After more than a year of detours and heightened security measures, a cautious movement back toward the Suez route is under way. Major carriers have begun selective transits and operational trials in December 2025, testing whether the fragile lull in Red Sea attacks will hold long enough to justify broader route changes.
The shift is tentative and tactical: shipping lines are weighing insurance, timing, and port-handling capacity even as canal traffic and economic signals show early signs of recovery. The coming months will show whether these initial moves become a sustained industry trend or a short-lived readjustment.
Early tests and selective transits
Several high-profile test transits in December 2025 signalled the first steps back to pre-crisis routings. Maersk completed an “initial transit” through the Red Sea/Bab el‑Mandeb on 18, 19 December and stressed it will take a “stepwise approach” without broad East, West service changes yet. Days later, the Suez Canal Authority reported two CMA CGM vessels, Jacques Saade and Adonis, transited on 23 December, and CMA CGM schedules indicate INDAMEX services will use Suez from January 2026.
Oil and tanker flows have also seen measured testing: late‑2025 reports show tankers and crude transits through Bab el‑Mandeb and Suez being trialed selectively after sharp declines in 2024. S&P Global noted Bab el‑Mandeb transits plunged in 2024 and only started to be tested again in late 2025 as the security picture softened.
Operational indicators from the SCA and ports show upticks in monthly transit counts, and some ultra-large vessels have returned without escorts. Those early indications encourage carriers but do not yet constitute a full-scale reversion: most lines emphasise a calibrated, conditional return to Suez.
Insurance, war-risk and the cost of perception
Insurance markets have moved in step with the changing security environment. Platts/S&P Global reported war‑risk premiums in the Red Sea fell to roughly 0.2% of hull value after the October 2025 ceasefire, down from about 0.5% prior to the ceasefire, reducing one of the most visible added costs of Suez transits.
Underwriters remain conservative, however, and premiums are widely expected to stay above pre‑crisis levels until a prolonged period of safe, unmolested transits is evident. That lingering insurance premium differential keeps the economics of route choice uncertain for many operators, especially on marginal loops.
Beyond premiums, carriers face other security-related costs, escort fees, crew hazard pay and extra security measures, that together with insurance can produce an economic “cost inversion” in which the longer Cape of Good Hope route becomes competitive despite higher fuel and time penalties.
Carriers’ calculus: stepwise returns and capacity planning
Major carriers are responding cautiously. Maersk described its December transit as an “initial” test and intends a gradual approach; Hapag‑Lloyd’s CEO warned the industry’s return to Suez would likely be phased over a 60, 90 day window to avoid port congestion and operational bottlenecks. These timeframes reflect carriers’ desire to manage port calls, terminal slots and vessel rotations as routings shift.
Some services are already scheduled to resume Suez use in early 2026, but lines stress changes will be synched with commercial and operational readiness rather than driven by line transits alone. The balance is delicate: resuming Suez can cut transit times by 10, 14 days on some loops, freeing vessel capacity, yet restarting flows en masse risks port congestion if not coordinated.
That need for coordination explains why carriers are not reverting overnight. A stepwise return allows reassessment of freight rates, port capacity and crew logistics while keeping the option to route around the Cape quickly should security conditions change.
Market impacts: capacity, freight rates and the BIMCO warning
Industry analysts say a broad normalization of Suez routings could materially change the market balance. BIMCO warned in December 2025 that a return to Suez could reduce ship demand by roughly 10% if widely adopted, a figure that would meaningfully affect vessel utilization and the charter market.
Shippers and freight rate trackers expect rapid market effects if routings broaden: shorter Asia, Europe and Asia, US transit times would effectively increase available capacity and apply downward pressure on spot rates unless carriers take capacity‑management measures. Firms such as CH‑Robinson and benchmarking services like Xeneta have flagged how quickly route normalization can influence rates.
Analysts from Drewry and Xeneta suggest normalization could be achieved by end‑2026 or into 2027 if stability holds, but they stress the outcome hinges on the security environment and insurance market response. A measured return could still shift bargaining power toward shippers and customers as capacity tightness eases.
Economic and Egyptian canal outlook
The Suez Canal’s finances bore the brunt of the routings shift: revenues plunged from about $10.2 billion in 2023 to roughly $4.0 billion in 2024, and transits roughly halved in that period. The sharp revenue drop was widely attributed to Red Sea security risks and the rerouting of East, West traffic around the Cape.
Suez Canal Authority data and statements have, however, signalled a gradual recovery. SCA chairman Osama Rabie said in November 2025 that the canal was showing “a real beginning of gradual recovery” and expected revenues of about $4.2 billion for 2025 as traffic and net tonnage improved in recent months. Some reports and analysts have pointed to even stronger rebounds for later fiscal periods, though estimates vary by methodology and fiscal framing.
A meaningful normalization of routings would boost SCA revenues and restore ancillary services that disappeared during the crisis, but any full recovery depends on sustained, predictable transits and the pace at which carriers and insurers shift back toward Suez.
Risks that could reverse the trend
The most immediate risk to a broader return to Suez is the conditional nature of the Houthi pause. Reporting through late 2025 suggested Houthis had largely paused widespread Red Sea attacks following the October ceasefire, but the group has not renounced maritime operations and has warned it could resume if the conflict reignites or political conditions change.
Underwriters, carriers and port authorities are all aware that a few high-profile incidents could sharply reverse market sentiment and reinstate higher premiums and routing shifts. Insurance markets would likely respond quickly, and the added cost and reputational risk could push many operators back to the Cape.
For now, industry watchers emphasise that a sustainable return to Suez requires not just episodic calm but a demonstrable, prolonged decline in maritime attacks, tangible evidence that risk premiums and operational disruptions will remain low over time.
Looking a, the pathway back to Suez is cautiously optimistic but conditional. Early transits by Maersk and CMA CGM, easing insurance premiums and SCA traffic upticks are meaningful signals, yet fleets and insurers are balancing those signs against the possibility of renewed disruptions.
If the lull persists, a gradual reallocation of capacity and routings could reshape freight markets by late 2026 or 2027, pressuring spot rates and easing vessel demand. But the timing and extent of that shift will depend on sustained security, coordinated carrier planning and insurance market responses.
