Maersk (CPH: MAERSK-B) hits record as 2026 EBITDA outlook doubles

A.P. Moller – Maersk A/S (Nasdaq Copenhagen: MAERSK-B) has reached a record share price after a second major guidance upgrade transformed the 2026 earnings outlook for the global shipping and logistics group. Maersk reported second-quarter revenue of US$15.8 billion, EBITDA of US$3.0 billion and EBIT of US$1.6 billion as higher Ocean freight rates, stronger container volumes and global port congestion lifted profitability. The Class B shares closed at DKK 20,700 on August 14, up 8.75% for the session and almost 19% across the two trading days following the results. The central investor question is now whether unusually favourable freight rates and congestion can remain strong enough to support a 2026 EBITDA guidance midpoint that has doubled in only three months.

Why did Maersk shares surge to a record high after Q2 results?

Maersk’s second quarter substantially exceeded the expectations the market carried into the results.

Revenue increased 20% year on year to US$15.8 billion from US$13.1 billion. EBITDA climbed to US$3.0 billion from US$2.3 billion, while EBIT almost doubled to US$1.6 billion from US$845 million. Profit for the period reached approximately US$1.3 billion compared with US$586 million a year earlier.

The improvement was broad enough to prompt management to raise full-year guidance for the second time since late June. Underlying EBITDA is now expected to reach US$10.5 billion to US$12.5 billion, up from the US$8 billion to US$10 billion range announced on June 29. Underlying EBIT guidance increased to US$4.5 billion to US$6.5 billion from US$2 billion to US$4 billion.

The increase looks even larger when compared with the outlook at the start of the quarter. On May 7, Maersk expected 2026 underlying EBITDA of only US$4.5 billion to US$7.0 billion. The midpoint of that range was US$5.75 billion.

The new midpoint is US$11.5 billion.

In other words, Maersk’s midpoint EBITDA expectation has doubled in roughly three months. Even compared with the June midpoint of US$9 billion, the latest guidance represents another increase of approximately 27.8%.

Investors have responded accordingly. MAERSK-B closed at DKK 19,035 on August 13, up 9.37%, before rising another 8.75% to DKK 20,700 on August 14. The cumulative increase from the August 12 close of DKK 17,405 is approximately 18.9%.

The stock is also about 21% above its August 7 close of DKK 17,110 and roughly 21.8% above the July 15 close of DKK 16,995. Friday’s DKK 20,700 close also marked the top of its current 52-week range, which extends down to DKK 11,840.

The latest move therefore leaves Maersk in a very different valuation and sentiment position from only a few months ago. Investors are no longer pricing the shares primarily for a difficult freight-rate environment. They are increasingly pricing in a stronger shipping cycle.

Why has Maersk’s earnings outlook changed so dramatically?

The biggest change has occurred in Ocean, Maersk’s container-shipping business.

Ocean revenue increased 23% year on year during Q2. Loaded volumes rose 4.1%, while the average loaded freight rate increased 22%. Vessel utilisation remained high at 96%.

That combination had a dramatic effect on profit. Ocean EBIT reached US$935 million compared with only US$229 million a year earlier and a US$192 million loss during the first quarter of 2026.

Higher freight rates were particularly important.

Trade flows from the Far East have remained strong, while congestion across ports and inland logistics networks has reduced the effective amount of capacity available to move cargo. Maersk has highlighted bottlenecks across Europe, the Middle East, South America, West Africa and China.

The company has also been able to redeploy capacity as geopolitical disruption affected shipping patterns around the Gulf and Middle East.

The result is an unusual shipping environment in which strong cargo demand and constrained landside infrastructure are supporting freight rates even as carriers continue dealing with higher fuel and operating costs.

Maersk now assumes global container-market volume growth of approximately 4% for 2026.

The important distinction for investors is that higher rates have not resulted solely from an increase in cargo volumes. A significant part of the earnings improvement reflects congestion and trade imbalances that reduce network efficiency and tighten available capacity.

That makes the durability of those conditions one of the largest variables in the second-half outlook.

