Side-by-side comparison of CMA CGM Group and COSCO Shipping across fleet, coverage, emissions and performance.


CMA CGM Group has the lower environmental footprint across the metrics compared here.
Carbon efficiency (EEDI)
Annual fleet CO₂ (Scope 1)
Major oil spills
Biofuel / dual-fuel fleet
32 published rates
32 published rates
Here is how CMA CGM Group and COSCO Shipping compare across the metrics that matter most. CMA CGM Group operates the larger fleet. COSCO Shipping offers the wider port coverage. CMA CGM Group is the more carbon-efficient carrier.
CMA CGM Group operates the larger fleet of the two, based on number of ships in service.
CMA CGM Group is the more carbon-efficient carrier, with a lower EEDI across its fleet.
COSCO Shipping calls at more ports worldwide, giving it the broader global network.
CMA CGM Group is headquartered in Marseille, France, while COSCO Shipping is based in Shanghai, China.
Dive into full profiles, rankings and performance data for either carrier.
Safecube aggregates all your carriers into a single dashboard: predictive ETAs, milestone alerts and D&D forecasting — no per-company portal.