The Top 8 Regions Driving Up War Risk Premiums in 2025

The Strait of Hormuz remains the single most expensive transit point in maritime insurance in 2025. Hull and machinery war risk premiums have risen from around 0.125 percent to approximately 0.2 percent of vessel value. That translates to an extra $75,000 per $100 million ship for a single passage. The Canal Cost Calculator from Ship Universe can provide a quick cost breakdown of common maritime chokepoints. ➕ Reason for Spike:

• Escalating Israel and Iran tensions with repeated missile and drone threats.
• Electronic interference and shadow fleet traffic disrupting safe navigation.
• Increased risk of retaliatory blockades or mining activity by Iran.

📊 Real-World Impact:

• Premiums jumped over 60 percent. A ship valued at $100 million now faces approximately $200,000 in war risk coverage for one trip.
• Charter rates for VLCCs have doubled, rising from about $20,000 to $47,000 per day, reflecting the pass-through of insurance costs.
• Rising oil prices and elevated trader risk premiums are creating downstream pressure across global supply chains.

💡 Mitigation Strategies:

• Coordinate with IMSC or EMASoH escort convoys when available for added protection.
• Negotiate fleet-level or multi-voyage bundled war risk premiums to lock in lower rates.
• Stay alert to updates. Even minor jamming incidents or shadow fleet sightings can cause mid-voyage premium increases.

Bottom line: Skipping a single Strait of Hormuz transit could save over $200,000 in insurance costs, but rerouting introduces higher bunker fuel expenses, longer delivery times, and potential contract penalties. Every route decision now carries serious financial weight.

Crossing the Red Sea, especially through the Bab el‑Mandeb strait, has become one of the most expensive maritime insurance routes in 2025. War risk premiums for a single passage can reach 0.5 percent of vessel value, with temporary spikes as high as 1 to 2 percent during peak threat periods. For a $100 million vessel, that can mean hundreds of thousands of dollars in additional insurance per trip. ➕ Reason for Spiking:

• Over 100 attacks by Houthi forces on commercial vessels using missiles, drones, and small boat operations.
• Transit volume through Bab el‑Mandeb has declined by more than 50 percent compared to last year.
• Military operations in the area have not fully neutralized the threat, leading to sustained insurer caution.

📊 Real‑World Impact:

• Premiums around 0.5 percent of vessel value are now common. In high-alert periods, rates have temporarily climbed as high as 2 percent.
• Rerouting around the Cape of Good Hope adds 10 to 14 days of sailing time and up to $1 million in extra fuel costs per voyage.
• Egypt has introduced Suez Canal fee discounts of up to 15 percent in an effort to lure ships back to the region.

💡 Mitigation Strategies:

• Join naval escort initiatives where available for safer passage.
• Work with specialist underwriters to structure flexible coverage for multi-leg voyages.
• Monitor ceasefire periods and naval schedules to time transits when threat levels are lowest.

Bottom line: Sailing through the Red Sea in 2025 isn’t just risky, it’s expensive. Even with protection, insurers are pricing in the persistent threat. Avoiding the corridor adds cost in other ways, forcing operators to weigh every route from both a safety and financial angle.

The Gulf of Aden continues to be a high-cost transit zone for war-risk insurance in 2025, blending persistent piracy threats with ongoing geopolitical tensions. Single-passage premiums typically cost between 0.3 and 0.5 percent of vessel value, influenced by overlapping risks from Somali-based piracy and regional conflicts. ➕ Reason for Spiking:

• Resurgence in piracy reported incidents up nearly 50 percent over early 2024 levels.
• Proximity to Yemen and Houthi maritime actions creates war-risk overlap.
• Naval escorts (CTF‑151, EU Aspides) help but haven’t fully pushed threats away.

📊 Real‑World Impact:

• Standard war-risk premiums hover at 0.3–0.5 percent of vessel value per transit.
• Private security hire costs shot up 50 percent, now costing $4,000–$15,000 monthly per vessel.
• Detours to avoid the Aden corridor increase fuel expenses and voyage times modestly, but insurers still flag it as a high-risk zone.

💡 Mitigation Strategies:

• Participate in convoy transits under Combined Task Force 151 and EU Aspides patrols.
• Use private armed security teams but balance their costs against premium savings.
• Keep routes flexible and rely on live intelligence and BMP5 reporting for real-time threat updates.

