Xavier Destriau
Analyst · Omar Nokta with Jefferies. Your line is open
Thank you, Eli. And again, on my behalf, welcome to everyone. On the Slide 7, we present our key financial and operational highlights. Our strong Q1 results reflect our success of scaling our fleet, supported by positive underlying demand trends. ZIM generated in Q1 revenue of $2 billion, a 28% increase compared to last year. During the quarter, our average freight rate per TEU was $1,776, a 22% increase year-over-year, though 6% lower than the Q4 average freight rate of $1,886. Total revenues from non-containerized cargo, which reflects mostly our car carrier services, totaled $114 million for the quarter compared to $111 million in the first quarter of 2024. To remind you, since November 2024, we have been operating 15 car carrier vessels. Our free cash flow in the first quarter totaled $787 million compared to $303 million in the first quarter of 2024. Turning to the balance sheet. Total debt decreased by $150 million since prior year end. Throughout 2023 and 2024, our total debt increased, mainly due to the net effect of receiving the newbuild capacity, namely larger vessels with longer-term charter durations attached. This trend is now reversing as repayment of lease liabilities is higher than new liabilities being incurred. Next, the following slide provides an overview of our operated capacity. Eli already discussed certain aspects of our fleet strategy and I would like to highlight a few more data points that we believe are important to underscore when thinking about ZIM split. ZIM currently operates 126 container ships with a total capacity of approximately 774,000 TEUs. Around two-thirds of this capacity comes from the 46 newbuilds received during the last two years 2023 and '24, which carried charter duration from five to 12 years. And also another 16 vessels that are owned by ZIM. To remind you, we opted to secure our newbuild capacity on long-duration contracts rather than continue to rely on the short-term charter market, and that to ensure that we have secure access to fuel efficient and cost competitive tonnage. We view this as our core capacity, and as such, maintaining flexibility with respect to this capacity is a secondary factor. 25 of the 28 LNG vessels carry a charter period of 12 years, creating a predictability in our cost structure. Moreover, we hold options to extend the charter period for these vessels as well as purchase option, giving us full control over the destiny of these vessels, very much as if we were the vessel owners. We had a similar agreement for the 10 11,500 TEU dual-fuel LNG vessels we recently committed to with a charter period of 12 years and options to purchase the vessels at the end of the chartered period. The remaining one-third of the capacity that we operate, approximately 260,000 TEUs, allows us to maintain important flexibility. By the end of 2026, there will be a total of 44 vessels up for charter renewal, with 22 vessels or 81,000 TEUs up for renewal in 2025, and another 22 vessels or 74,000 TEUs in 2026. This optionality to keep the capacity or we deliver to owners allows ZIM to adjust its capacity according to changing market conditions or shifts in our commercial strategy. Longer term, our focus is to ensure that we maintain and continue to enhance the competitive position of our fleet. Now turning to additional Q1 financial metrics here on Slide 9. Adjusted EBITDA in the quarter was $779 million, or 39% EBITDA margin, compared to $427 million in Q1 2024. Adjusted EBIT was $463 million or 23% margin compared to adjusted EBIT of $167 million in the same quarter of last year. Net income for the first quarter was $296 million compared to $92 million in Q1 2024. Next, you will see that we carried 944,000 TEUs in the first quarter compared to 846,000 TEUs during the same period last year. That represents an increase of 12%, well ahead of market growth of 4.5%. Our Transpacific volume grew 11% in Q1. It is important to reiterate that we maintain flexibility to reshuffle vessel capacity as the market evolves, driving resilience in our business. Notably, we achieved a 22% year-over-year volume growth in Latin America in this first quarter. And we anticipate further increasing our market share in this trade as we continue to strengthen our presence in the region. Next here we present our cash flow bridge. For the quarter, our adjusted EBITDA of $779 million converted into $855 million of cash flow generated from operating activities. Other cash flow items for the quarter included $582 million of debt service, mostly related to our lease liability repayments. Debt service in Q1 cash flow includes $72 million reflecting repayment of lease liabilities related to the two second hand 8,500 TEU vessels we acquired in the quarter, as well as the down payment of the last remaining LNG vessel that we received in January. Moving now to our 2025 guidance, we have reaffirmed our outlook and expect to generate adjusted EBITDA between $1.6 billion and $2.2 billion and adjusted EBIT between $350 million and $950 million, with the second half still expected to lag the first half. We have maintained wide ranges, reflective of the high degree of uncertainty related to global trade and geopolitical issues. Before touching on our underlying assumptions regarding freight rates, volume, and bunker costs, I would like to update on our contract volume. As can be expected, contract negotiations this year were affected by the uncertainty regarding tariff levels. And as such, the new annual Transpacific contracts, which went into effect on May 1st, represent approximately 30% of our expected Transpacific volume for the coming year, somewhat similar percentage to the one of last year. Our view on freight rates and operated capacity are unchanged as compared to our guidance assumptions from March. We expect freight rates to be significantly lower in 2025 versus 2024, with average freight rates in the remainder of 2025 lower than Q1 average. Also, we currently assume the sailing through the Red Sea will not resume this year, continuing to absorb significant capacity. We assume that we will maintain similar operated capacity on average to that of 2024 over the course of the year, as we renew some of the existing capacity or similar tonnage, though at lower rates than those fixed in '21 and '22. As such, we expect to continue to see an improvement in our cost structure. Given our exposure to the Transpacific, we revisited our volume growth assumptions and now assume low-single-digit volume growth year-over-year. Finally, as for bunker cost, we now expect slightly lower costs per ton in 2025 when compared to 2024. Before we open the call to questions, a few more comments on the market. The current environment is marked by a range of factors greater and more diverse than ever, which significantly impact the supply-demand balance we typically track to assess the health of the industry. The expected growth in capacity is known. The current order book to fleet ratio is significant, approximately 29% or about 9 million TEUs of equivalent capacity. But there are mitigating factors to consider with short-term and long-term impacts. First, the delivery schedule for this capacity is spread out over the next 4.5 years, with more modest deliveries in 2025 and 2026. Scrapping has been minimal in recent years, and projections for the coming years are also low, resulting in an aging fleet. At some point, scrapping should catch up. Also, the industry's decarbonization agenda and the need to meet stricter emission targets or customers' expectations will also require a higher pace of fleet renewal and could spur further scrapping. Yet the most significant factor impacting supply today is exogenic to our industry. The rediversion around the Cape of Good Hope. As the current consensus is that we will continue to do so for the coming months, the outcome for 2025 are likely to be mostly demand-driven. Namely, when and how we see resolution on US tariffs. Last week's agreement by the United States and China to bring down the level of mutual tariffs for a 90 day period is a positive step and will allow demand to recover at least in the near-term. It could also be viewed as mutual recognition by both sides of the need to reach an agreement. The efforts of the current US administration to address its trade deficit are not yet resolved. The tariff rates that will typically be established between the United States and China, as well as other US trading partners, will determine whether demand and the return to previous levels or whether tariff levels will establish new trade barriers. Equally important is the timing of these agreements. As the ongoing uncertainty on tariff levels impacts purchasing and as a result, booking decisions, leading to possible disruptions within the supply chain. Notwithstanding these tariff actions, we motivate trade and manufacturing diversification as both the US and China will most probably seek to reduce their mutual dependency. This in turn, will further complicate supply chain management, which could present both risks and opportunities for our industry and also require further investment in inland and port infrastructures which, if insufficient, could hold higher potential for disruptions. Thank you. And on that note, we will open the call to questions.