Supply Chain Congestion Index Declines 4% Week over Week; Bottleneck Level Remains at a Low “2”

Overview

Goldman Sachs' weekly U.S. Supply Chain Congestion Index declined 4% week over week in the week ended August 17, 2026, while the weekly bottleneck level remained at “2.” This level is close to pre-pandemic supply chain fluidity and materially below the pandemic congestion peak of “10.”

Core views

High-frequency supply chain congestion pressure remains moderate: the number of vessels at anchor is low, rail intermodal volumes continue to grow year over year, and rail and container dwell times remain far below peak levels. At the same time, ocean freight rates have risen significantly, and some lagged monthly indicators for June show contracting warehousing capacity and accelerating warehouse utilization expansion, indicating that freight demand, tariffs, and geopolitical events could still alter the pace of logistics activity.

Analysis framework

Using the pre-pandemic baseline of February 3, 2020, the report aggregates weekly and monthly logistics indicators to construct a supply chain congestion scale from 1 to 10. The weekly index provides a leading high-frequency signal, while the monthly composite index confirms trends using a broader set of variables.

Methodology notes

• Supply Chain Indicator FrameworkSupply Chain Congestion Scale

  Composite Logistics Bottleneck Assessment

  Measures supply chain conditions from fully congested to fully fluid using variables including vessels at anchor, rail intermodal volume and speed, rail and container dwell times, ocean freight rates, port throughput, and supplier delivery times.

• High-Frequency MonitoringWeekly and Monthly Composite Indices

  Leading and Confirmation Mechanism

  The weekly index is more timely and is intended to indicate the direction of the monthly composite index with roughly a one-month lag; the monthly index incorporates more variables to confirm congestion trends.

• Benchmark ComparisonPre-Pandemic Baseline Method

  Relative Change Scoring

  Each indicator is assessed relative to its pre-pandemic condition on February 3, 2020, with greater weight assigned to variables more directly linked to bottlenecks.

Asset mapping & comparison

Structured mapping from thesis to named assets (strengths, weaknesses, peers, risks).

• Port and Terminal Operators

  Direct beneficiaries of or parties affected by supply chain fluidity and loaded import container volumes

  Strengths

  Low numbers of vessels at anchor and moderate port congestion support throughput and operating efficiency.

  Weaknesses

  Low congestion may also mean limited opportunities for emergency handling fees and congestion-related revenue.

  Comparison

  Loaded import container volumes at the three major West Coast ports rose 12% year over year in June, while vessels at anchor remained low.

  Risks

  Tariffs, shifts in trade flows, and geopolitical events could cause sudden volatility in cargo volumes and port-call timing.

• Rail Intermodal Operators

  Key beneficiaries of freight flows and network efficiency

  Strengths

  West Coast intermodal volume still grew 5% year over year, indicating resilient freight flows.

  Weaknesses

  BNSF and UNP showed divergence in speed and terminal dwell metrics, indicating uneven operational improvement.

  Comparison

  BNSF intermodal volume rose 2.3% year over year, while UNP rose 7.2% year over year.

  Risks

  Weaker freight demand, imbalanced capacity allocation, and declining service speeds could affect pricing and efficiency.

• Ocean Shipping and Freight Forwarding-Related Assets

  Highly correlated with freight rates and trans-Pacific cargo demand

  Strengths

  China/East Asia-to-U.S. West Coast freight rates rose sharply both week over week and year over year, benefiting participants with spot freight-rate exposure.

  Weaknesses

  Higher freight rates have not yet been reflected in broad port congestion, creating uncertainty about their durability.

  Comparison

  Freight rates were approximately $6,830/FEU, up 11% week over week and 222% year over year.

  Risks

  Demand declines, capacity deployment, trade policy, and geopolitical changes could all drive sharp freight-rate volatility.

• Retail and Consumer Goods Companies

  Supply chain fluidity affects inventory replenishment, delivery cycles, and costs

  Strengths

  Low congestion and shorter dwell times help reduce stockout and delay risks.

  Weaknesses

  Rising ocean freight rates may increase import procurement and logistics costs.

  Comparison

  The overall congestion level was “2,” but trans-Pacific freight rates rose notably.

  Risks

  Tariff changes, sustained freight-rate increases, and global trade disruptions could compress gross margins.

Key data

• Weekly Composite Congestion IndexDown 4% week over week; bottleneck level at “2”For the week ended August 17, 2026, overall conditions were below pandemic peaks and close to pre-pandemic fluidity.
• West Coast Container Vessels at Anchor1 vesselUnchanged from the prior week.
• East Coast and Gulf Coast Container Vessels at Anchor2 vesselsDown from 5 vessels in the prior week.
• West Coast Class I Rail Intermodal VolumeUp 5% year over yearUp 6% year over year in the prior week; BNSF rose 2.3% year over year and UNP rose 7.2% year over year.
• Rail Terminal Dwell Time20.0 hours for UNP; 22.2 hours for BNSFUNP increased by 0.1 hour week over week, while BNSF declined by 0.5 hour week over week.
• 20-Foot Chassis Street Dwell Time4.0 daysIn week 32 of 2026, below 4.3 days in week 26.
• China/East Asia-to-U.S. West Coast Freight RateApproximately $6,830/FEUUp 11% week over week and 222% year over year.
• San Pedro Bay Container Weighted Average Dwell Time2.9 daysIn June 2026, above 2.6 days in May.
• Loaded Import Container Volumes at the Three Major West Coast PortsUp 12% year over yearIn June 2026, covering the Ports of Los Angeles, Long Beach, and Oakland.
• LMI Transportation Capacity Index30.8In June 2026, below 31.7 in May, indicating accelerating contraction in transportation capacity.
• LMI Warehousing Utilization Index69.4In June 2026, above 62.9 in May, indicating accelerating expansion in warehouse utilization.

Impact & implications

Low congestion supports relatively stable replenishment and delivery efficiency for retailers, consumer goods companies, and transportation networks, while reducing costs and inflation pressure caused by logistics bottlenecks. The rapid rise in freight rates has not translated into broad congestion, suggesting that price pressure should currently be distinguished from actual network blockage; if supply chain pressure continues to ease, the index could remain more consistently near “1” in 2026.

Risks

• Changes in tariff policy could front-load, delay, or reshape freight demand and import timing.
• Geopolitical conflicts could disrupt global trade routes, capacity allocation, and freight rates.
• If rapid increases in ocean freight rates persist, they could be passed through to import costs and goods prices.
• Monthly data are lagged, and weekly indicators do not provide a certain signal for the subsequent monthly composite index.
• Some chassis dwell data use unchanged assumptions for several weeks due to changes in the data source, which may reduce the precision of short-term comparisons.

What to watch

• Whether the weekly congestion index further stabilizes at “1” from “2.”
• Whether the number of vessels at anchor on the East and West Coasts rises again.
• Whether rising China/East Asia-to-U.S. West Coast freight rates persist and spread to other trade lanes.
• Whether BNSF and UNP intermodal volumes, train speeds, and terminal dwell times improve in tandem.
• Subsequent monthly readings for port container dwell times, warehouse capacity, and warehouse utilization.
• The effects of tariff policy and geopolitical events on freight volumes, inventory replenishment, and route planning.