Bottom line: The Gulf of Aden remains a complex risk zone. Though not as costly as direct war-risk hotspots, its combined threat profile keeps insurers cautious and premiums elevated. Security planning and naval cooperation are essential to keep costs under control.

The Black Sea remains a costly and unstable zone for maritime war‑risk insurance in 2025. Sharp spikes in missile and drone strikes targeting commercial vessels and port infrastructure have prompted insurers to impose higher surcharges often adding 1 to 1.5 percent of vessel value for trips involving Ukrainian or Russian ports. ➕ Reason for Spiking:

• Large-scale Russian drone and missile attacks on Ukrainian ports like Odesa and Chernomorsk disrupted grain and bulk flows.
• High frequency of naval mines, GPS interference, and coastal artillery mixing war risk with navigational hazard.
• Uncertainty over ceasefires. After a truce fell through in May, risk perception surged sharply.

📊 Real‑World Impact:

• War‑risk premiums of 1 to 1.5 percent of vessel value are now commonplace on routes involving Black Sea ports.
• A 150 k-tonne Suezmax tanker now pays an extra ~$200,000 per voyage in war‑risk levies.
• Ukraine’s grain corridor is still active, but its cost advantage is partially offset by insurance surcharges and port delays.

💡 Mitigation Strategies:

• Secure cover under Ukraine’s state‑backed war risk scheme through Marsh/Lloyd’s to benefit from capped premiums.
• Time voyages within declared maritime truce windows to access lower-risk routes.
• Rely on military-backed commercial transit corridors under NATO and Ukrainian navy escort.

Bottom line: The Black Sea remains a high‑cost passage in 2025. Elevated premiums and port disruptions eat into the grain and bulk trades. Operators must use state schemes and time shipments to make the Black Sea corridor viable.

Shipping to Israeli ports, especially Ashdod and Haifa has become a major war-risk hotspot. Insurance premiums for a seven-day call now hover between 0.7% and 1.0% of vessel value, up from about 0.2% just one week earlier. For a $50 million, medium-sized cargo vessel, that’s an extra $350,000 to $500,000 in war-risk charges. ➕ Reason for Spiking:

• Recent missile strikes on Israeli port infrastructure, including an attack that shut down Haifa’s oil refinery.
• Escalation in Iran-Israel hostilities prompted a sharp reassessment of maritime exposure.
• Threats from Iran-backed groups like the Houthis declaring blockades on Israel-linked shipping.

📊 Real‑World Impact:

• Premiums at 0.7–1.0% now add $350,000–$500,000 extra per voyage on a $50 million ship.
• Insurance remains below the 2.0% peak recorded after the 2023 Hamas attack, but volume and frequency of strikes keep rates elevated.
• Haifa and Ashdod ports are still operational, but around 30 ships are often waiting offshore amid higher risk warnings.

💡 Mitigation Strategies:

• Shift cargo to alternative ports like Cyprus or Piraeus where possible.
• Negotiate port call-specific clauses to limit exposure for only days spent within the higher-risk zone.
• Coordinate with national compensation schemes or insurers offering stop-loss policies for Israeli waters.

Bottom line: Short port calls to Israel now come with six-figure war-risk premiums. Even though ports remain open, the threat environment has changed and operators need to balance direct access against extra cost and danger.

Shipping to Israeli ports, particularly Ashdod and Haifa, has become a major war-risk hotspot. Insurance premiums for a seven-day call now range between 0.7 percent and 1.0 percent of vessel value, up from around 0.2 percent just one week earlier. For a $50 million medium-sized cargo vessel, that adds an extra $350,000 to $500,000 in war-risk charges. ➕ Reason for Spiking:

• Recent missile strikes on Israeli port infrastructure, including damage to Haifa’s oil refinery.
• Ongoing hostilities between Iran and Israel have heightened insurer concerns.
• Iran-backed groups, including the Houthis, have publicly threatened to target vessels linked to Israeli trade.

📊 Real‑World Impact:

• Premiums at 0.7 to 1.0 percent now add $350,000 to $500,000 per voyage on a $50 million ship.
• Rates remain below the 2.0 percent peak seen after the 2023 Hamas attack, but the security situation keeps pricing elevated.
• Ports are operational, but dozens of ships often wait offshore due to elevated threat conditions and port entry delays.

💡 Mitigation Strategies:

• Shift cargo to alternative regional ports such as Limassol or Piraeus when operationally feasible.
• Use voyage-specific clauses that limit war-risk exposure to actual days spent in high-risk waters.
• Work with insurers offering stop-loss or capped premium policies for operations in Israeli waters.

