Freight, Insurance and the Route Equation with the Strait of Hormuz Closed
Effectively closed since February 2026, Hormuz has taken out of service a lane carrying a quarter of the world's seaborne oil trade; the result has been not only high freight rates but insurance cover itself becoming the problem.
Under normal conditions the Strait of Hormuz is the world's busiest energy passage. According to data from the US Energy Information Administration (EIA), an average of 20.9 million barrels a day of oil and oil products passed through the strait in the first half of 2025; that corresponds to about 20 percent of global oil consumption and roughly a quarter of all oil carried by sea. Over the same period 11.4 billion cubic feet a day of LNG, more than a fifth of global LNG trade, also left through this narrow passage. The International Energy Agency (IEA) gives a similar picture for 2025: around 20 million barrels a day and roughly a third of crude oil carried by sea. On the container side the figures are smaller in absolute terms but decisive regionally. Total container throughput of the Persian Gulf states is at a level of about 33 million TEU a year; within that, Jebel Ali alone handles around 15.5 million TEU a year, while Khalifa Port moved 6.6 million TEU in 2025. Although its share of global port throughput is around 3.5 percent, for a shipper sending goods to the Gulf or transhipping through it this lane was close to having no alternative.
The conflict that began on 28 February 2026 reversed this picture. Following navigation warnings from the Revolutionary Guards, traffic fell to almost zero within days; a partial reopening was attempted with the ceasefire of 8 April, but the strait closed again on 18 April. As of the end of August it is regarded as effectively closed. Lloyd's List Intelligence counted 114 transits in the week of 17–22 August; although that was a 30 percent increase on the previous week, it is far below the pre-crisis average of 85 transits a day. As of 28 August, 383 vessels were still waiting off berth. The striking of a tanker on 25 August by ordnance of unidentified origin sums up why commercial risk appetite has not returned despite the assessment by military authorities that the area had been 'cleared of mines'.
The real issue is not the premium but the cover itself
The increase in the war risk premium is the most tangible cost item of this crisis. Premiums for a Gulf transit, quoted before the crisis in a range of 0.1 to 0.25 percent of the vessel's value, had risen by June 2026 to 3–8 percent, that is 3–8 million dollars per voyage for a large tanker; in the escalation at the end of July some quotations reached the 7.5–10 percent range and an insurance cost of around 21 million dollars was cited for a 270,000-tonne tanker. The Joint War Committee of the Lloyd's Market broadened its high-risk area definition to cover the whole Persian Gulf. For a logistics operator, however, the critical point was not the level of the premium but the fact that for a period no cover could be obtained at all: as some insurers withdrew from the region, a reinsurance facility led by the US International Development Finance Corporation (DFC) came into play, set up initially at 20 billion dollars and later raised to 40 billion dollars; the US Treasury took half the risk and seven insurers, among them Chubb, AIG and Berkshire Hathaway, took the remainder. On 19 June 2026 a separate consortium led by Chubb was opened within Lloyd's, offering 200 million dollars of capacity each for hull, P&I and cargo. These measures made cover purchasable again, but they did not normalise its price; industry sources say that premiums will need a confirmed period of calm of at least two to four weeks before they ease.
On the container side, lines suspended sailings one after another in March 2026 and introduced surcharges. Hapag-Lloyd announced an emergency conflict surcharge of 1,500 dollars per 20-foot container for regional deliveries and CMA CGM one of 2,000 dollars; Maersk, MSC and Cosco suspended their Gulf operations or diverted their vessels to safe waters. On the tanker side, Gulf–China clean product freight rose to around 78 dollars a tonne in July; the five-year average was around 19 dollars, while the March peak had approached 140 dollars. The global container spot index, by contrast, did not deteriorate to the same degree: Drewry's World Container Index of 27 August 2026 closed at 4,473 dollars per 40-foot container, down 1 percent on the week; Shanghai–Rotterdam stood at 4,287 dollars and Shanghai–Genoa at 4,866 dollars. The shock, in other words, was concentrated in cargo moving into and out of the Gulf and fed through to global mainline trades only to a limited extent.
