IN Brief:
- Ningbo-Zhoushan handled 22.90 million TEU in H1 2026, up 8.8% year on year.
- Singapore processed 22.74 million TEU, leaving approximately 160,000 TEU between the two gateways.
- Jintang expansion, new international services, and inland rail development are supporting Ningbo-Zhoushan's wider capacity growth.
Ningbo-Zhoushan Port has moved ahead of Singapore to become the world’s second-busiest container gateway for the first half of 2026, putting two Chinese ports at the top of the global ranking.
Ningbo-Zhoushan Port handled 22.90 million TEU between January and June, an increase of 8.8% year on year. Singapore processed 22.74 million TEU, up 4.7%, leaving approximately 160,000 TEU between the two ports.
Shanghai retained first place with first-half throughput of 28.74 million TEU, 6.2% higher than a year earlier. Ningbo-Zhoushan’s move therefore does not challenge China’s largest container gateway, but it does underline the rate at which capacity and cargo volumes are expanding further south along the Yangtze River Delta.
The margin over Singapore remains small. A gap of 160,000 TEU represents less than one per cent of either port’s six-month volume, leaving relatively modest differences in monthly throughput capable of changing the order again before the end of the year.
Ningbo-Zhoushan’s growth has been supported by additional terminal capacity and a broader service network. The second phase of the Jintang container hub was completed in July, integrating five operational container berths. Jintang itself recorded 23.4% volume growth after adding 17 international routes during the first half.
Those maritime investments are being accompanied by development farther inland. Ningbo-Zhoushan has expanded fixed rail services, dry-port connections, and multimodal links into major manufacturing regions, giving factories away from the coast additional access to the port without relying solely on long-distance road transport.
The gateway recently moved more than 8,000 TEU by sea-rail on consecutive days, setting new daily records as inland container flows increased. That development is separate from the latest global ranking, but it shows how hinterland capacity is being expanded alongside berth and vessel-handling capability.
A container terminal cannot sustain higher marine throughput without corresponding improvements landside. Larger vessel exchanges place more boxes into the yard during concentrated windows, increasing pressure on rail paths, road gates, empty-container storage, customs processing, and inland depots.
Additional berths therefore raise potential capacity rather than guaranteeing higher usable throughput. If road queues lengthen, rail departures cannot keep pace, or containers remain in stacks for longer, the terminal can become congested even while its quay infrastructure has room to handle more vessels.
Ningbo-Zhoushan benefits from direct access to Zhejiang and the wider Yangtze River Delta, one of the world’s largest manufacturing regions. Its ability to combine deep-sea services with inland rail and dry ports effectively extends the port interface farther into the industrial hinterland, allowing export cargo to be consolidated before reaching the coast.
That structure also helps spread cargo across more transport modes. Long-distance trucking remains essential for many consignments, but scheduled rail can move larger blocks of containers between manufacturing centres and the port while reducing dependence on road capacity over the full journey.
Singapore operates a different model, with a large share of its container traffic based on transhipment between shipping services rather than cargo generated by a domestic manufacturing hinterland. Its first-half growth of 4.7% still represents substantial additional throughput on an already large base, and the port remains central to liner networks connecting Asia with the rest of the world.
The comparison is therefore between two large gateways performing overlapping but not identical functions. Ningbo-Zhoushan’s growth is closely linked to Chinese production and expanding inland connections, while Singapore’s position rests heavily on network connectivity, transhipment, and its role as a regional maritime hub.
Changes elsewhere in the ranking also show how external disruption can distort comparisons. Dubai handled 3.14 million TEU during the first half, down sharply from 7.77 million TEU a year earlier amid disruption affecting Gulf shipping, while Port Klang moved into the global top ten.
Ningbo-Zhoushan’s advance is different because it reflects sustained volume growth and additional infrastructure rather than a competitor’s exceptional collapse. The port exceeded 40 million TEU for the first time in 2025 and continued expanding its service network into 2026.
Maintaining second place will depend on whether those gains continue through the full year. Singapore remains only a fraction behind, while Ningbo-Zhoushan must keep its new terminal capacity, inland connections, and yard operations aligned as throughput rises.
The ranking provides the headline, but the more demanding task is operational. Five additional berths and new liner services can attract more containers; rail paths, gate performance, equipment availability, and inland capacity will determine how efficiently those boxes actually move through the system.