Bottom line: Calling at Israeli ports now comes with significantly higher war-risk premiums. Even short port stays can generate large added costs, requiring careful planning and coordination with insurers.

The Gulf of Guinea is a major war-risk cost centre and piracy hotspot. Standard war-risk premiums range from 0.3 to 0.7 percent of vessel value per voyage. Despite recent security gains, shipping to Nigerian ports alone triggered over $1.5 billion in war-risk premiums over the past three years. ➕ Reason for Spiking:

• Piracy incidents remain high despite some reductions; attacks are often violent, targeting crew and cargo.
• Sabotage and militant activity around the Niger Delta compound insurer risk calculations.
• Insurers maintain high-risk classification, passing extra premiums onto operators even when attacks dip.

📊 Real‑World Impact:

• Gulf premiums typically sit at 0.3–0.7 percent per transit.
• Nigerian shipments alone produced over $1.5 billion in war-risk surcharges over three years.
• A $130 million crude carrier may face up to $445,000 per voyage; container vessels can incur over $500,000 per trip.

💡 Mitigation Strategies:

• Join vessel convoys and utilize naval task force patrols.
• Hire private armed security but weigh the cost against possible insurance savings.
• Advocate with trade bodies and government agencies, Nigeria’s Deep Blue Project aims to push insurers to reduce classification.

Bottom line: The Gulf of Guinea remains expensive due to its persistent piracy and political risks. Operators must balance security measures with rising insurance costs to protect profit margins.

The Singapore and Malacca Straits have once again become a concern for war-risk insurance. After a rise in piracy and armed robbery incidents, insurers have reclassified the area as elevated risk. Premiums increased from around 0.025 percent to approximately 0.1 percent of hull value per transit, adding roughly $150,000 to a typical VLCC voyage. ➕ Reason for Spiking:

• Piracy incidents surged by over 50 percent in early 2025 compared to the same period in 2024, with 36 incidents reported in the Singapore Strait alone.
• The Joint War Committee restored a risk designation following several serious boardings in January 2025.
• High traffic lanes and narrow passages make ambushes more feasible, despite active patrols.

📊 Real‑World Impact:

• Insurance now adds 0.1 percent per transit up from 0.025 percent. That can cost around $150,000 extra on a VLCC.
• Route diversions through the Sunda or Lombok Straits add 3–5 days and about $120,000 in bunker costs per voyage.
• Crew safety remains a concern: armed robberies are still frequent even if violent incidents are less common.

💡 Mitigation Strategies:

• Use coordinated patrols under ReCAAP and Malacca Straits Patrol initiatives.
• Increase onboard vigilance: better lookouts and controlled access during transit.
• Consider convoy-style transits where grouping vessels provides added deterrence.

Bottom line: The Singapore and Malacca Straits are no longer the low-risk zones they used to be. Rising incidents and war-risk premium hikes mean operators must balance safety with efficiency when plotting Southeast Asia transits.

The Bosporus and Dardanelles are narrow and winding, making them a maritime hotspot. Heavy traffic up to 127 vessels daily, including large tankers combined with the presence of uninspected or uninsured “dark fleet” vessels has prompted Turkey to impose stricter transit insurance demands. ➕ Reason for Spiking:

• Frequent collisions and accidents in narrow passages involving vessels laden with oil, gas, chemicals, even nuclear waste.
• Shadow fleet tankers avoiding sanctions operate without adequate insurance and often disable AIS, raising risk of crash or spill.
• New Turkish insurance regulations require additional P&I coverage and vetting of insurers before transit.

📊 Real‑World Impact:

• About 14,000 vessels, including 5,300 tankers, transit annually, leaving little room for error.
• Accidents in the straits have caused hundreds of deaths and huge pollution events over the last few decades.
• Uninsured dark tankers near Bosporus could incur environmental liability costs up to $1.6 billion in worst-case spill scenarios.

💡 Mitigation Strategies:

• Ensure P&I policy meets Turkish-approved standards and notify at least 24 hours in advance.
• Use hired pilots and comply with Turkey’s daytime, weather, and vessel-type restrictions.
• Avoid sailing near vessels without AIS or displaying irregular flag/registry patterns.

Bottom line: Transit through the Turkish Straits is no longer routine. Navigational risks and shadow fleet traffic have forced Turkey to demand higher insurance and stricter vetting. Operators must meet these standards to avoid delays or denial of passage.