Is Maersk becoming less dependent on Ocean shipping?

The broader logistics portfolio also improved during Q2, although Ocean remains the dominant earnings swing factor.

Logistics & Services revenue increased 15% year on year and 11% sequentially. EBIT reached US$217 million compared with US$175 million a year earlier, while the EBIT margin improved to 5.1%.

Landside logistics was one of the stronger contributors as Maersk expanded services connecting alternative Gulf ports and inland destinations. Forwarding also benefited from higher air-freight and project-logistics volumes.

Terminals revenue increased 11%. Volumes rose 2.2%, while revenue per move increased 7.1% because of higher rates and storage income. Terminals generated US$458 million of EBIT, broadly stable compared with US$461 million a year earlier.

These businesses matter because Maersk has spent years attempting to become a more integrated logistics company rather than relying entirely on container freight rates.

There is evidence that the strategy is progressing. Logistics & Services is producing improving margins, while terminals continue generating substantial earnings and provide Maersk with infrastructure exposure in strategically important ports.

The group is also investing further.

APM Terminals recently inaugurated a US$350 million container terminal at Suape in Brazil, described by Maersk as the first fully electrified container terminal in South America. In Vietnam, APM Terminals and Hateco Group have agreed with Da Nang City to develop and operate the Lien Chieu Container Terminal, representing an investment of more than US$1.7 billion.

The long-term attraction is straightforward. A company earning money from Ocean transport, terminals, warehousing, forwarding and inland logistics has more ways to capture value from global trade than a pure container carrier.

The near-term numbers still show, however, that Ocean is capable of moving group earnings far more dramatically than the other businesses. That means the diversification story remains important but has not eliminated shipping-cycle exposure.

Can Maersk sustain the US$10.5bn to US$12.5bn EBITDA range?

The new guidance requires another strong second half.

Maersk generated approximately US$3.0 billion of EBITDA in Q2 after producing about US$1.7 billion in Q1. That puts first-half EBITDA near US$4.7 billion.

Reaching the bottom of the new US$10.5 billion full-year range would therefore require roughly US$5.8 billion during the second half. Reaching the US$11.5 billion midpoint requires about US$6.8 billion, while the US$12.5 billion upper end requires approximately US$7.8 billion.

At the midpoint, Maersk would need to average roughly US$3.4 billion of EBITDA in each of the final two quarters.

That is approximately 13% above the US$3.0 billion delivered in Q2.

The hurdle is therefore meaningful but not inconsistent with management’s decision to increase guidance. Maersk said improved visibility for the rest of the year and sharply higher Ocean rates supported the new forecast.

Free cash flow guidance has improved at the same time.

Management now expects 2026 free cash flow to be greater than zero. The previous June guidance was for at least negative US$1.5 billion, while the May outlook had been for at least negative US$3 billion.

Q2 already produced approximately US$0.5 billion of free cash flow compared with negative US$0.4 billion a year earlier.

If freight rates remain elevated and second-half EBITDA reaches the higher range now anticipated, cash generation should become a more important part of the investment case rather than earnings alone.

Could a wider return to the Suez Canal change the earnings picture?

This is probably the most important industry risk following the rally.

Maersk and Hapag-Lloyd have begun moving the AE19 Gemini service back through the Suez Canal and Red Sea rather than around the Cape of Good Hope. The companies described the change as another step in the gradual return toward trans-Suez routing following security assessments.

A shorter route is positive for customers because it reduces transit times and fuel consumption.

For shipping economics, however, broader normalisation can release effective vessel capacity back into the market. Ships travelling around Africa require more vessels and more sailing days to move the same amount of cargo. A large-scale return through Suez could therefore reduce one source of supply tightness.

Maersk has not announced a full East-West network return to Suez and has said there is no specific timetable for doing so. The Middle East security environment also remains highly volatile.

The risk is nevertheless worth monitoring because the market has just repriced Maersk on the assumption of substantially stronger earnings.

The current earnings uplift is also being supported by congestion. If ports, rail networks, trucking systems and inland terminals become less constrained at the same time that major shipping routes shorten, freight rates could normalise more rapidly.

