The findings come from the Container Port Performance Index 2025, published by the World Bank and S&P Global Market Intelligence. The index ranks container ports according to observed vessel time in port, adjusted for ship size and call size. It is based on operational data rather than self-reported port performance.
According to the report, the CPPI should be used as a diagnostic and benchmarking tool, not as a complete assessment of port management. It measures the time container vessels spend in port, including arrival and berth time, but it does not by itself explain every local cause behind a port’s ranking.
The European results show a sharp split. Algeciras ranked 12th globally with a CPPI score of 121.9, making it the only European port in the global top 20. Barcelona ranked 34th with a score of 86.0, Italy’s Savona-Vado ranked 51st, and Göteborg in Sweden ranked 67th.
By contrast, several of Europe’s largest gateways appeared much lower in the index. Hamburg ranked 239th, Bremerhaven 264th, Antwerp 306th and Rotterdam 333rd. Valencia ranked 368th, while Genoa was placed 392nd, La Spezia 386th, Trieste 382nd and Rijeka 397th.
Europe’s strongest and weakest scores
| Port | Country | CPPI 2025 rank | CPPI 2025 score |
| Algeciras | Spain | 12 | 121.9 |
| Barcelona | Spain | 34 | 86.0 |
| Savona-Vado | Italy | 51 | 64.1 |
| Göteborg | Sweden | 67 | 48.2 |
| Southampton | UK | 92 | 25.8 |
| London | UK | 132 | 12.7 |
| Liverpool | UK | 147 | 8.8 |
| Hamburg | Germany | 239 | -4.6 |
| Bremerhaven | Germany | 264 | -10.4 |
| Antwerp | Belgium | 306 | -21.2 |
| Rotterdam | Netherlands | 333 | -38.3 |
| Valencia | Spain | 368 | -75.8 |
| Genoa | Italy | 392 | -205.3 |
| Rijeka | Croatia | 397 | -238.9 |
The report also shows that the split is not simply a north-south divide. Some Mediterranean ports are among Europe’s strongest performers, while others sit near the bottom of the global ranking. The same pattern appears in Northern Europe, where major gateways record weaker scores than several smaller or more specialised ports.
Red Sea disruption reaches European terminals
The report links part of the pressure on European ports to the Red Sea crisis, which disrupted shipping through the Suez Canal in 2024 and 2025. Many carriers rerouted vessels around the Cape of Good Hope, adding 10 to 14 days to Asia-Europe transits.
According to the World Bank, this did not only increase freight costs. It also disturbed schedules across shipping networks. North European ports experienced surges when delayed vessels eventually arrived together, worsening congestion.
The report describes this pattern as “burst congestion”: short, intense episodes in which several off-schedule vessels reach a port within a narrow window. These events are not necessarily caused by a steady rise in cargo volumes. Instead, they are driven by the clustering of vessel arrivals after a disruption.
For ports, this creates operational problems beyond berth availability. Terminals lose predictability in berth allocation, labour deployment, yard planning and landside flows. If inland transport, storage or clearance processes cannot absorb the surge, containers remain longer in the terminal, yard density rises and vessel stays can lengthen further.
The World Bank says port performance and supply-chain stress reinforce each other. When vessels spend more time in port, effective shipping capacity is reduced. Ships held at anchor or berth cannot be used elsewhere, and delays are passed on to later ports of call.
Valencia and Hamburg show the pressure points
Valencia is one of the clearest European examples in the report. The World Bank says the Spanish port showed adaptive performance under external pressure, including efforts to accommodate additional calls and transshipment volumes following the Red Sea crisis.
However, the additional pressure still weakened its measured performance. Valencia’s share of vessel time spent at berth fell from about 64% in 2024 to roughly 49% in 2025, indicating that more time was being spent outside productive berth operations. Its CPPI score fell to -75.8, putting it 368th globally.
Hamburg is used in the report as an example of renewed congestion pressure in Northern European supply chains. The World Bank says the port saw a mild deterioration in turnaround performance linked to vessel bunching and off-schedule arrivals, even though it retains high structural efficiency. It describes Hamburg as a “relief node” absorbing delayed arrivals.
The annex data show that Hamburg’s 2025 CPPI score was -4.6, while Rotterdam’s was -38.3 and Antwerp’s -21.2. Bremerhaven scored -10.4. These results place several of Europe’s main northern gateways behind smaller European ports in the 2025 ranking.
The report notes that ports in Europe and North America have continued to recover from earlier disruption, but that their average scores remain affected by structural sensitivity to congestion and labour rigidity.
