strike in Italy on Feb 6.

Global risk board (scan-first)

Risk tiers used in this briefing

Critical: 90%+ yard utilisation or 4+ day vessel waits or operational restrictions likely (gate/yard window/major inland dwell)
High: 85–90% yard or 2–4 day waits or persistent disruption signals
Stable: <2 day waits and no major restrictions, but still monitor if weather/seasonal factors apply

Location	Key signals this week	Tier	Likely impact	What LSPs should do now
Rotterdam (MVII)	Yard near 100%; empty return restriction risk	Critical	Empty returns + pickup slot tightening	Pre-plan empty return options; pull imports earlier
Ningbo (MSICT)	Yard >90%; terminal delays higher than port average	Critical	Terminal queues + schedule volatility	Confirm terminal context early; buffer pickup plans
Semarang	Wait ~3.28 days; yard >90%	Critical	Slow discharge + long pickup readiness	Reset lead times; plan storage exposure scenarios
Surabaya	Wait ~5.44 days	Critical	Extended anchorage + cascade delays	Avoid if flexible; communicate 5+ day delay risk
Mombasa	Wait ~5.08 days	Critical	Equipment + transshipment friction	Build delays into customer promises early
Abidjan	Wait ~4.67 days	Critical	Ongoing slowdowns despite capacity adds	Plan for multi-day waiting and landside knock-ons
Montreal (rail)	Rail dwell ~7 days; port wait ~2.75 days	Critical	Inland delay dominates	Quote inland timelines with rail dwell reality
Manila	Wait ~2.87 days; yard 80–90%	High	Heavy berth congestion + low spare capacity	Book appointments early; avoid last-minute pickups
Shanghai (YS3/YS4)	Terminal waits ~3 days; WGQ heavy	High	Terminal-dependent delay swings	Get terminal assignment early; adjust pickup windows
Gdansk	Reduced yard window (7→5 days pre-ETA); winter disruption	High	Compressed export windows + fewer slots	Confirm cutoffs/appointments earlier than normal
Hamburg	Yard ~80%; ice adds manoeuvre time	Stable (watch)	Small delays compound	Add buffer to inland connections; watch bunching
Antwerp (Q869)	Yard 81%; high reefer share; truck turnaround stable	Stable (watch)	Reefer capacity becomes sensitive	Confirm plug plans; avoid late-week surge pickups
Rotterdam (Delta II)	Utilisation ~40%	Stable	More workable fallback	Use as a contingency option where feasible

Critical tier deep dives (where you can lose the week)

Rotterdam: MVII near capacity and empty-return risk

Rotterdam’s constraint this week is not just berth performance—it’s yard density at MVII, which is near full. When yard space tightens, terminals typically protect stability by limiting empty returns or narrowing acceptance rules.

What this means operationally

Empty returns can become exception handling rather than routine moves, pushing staging and repositioning costs upstream.
Truck scheduling becomes less forgiving as appointment availability tightens.
Even modest vessel bunching can translate into longer dwell because the yard cannot absorb peaks.

What to tell customers

“This week’s risk is landside flow: pickup slots and empty returns may tighten quickly.”

Action checklist

Confirm empty return options before dispatch (terminal vs depot vs alternative terminal).
Pull imports earlier in the free-time window where possible.
Treat Delta II (lower utilisation) as a contingency path if operationally and contractually feasible.

Ningbo: MSICT operating above 90% yard utilisation

Ningbo’s headline waiting time can look moderate, but the operational reality depends on the terminal. MSICT is above 90%, which usually signals a loss of flexibility and higher variability.

What this means operationally

At 90%+ yard density, re-handles increase and “normal” flow breaks into terminal-specific queues.
Port averages become less predictive; your vessel can face materially worse delays than the weekly headline suggests.

What to tell customers

“The port may look stable on paper, but the terminal is the constraint. Expect variability.”

Action checklist

Confirm terminal-level conditions early (not just the port name).
Add buffer to pickup promises, especially for time-sensitive cargo.
If customers require higher certainty, set expectations that mitigation options may carry trade-offs (cost, flexibility, timing).

Semarang: severe congestion with yard >90% and ~3.28-day waits

Semarang is one of the most operationally constrained locations in this dataset: elevated waiting time plus 90%+ yard utilisation is a tough combination.

What this means operationally

Discharge, yard moves, and gate operations all slow under combined berth + yard pressure.
Pickup readiness becomes less predictable; delays can persist even after the vessel is alongside.

