A shipping company is clearly not a supplier of services like another. The supply chain world has been regularly reminded of this sometimes painful truth in recent years. Problems now come from an increasing number of different sources. Buying space purely on the basis of price, as was the case for decades, no longer makes sense, so complicated have external factors rendered the equation price/service/uncertainty equation.
In its Safety and Shipping Review 2026, Allianz Commercial, the corporate insurance arm of the Allianz insurance group, offers a detailed review of the different incidents which impacted the shipping sector in 2025 but also the major risk trends it faces. We strongly recommend that you read the review, which has become a reference document in its field, and, to give you a foretaste of its contents, we offer here a personal view in which we concentrate on four issues which seem to us particularly important.
Our first observation, which is a gratifying one, is that the number of casualties has fallen. Between 2016 and the end of 2020, 555 total losses were recorded, which is to say an average of 111 per year. Between 2021 and the end of 2025, the total fell to 350, making an average of 70 per year. Allianz noted that this represented a reduction of 37% on the previous five years. Despite its relatively strong growth, the merchant marine sector clearly reaped the dividends of its long-term efforts in terms of ongoing technical, training and safety improvement.
A word of warning, however. The number of claims looks to have begun rising again in recent months under the impact of geopolitical factors.
Our second observation is concerning, the fleet is ageing and this has a direct impact on casualty levels. "The average age of the global shipping fleet rose to 23 years in 2025", the review noted."Vessels 20 years or older now account for almost a quarter of the global container ship fleet, the highest proportion in decades, as geopolitical volatility and limited shipyard capacity delay fleet renewal…"
The operation of vessels more than 25 years old, which is made possible by their still high residual values, is not a marginal phenomenon. Damage and breakdowns naturally become more frequent. Moreover, the use of spare parts of lower quality, which do not have shipbuilder approval, is on the increase because they are cheaper and more easily available.
Allianz has identified a particular point requiring vigilance moreover. The use of older ships in hostile environments like the Arctic can lead to much higher claims levels.
Our third observation is that the rapid development of the use of electricity for motor vehicles and consumer goods is increasing the risk of shipboard fires. This is the case, notably, for ships transporting lithium-ion batteries.
The resulting casualties are serious and costly. Thermal runaways are becoming more frequent and combating fires of this kind is particularly complex. According to Allianz, regulation is not following technological development fast enough. Putting lithium batteries in class 9 ("miscellaneous dangerous goods") of the International Maritime Dangerous Goods Code (IMDG) seems totally inappropriate today.
At the same time, the shipping companies are often the victims of false declarations of goods, which can cause massive accidents and an increase in the number of declarations of general average.
Companies try to adapt to these new risks by developing specific solutions. For example, Ceva Logistics announced in March 2026 that it was launching a new safe system for shipping used lithium-ion batteries to continental Europe. The problem requires a much more global solution, however. Given its rate of growth, this segment of the market almost deserves dedicated ship capacity to ensure that the risk posed by lithium-ion batteries is isolated.
Our fourth observation is that Allianz draws attention to the additional risks posed by “fuel shifts”, meaning the switch from one fuel to another on dual-fuel ships.
Switches are generally made not far from the coast, where environmental regulations can require the use of a cleaner fuel. They can lead to electricity cuts, which, even if they only last a few minutes, can cause a total loss of manoeuvrability in densely populated areas, with numerous ships and other obstacles of all kinds. This is a new risk for which training and technical procedures need to be improved urgently. On the MV Dali, which collided with a metal bridge in Baltimore in March 2024, the final report of the US National Transportation Safety Board found that, in additional to the defective electrical switchboard which was the main cause of the accident, an inappropriate fuel circuit and pump had been used to change the engine’s fuel supply.
Another risk which is little talked about and is proper to the biggest 24,000 TEU container ships, also merits attention, in my opinion. This is the bank effect, which has a major effect on ship manoeuvrability in rivers and other restricted waterways. It creates additional pressure on the prow of the ship, pushing it away from the bank, and a suction effect on the stern, pulling it towards the bank and creating a major risk of yawing on the vessel’s part, loss of control and grounding. As we saw with the Ever Given in the Suez Canal, these physical phenomena are not necessarily a major cause of accidents but can be significant aggravating factors. It is, in any case, a factor which the major shipping companies may want to take into account, along with the wider security questions and financial risks they also face, as they reflect on the possibility of a large-scale return of their 24,000 TEU vessels to the Suez Canal.
The growth in international tension and less and less infrequent acts of war will clearly result in an increase in insurance premiums, as we move towards an ever less predictable future. Allianz’s review has the merit of highlighting a whole series of risks which today are under the radar but which are nevertheless critical for maritime safety.