Maersk provides useful sensitivity data for understanding the exposure. Management estimates that a US$100 change in average container freight rate per forty-foot-equivalent unit would change full-year 2026 EBIT by approximately US$700 million, all else being equal.

That figure explains why relatively small changes in freight pricing can have a large effect on group earnings.

How strong is Maersk’s balance sheet after the earnings rebound?

Maersk retains substantial liquidity even while investing and returning capital to shareholders.

At the end of Q2, the company held approximately US$18.5 billion of cash, short-term deposits and securities. Gross debt, including lease liabilities, was around US$17.0 billion.

Net interest-bearing debt was negative US$1.5 billion, meaning Maersk remained in an overall net cash position on this measure.

That provides considerable resilience for a company operating in a highly cyclical industry.

The balance sheet also supports continued shareholder returns. Maersk is executing a US$1.0 billion share-buyback programme while continuing investment across vessels, terminals and logistics infrastructure.

The company’s market capitalisation was approximately DKK 272.5 billion at the August 14 close.

That figure has risen rapidly alongside the share price, making future returns more dependent on whether today’s higher earnings level can persist.

The balance sheet reduces financial risk. It cannot remove freight-cycle risk.

A shipping company can move from exceptionally strong profitability to considerably weaker earnings without experiencing a balance-sheet crisis. For investors buying at a record share price, that distinction matters because the next downside scenario is more likely to involve earnings normalisation than an immediate financing problem.

Maersk stock key takeaways after the second 2026 guidance upgrade

• Maersk’s Class B shares closed at a record DKK 20,700 on August 14 after rising 8.75% for the session and approximately 18.9% across the two trading days following Q2 results.
• Q2 revenue increased 20% to US$15.8 billion, while EBITDA reached US$3.0 billion and EBIT increased to US$1.6 billion.
• The midpoint of 2026 underlying EBITDA guidance has doubled from US$5.75 billion in May to US$11.5 billion after two major upgrades.
• Ocean remains the principal earnings engine, with loaded volumes up 4.1%, average freight rates up 22% and segment EBIT rising to US$935 million.
• Logistics & Services revenue increased 15% and its EBIT margin improved to 5.1%, providing evidence that Maersk’s broader logistics strategy is also progressing.
• Maersk retains approximately US$18.5 billion of cash and deposits and remains in a net cash position, limiting near-term balance-sheet risk.
• Freight-rate normalisation, easing congestion and a broader return to shorter Suez Canal routes are the main variables that could weaken the current earnings trajectory.

What would strengthen or weaken the Maersk investment case from here?

Maersk enters the second half with dramatically stronger earnings momentum than investors expected only three months ago. Q2 Ocean profitability rebounded sharply, Logistics & Services improved, terminals remained highly profitable and free cash flow returned to positive territory. Management has now increased its EBITDA outlook twice since May, culminating in a midpoint that is twice the level implied by its initial second-quarter guidance.

The investment case would strengthen if Ocean freight rates remain elevated through Q3, loaded volumes continue growing, Logistics & Services margins improve further and Maersk generates enough second-half EBITDA to reach or exceed the US$11.5 billion guidance midpoint. Sustained positive free cash flow while the US$1 billion buyback continues would provide additional evidence that the earnings recovery is translating into shareholder value.

The thesis would weaken if congestion eases rapidly, a wider return to Suez releases substantial effective vessel capacity or global container demand slows below Maersk’s approximately 4% market-growth assumption. The sensitivity of EBIT to freight rates means even a moderate normalisation can have a substantial earnings impact.

The next scheduled financial checkpoint is Maersk’s third-quarter report on November 5. By then, investors should have considerably more evidence on whether Q2 marked the beginning of a durable higher-earnings period or the strongest phase of another unusually favourable shipping window.

After the move to DKK 20,700, the market is no longer waiting for proof that Maersk’s earnings outlook has improved. It has improved dramatically. The harder question is how much of that improvement can survive once the bottlenecks currently making global shipping unusually profitable begin to clear.