What to tell customers

“This is not a one-day slip scenario. Plan for extended pickup readiness.”

Action checklist

Reset customer lead times early in the week.
Treat storage/demurrage as a scenario to plan around (confirm tariff/free time per terminal and contract).
Stagger pickup plans and avoid last-minute dispatch assumptions.

Inland North America: Montreal rail dwell is the binding constraint

Montreal’s port-side waiting time is elevated, but the bigger issue is inland: rail dwell around 7 days can dominate the timeline even when discharge is complete.

What this means operationally

Containers can sit longer after discharge due to rail capacity and downstream network constraints.
Customer frustration often spikes because cargo is “at the port” but not moving inland.

What to tell customers

“The critical delay is inland rail availability—port clearance is not the bottleneck.”

Action checklist

Quote inland timelines that reflect rail dwell reality (not just vessel ETA).
Confirm appointments early where trucking is used, but avoid promising speed if inland conditions are constrained.
Where routing flexibility exists, assess alternates only if they improve reliability end-to-end (not just port wait time).

High-risk secondary hubs: plan around 4–5+ day waits

Several ports show multi-day waits that can quickly cascade into schedule unreliability:

Surabaya: ~5.44 days
Mombasa: ~5.08 days
Abidjan: ~4.67 days

What this means operationally

Multi-day anchorage delays compress downstream windows, increase rollover risk, and destabilize inland planning.
These are “network shock” nodes: delays can propagate into connecting services.

Action checklist

If flexible, avoid these ports for time-sensitive cargo this week.
If locked in, communicate 5+ day delay risk early and adjust inland commitments accordingly.

High tier snapshots (2–4 day waits, 85–90% yards, or disruption signals)

Shanghai: WGQ congestion and a clear YS split

Shanghai is showing terminal-level divergence. WGQ congestion is heavy, while the YS terminals are split: YS3/YS4 are meaningfully slower than YS1/YS2.

What this means

Terminal assignment can change outcomes by days.
Even “moderate” terminals can tighten fast if volume is redistributed.

Do this now

Request terminal assignment confirmation early.
If assigned to the more constrained terminals, adjust pickup windows and customer promises up front.

Manila: heavy berth congestion and 80–90% yard utilisation

Manila is busy and operating with limited spare capacity. When the yard is already dense, service reliability becomes appointment-dependent.

Do this now

Confirm appointments early and avoid last-minute pickup assumptions.
If customers have flexibility, stagger demand rather than concentrating pickups on peak days.

Gdansk: winter disruption and reduced yard opening window

Gdansk’s key issue is operational restriction: the yard opening window is reduced (7 days to 5 days before ETA), with winter conditions impacting rail and truck availability.

Do this now

Confirm cutoffs and appointments earlier than normal.
Avoid planning exports on the assumption that late gate-in will be accepted.

Stable tier (monitor, but not the main risk driver)

Hamburg: workable operations with winter friction

Hamburg is operating around 80% yard utilisation, but ice conditions add small delays that can compound when vessels bunch.

Do this now

Add buffer to inland connections (barge/rail cutoffs) where timing is tight.
Treat weather-driven slippage as cumulative, not isolated.

Antwerp (Q869): 81% utilisation with high reefer share

Antwerp remains workable on the landside, but the combination of higher utilisation and a large reefer share means capacity can tighten quickly if arrivals bunch.

Do this now

For reefers, confirm plug plans early and avoid “day-of” changes.
For dry cargo, pull imports earlier in the window when possible.

Disruption bulletin (items that don’t fit a port-by-port template)

Italy: nationwide 24-hour strike on Feb 6 (Tuesday) is expected to affect port operations across Italian gateways. If you have Italian routings this week, plan for schedule variability and short-notice operational changes.
Northern Europe winter conditions continue to create sequencing risk. Even where average waiting time looks moderate, the combination of late arrivals + high yard density can flip performance quickly.

Forward lookout (next 7–14 days)

Terminal-level volatility stays elevated where yards are 90%+ (e.g., MSICT in Ningbo). Expect wider swings between “fine” and “delayed” outcomes.
Europe remains sensitive to bunching: high utilisation terminals have less recovery capacity if multiple vessels arrive off-window.
Inland constraints remain the real story in parts of North America: rail dwell can dominate timelines even when ports reopen.

Visibility note (for teams that want this in-system)

Many teams read congestion updates but still chase milestones manually. Tradlinx provides event-based container visibility (e.g., gate-in/out, vessel departure/arrival) and API integration so workflows and alerts can run directly inside your systems.