Author: Piskun Yuliia

Pricing issues in the logistics industry are extremely relevant today. A particularly significant aspect is that an emphasis on “cheap at the start” typically results in a much higher cost of error later. This can manifest as breaches of agreed deadlines, downtime, fines, or loss of clients. That is why Ukraine needs a reliability rating for logistics companies, rather than a price ranking.

What the Market Watches vs. What it Overlooks

One of the key problems facing the modern logistics services market is that the focus is centered on the rate, while a whole range of other factors remains overlooked, namely:

• Risk profile;

• Service discipline;

• Readiness for force majeure;

• Transparency.

Therefore, a selective focus on the price factor becomes the fundamental error in selection, leading to partnerships that ultimately disappoint.

Current Insights into the Logistics Sector

To address this, let’s highlight three key metrics that are most significant for assessing a logistics partner’s reliability:

1. Speed and quality of response to force majeure;

2. Transparency and process control;

3. Company experience and longevity, which serves as evidence of reliability.

In my opinion, it is equally vital to consider scenarios where a low freight rate hides the exclusion of THC (Terminal Handling Charges), local port fees, storage, or free time. Furthermore, vehicle downtime often occurs, fuel surcharges appear, and there are re-issuances of bills of lading or additional certificates that were supposedly agreed upon in advance.

For example: A client saves money at the start but loses both time and money later. Consider a customs clearance case where a competitor offered a 30% cheaper rate for filing a Customs Declaration. However, the “cheapest” broker submitted an incorrect commodity code, forcing the importer to pay an additional 1.5% in duties—amounting to approximately $10,000.

It is also crucial to watch for “red flags” that indicate reliability is unlikely. This includes “guarantees” of transit time and cargo safety. While these factors can be managed with care, they cannot be legally guaranteed.

5 Significant Criteria to Consider When Choosing a Logistics Provider

When asked about selection criteria, I believe you should focus on the following:

• KPIs for maintaining ETD conditions: % of shipments without disruptions (no rollovers, no route changes due to the forwarder’s fault, no critical delays);

• KPIs for maintaining quoted costs: % of shipments without additional unplanned expenses;

• Volume metrics: Not the primary factor, but important to show how the company performs under load;

• Annual volume: (TEU / MT / trucks / charters);

• Client retention rate: (Year-over-year).

Additionally, a global agent network should be added to this list.

Additional Criteria for a Reliable Carrier

Beyond the aforementioned points, you should also consider:

• The carrier’s experience in their specific niche;

• Transit times;

• Availability of their own fleet;

• Recommendations from B2B clients;

• Pricing transparency and a clear breakdown of all services included in the tariff;

• Level of customer service, including 24/7 support, convenient communication channels, and cargo status reporting;

• Ability to offer alternative routes in case of force majeure;

• Capability to provide necessary shipping conditions for specialized cargo (e.g., hazardous materials, etc.).

If you take all these factors into account when choosing a freight forwarder, it will significantly increase the chances of a successful partnership.

In the challenging conditions of wartime, Ukrainian logistics continues to face a wide range of risks and challenges. These are constantly evolving, as the field is highly dynamic and influenced by both domestic processes and international factors.

CEO Pavlo Lynnyk and Commercial Director Volodymyr Huz discuss the current context for logistics companies.

What logistics solutions do you consider most effective for mitigating risks in 2026?

Volodymyr Huz: In 2026, the key factor for resilience is diversification and supply chain controllability, rather than relying on a single “ideal” route. When distributing flows, one must consider local risks perceived by importers. Insurance and tariffs are also vital issues. It is particularly worth noting that insurance services have surged in price and continue to get more expensive—rising from 1% to 3.5%.

Poland remains a key hub. We can assume that in March, this traffic will continue to be oversaturated. However, it remains effective as it allows for work with various transport modes—container ships, trucks, and rail. By the way, rail can reach the final destination directly (which is cheaper but not very fast) or, for example, go to the Mostyska border crossing, from where the cargo can be picked up by truck.

One should not forget other European alternatives. Constanța hasn’t gone anywhere and has become more active as of today. It is a sort of European “Plan B.” Similarly, Rijeka remains a solid hub for rail service via Budapest, which is a good option for certain importers.

If we are talking about connections with Northern and Central Europe, the USA, Canada, and South America, then Germany and the Benelux countries can be considered alternatives to Poland. This is relevant for high-margin goods where one wants to avoid the risks in Poland, such as the port closures seen in early January.

Pavlo Lynnyk: From our experience, the most effective solutions are: multimodal routes with the ability to quickly switch between ports, countries, and transport modes; the regionalization of logistics and use of dry ports, border hubs, and temporary storage warehouses closer to the client; and combining shipping lines with alternative services to avoid dependence on a single global player.

Effectively, in 2026, the winner is not the one who is cheaper, but the one who is more stable and adapts faster.

What changes in carrier behavior are you already recording at the beginning of 2026, and what do you expect in the next 6–12 months? Are you seeing a return of the fleet to traditional routes, or is the priority still on alternative paths?

Volodymyr Huz: Regarding road carriers, we are currently observing an increase in tariffs. This applies to truck and container transport both within Ukraine and in international logistics. However, it is important to understand the market context: prices are simply rising to market levels and moving away from the dumping that characterized last year. Therefore, current price levels are market-optimal rather than inflated.

An identical trend is observed in the break-bulk fleet. Small dry-cargo vessels (3,000–5,000 tons) have nearly doubled their freight costs in the Black Sea. For example, six months ago, import tariffs to Ukraine were $20–$25 per ton; now they are around $40 per ton.

Conversely, container prices to Ukraine continue to decrease. Precise pricing depends on the factor of traffic returning to the Suez Canal. As of now, CMA has announced they are not returning, while MAERSK has returned with two services.

Pavlo Lynnyk: Overall, carriers are becoming more pragmatic. they are conducting fewer experiments and focusing more on profitable and predictable routes. Transport prices are also rising. The winner is the one who provided work early on, but no one intends to hold back tariffs or prices while demand exists.

Thus, alternative routes (via Poland, the Baltics, Southern Europe, and multimodal corridors) remain a priority, especially for Eastern Europe and Ukraine. At the same time, carriers are reducing their risk tolerance. They are reviewing terms more frequently, introducing surcharges, and shortening free time.

What do you think will be the main challenges in your industry throughout 2026?

Volodymyr Huz: It is important to mention the underloaded export format in Ukraine regarding containers. Imports heavily prevail over exports. There are currently no signs that Ukrainian exports will begin to be accounted for in full-scale volumes. Therefore, I predict this trend will persist for the near future, and possibly for all of 2026.

Pavlo Lynnyk: Major trends will also include the unpredictability of geopolitics and regulatory decisions, which can instantly change routes, rates, and infrastructure availability; a deficit of quality infrastructure on alternative corridors, as warehouses, terminals, and rail hubs do not always keep up with demand; and pressure on margins, as clients expect “peacetime” service levels despite increased costs and risks.

Additionally, a human resources challenge is emerging. There is a growing need not just for logisticians, but for specialists who think in terms of scenarios, risks, and finance.

Adapting to all these challenges is a necessity for a modern logistics company. You either adjust to them or leave the market—these are today’s realities.