Total 135 Posts
Zim reported losses for 1Q 2023 before market open today (22 May). Both net profit and operating profit level were negative. While the accounting operating cashflow is positive, the depreciation expenses, which are added back for the operating cashflow since 2019, were mostly lease expenses and hence are cash items. Management maintains full year guidance which for EBIT is $100-500m, against $14m LBIT in 1Q. Zim is the second major liner, after Wan Hai, to have reported losses in 1Q 2023. Bo
Results out after market on 15 May. The fall in aernings and the mid-teen EBIT margin are broadly in line with Asian liner peers already reported. But what may have gone unnoticed in the market is that HMM has quietly took the lead in having the lowest slot costs. HMM has been operating a fleet of larger average vessel size since 2016. The dramatic development between 2018 and 2020 for HMM was due to its improvement in fuel efficiency (e.g. scrubber retrofit) and reduction in dependence on cha
Wan Hai reported its largest quarterly net loss at $70m in the first quarter of 2023, with losses at the gross profit level and operating cashflow level. Wan Hai has reduced its capacity exposure to Transpacific trade from 35% to 25% of its total capacity operated in the first quarter, with most of the reductions in the FE-WCNA route where capacity utilization has declined. Wan Hai's revenue dropped 71% YoY, the deepest YoY drop among the liners that have reported their first quarter perform
YMM put out its preliminary financial data after market on 12 May and then gave the full quarterly disclosure on 15 May. Profit attributable to shareholder down 95% YoY to a level similar of those seen in the long trough cycle before 2020.
Taiwanese liners' April revenue fell 5% MoM after a 1-month rebound in March. The decline in these liners' revenue start to mirror that magnitude of the fall in CCFI.
Hapag Lloyd reported before European market open today (11 May) where net profit dropped 38% QoQ and 57% YoY. The drop should be expected but fared better than the liner peers that have reported so far. Hapag Lloyd's average freight rates fell only 28% YoY versus CCFI's 68% YoY, benefited by Hapag Lloyd's higher mix in Transatlantic trade, which is not a composite in the CCFI. Hapag Lloyd EBIT at 31% in 1Q23, is better than all the other peers reported so far.
NYK and K-Line also reported beginning of this week where both operators guided the 91-92% YoY drop in the earnings from their container liner activities, in line with what MOL guided. Japanese shipping companies have the longest track record in guiding forward container liner earnings, dating back to 2005-2007. Of the 16 years where all three Japanese shipping companies have guided container liner earnings, the actual earnings beat guidance in 8 years. Their actual earnings tend to track bel
Maersk reported result before market today (4 May) where earnings fell hard as expected but $2.6bn at bottom line is still better than any quarters before 2021. Full year guidance stay unchanged, suggesting the EBIT for the next 3 quarters will range between negative $561mn or $2,4bn, which is a very wide range comparing to Maersk's track record before 2021. $2.4bn for 3 quarters would still be very good earnings while negative $561mn would be the worst ever. Maersk Line's unit revenue (total
COSCO provided full 1Q results after market on Friday (28 April) in addition to the EBIT, Net Profit figures already provided in an alert on 4 April. In the new disclosure, operating expenses in A-share accounting fell by 41% YoY while the volume fell by only 12% YoY. In our estimate, COSCO slot costs (annualised opex/capacity) fell 47% YoY in 1Q23. We will compare COSCO’s OPEX with the industry peers when more peers’ figures are available.
ONE reported its 4Q earnings for fiscal year 2022, which is 1Q23 on calendar year, during lunch break last Friday (28 Apr) with net profit down 56% QoQ and 76% YoY. Though, such quarterly results were still better than any quarter before 2021. The average unit revenue earned by ONE fell just 38% YoY whereas CCFI dropped 68% YoY as ONE likely benefited from higher contract mix and more diversified route mix than the CCFI, which is based on all China origin cargoes. ONE management has not prov