Written by
AJ Lockington
Head of Marketing

In this article

Supply Chain Glossary
Market Insights
Published: 
September 22, 2025

How Long Does It Take to Ship Cargo from Southampton to Charleston?

Shipping cargo from Southampton to Charleston takes 24.3 days on average¹. Analysis of 849 shipments shows this average includes two distinct routing methods: direct routing averaging 18.8 days and transshipment routing averaging 37.5 days¹.

The route shows two main performance clusters: most shipments arrive either around 9-10 days (14.6%) or 18-19 days (17.6%)¹. Understanding these patterns and the routing methods behind them helps with realistic delivery planning.

Direct vs Transshipment Routing Differences

Transit times vary significantly based on routing method. Direct routing sails point-to-point from Southampton to Charleston, accounting for 71% of shipments and averaging 18.8 days¹. Transshipment routing moves cargo through intermediate hub ports, representing 29% of volume and averaging 37.5 days¹.

Direct routing shows consistent performance with most shipments (23.7%) arriving in 18-19 days, while a faster subset achieves 9-10 day performance (21.0% of direct shipments)¹. Transshipment routing spreads across wider time ranges, with clusters at 53-54 days (11.4%), 24-25 days (11.0%), and 27-28 days (10.2%)¹.

The routing choice reflects operational strategy: direct routing prioritizes speed and schedule reliability, while transshipment routing optimizes cost through hub consolidation but requires longer, more variable transit times.

Southampton to Charleston - Transit Time Distribution
Southampton to Charleston Service Types
Direct vs Transshipment services show distinct performance patterns (849 shipments)
18.8
Direct Services Avg
37.5
Transshipment Avg
71%
Direct Services
29%
Transshipment

Carrier Performance and Routing Types

Different carriers show consistent performance patterns based on their routing strategies. ONE operates exclusively direct routing, averaging 9.4 days across 37 shipments¹. CMA CGM primarily uses direct routing (118 shipments) averaging 10.0 days, though some shipments use longer routings¹.

Other carriers include Hapag-Lloyd, which offers both direct routing (18.4 days average, 129 shipments) and transshipment routing (25.4 days average, 33 shipments)¹. OOCL operates predominantly transshipment routing (166 shipments) averaging 37.4 days, with some direct routing averaging 29.9 days (103 shipments)¹.

Maersk provides mixed routing with direct averaging 20.5 days (158 shipments) and transshipment averaging 42.9 days (34 shipments)¹. This carrier variation explains much of the route's performance distribution.

Distribution of Transit Times

The route demonstrates a bimodal distribution pattern directly related to routing methods. Direct routing creates the faster performance clusters at 9-10 days and 18-19 days, while transshipment routing explains the longer transit times ranging from 24-54 days.

The 24.3-day average sits between these routing methods due to the volume split (71% direct, 29% transshipment) and occasional longer direct routings. The median of 18.5 days¹ reflects the dominance of direct routing on this route.

Seasonal Patterns by Routing Method

Analysis of direct versus transshipment routing shows different seasonal sensitivities. Direct routing maintains more consistent performance throughout the year, with winter months showing modest increases to 20-22 days while summer months achieve 16-18 day performance.

Transshipment routing demonstrates greater seasonal variation due to hub port dependencies. Winter months can extend transshipment times to 45-55 days as European hub ports face capacity constraints and weather delays. Summer months see improved transshipment performance at 32-38 days as hub operations run more efficiently.

This seasonal difference helps explain why direct routing accounts for a higher percentage of winter shipments, as shippers seek more predictable performance during challenging weather periods. Transshipment routing becomes more attractive during summer months when hub efficiency improvements narrow the time gap with direct routing.

Southampton to Charleston - Monthly Performance by Routing Type
Southampton to Charleston Monthly Performance by Routing Type
Direct vs Transshipment routing showing seasonal patterns (12-month analysis)
7.5
Days Summer Gap
25
Days Winter Gap
16-22
Direct Range
32-55
Transship Range

Seasonal Routing Insights

Winter Impact: Transshipment routing shows greater seasonal sensitivity (up to 55 days) vs direct routing (22 days max). Summer Efficiency: Gap narrows to 7-8 days between routing methods during optimal conditions. Planning Impact: Consider routing method selection based on seasonal shipping windows and hub port efficiency.

Planning Considerations by Routing Type

Direct routing planning: Use 18-20 day windows for direct routing. Some carriers achieve 9-12 day performance on optimized direct routings. Direct routing shows more consistent performance with predictable arrival patterns.

Transshipment planning: Allow 35-45 days for transshipment routing. Performance varies based on hub efficiency and connection timing. Consider additional buffers for operational variations at intermediate ports.

Routing selection: Direct routing typically commands a higher pricing but provides schedule reliability. Transshipment routing offers cost savings through consolidation but requires longer planning windows and additional buffer time.

Comparing Alternative Routes

Southampton to Charleston's service mix can be compared with other UK-US East Coast options. Southampton to New York and Southampton to Savannah offer alternative destinations with different service type availability.

Felixstowe to Charleston provides an alternative UK departure point. Air freight services remain available for time-critical shipments requiring 2-3 day delivery.

Risk Management by Routing Type

Direct routing risks center on vessel delays, port congestion, and equipment issues affecting individual sailings. These risks typically add 1-3 days to planned transit times but remain relatively predictable.

Transshipment risks include hub congestion, missed connections, and equipment repositioning between vessels. These operational factors can add 5-10 days to planned transit times, explaining the wider performance distribution.

Planning buffers should account for routing characteristics. Direct routing might use 20-25 day planning windows, while transshipment routing benefits from 40-50 day allowances.

Planning Summary

Southampton to Charleston shipping requires understanding both the route's average performance and its routing characteristics. The 24.3-day annual average¹ provides a baseline, but practical planning should consider:

  • Direct routing: 18-20 day planning window (71% of shipments)
  • Transshipment routing: 35-45 day planning window (29% of shipments)
  • Carrier selection: Based on routing strategy and performance consistency
  • Buffer planning: Routing-specific allowances for operational variations

The route's bimodal distribution shows most shipments cluster around these two routing approaches rather than the mathematical average, making routing method selection an important planning factor.

Data Sources: ¹ Analysis based on Beacon platform data: 849 shipments (September 2024 - September 2025) showing 604 direct services (18.8-day average) and 245 transshipment services (37.5-day average)

Current service information available through Beacon