Alternatives: pipelines and ports outside the strait
The arithmetic of the pipelines is limited from the outset. Although Saudi Arabia's East–West line (Petroline) has a design capacity of 7 million barrels a day, its actual export capacity is around 4.5–5 million barrels a day because of the constraint at the Yanbu terminals; the IEA notes that the line was used at about 2 million barrels a day in 2025, leaving 3–5 million barrels of headroom. The UAE's Habshan–Fujairah (ADCOP) line has a capacity of 1.8 million barrels a day and carries around 1.1 million barrels; the headroom is about 700,000 barrels. Construction of the 3 billion dollar, 300-kilometre parallel line is roughly half complete and is expected to raise capacity to 3.6 million barrels by the middle of 2027. In total, the pipeline headroom that could be brought into use today is 3.5–5.5 million barrels a day, less than a quarter of the roughly 20 million barrels that pass through the strait.
Ports outside the strait responded faster on the container side, but they loaded the cost onto the cargo. Jebel Ali's throughput fell to 3.1 million TEU in the first half of 2026, a decline of 59.5 percent year on year; the second-quarter fall reached 90.1 percent and the port dropped from 10th to 32nd in the global rankings. At Khalifa Port the loss was at least 50 percent. Against that, Oman's port of Sohar grew by 40 percent in the first half to 545,000 TEU and Salalah by 15 percent to 2.33 million TEU; DP World stated that since March it had moved 500,000 TEU over intra-Gulf road and rail corridors with around 3,000 truck movements a day, and signed a 50-year agreement for a new terminal at Fujairah with a capacity of 2.5 million TEU. Overland substitution is not cheap, however: carriage of a 40-foot container from Salalah to Dubai was quoted in the 3,000–5,000 dollar range, while normal port-area haulage from Jebel Ali to the same region was in the 200–400 dollar band.
When planning
For Türkiye the most visible effect of the crisis was on the Ceyhan side. When Iraq's exports through the Gulf fell by more than 80 percent after February, Baghdad brought its Mediterranean outlet back into use: on 1 August 2026 a one-year agreement was signed between BOTAŞ and SOMO and NOC, providing for 750,000 barrels a day through the Kirkuk–Ceyhan line; the previous actual flow was around 170,000 barrels, while the line's capacity is about 1.5 million barrels. On the container side, Mersin grew by 11 percent year on year in the first quarter of 2026 to about 500,000 TEU; with throughput across Türkiye contracting by 0.7 percent, Mersin's divergence shows that part of the Middle East cargo flow is being reconfigured through the Eastern Mediterranean.
When planning on these lanes it is worth asking three questions separately. The first is whether the cover exists at all: if the contract does not state who bears the war risk premium and up to what level it is assumed, the premium on its own can undo the commercial logic of a voyage. The second is the assumption on which the transit time rests: for cargo that berths at a port outside the strait and continues overland, the real duration comes not from the vessel schedule but from the border crossing and truck capacity. The third is document and route consistency: when the load port changes, if the letter of credit terms, the origin and the route definition in the insurance policy are not updated along with it, payment can falter even when the goods reach their destination.
Sources
- EIA – World Oil Transit Chokepoints
- IEA – Strait of Hormuz
- Lloyd's List Intelligence – Strait of Hormuz Brief, 5 Ağustos 2026
- Windward – Strait of Hormuz Daily Intelligence
- Al Jazeera – How shipping insurance rates are rising (23 Temmuz 2026)
- Insurance Business – War-risk insurance braces for prolonged elevated premiums (28 Haziran 2026)
- Reinsurance News – Lloyd's unveils Chubb-led war risk facility for Hormuz
- World Economic Forum – What stopping war-risk insurance in the Strait of Hormuz tells us