5 Reasons Why Poor Vessel Choices Are Hitting Your P&L Harder Than You Think

And what you can do about it…

Fixing the right vessel is one of the most important commercial decisions a charterer makes. Yet in practice, it is often driven by gut feeling, outdated spreadsheets, and assumptions about sister vessels. The real issue is not just limited information, but misplaced confidence in data that is outdated, incomplete, or taken out of context.

Here are five reasons why poor vessel selection remains a costly pain point in our industry — and what it could be costing you:

1. Described performance rarely matches real-world results

Operators and industrials frequently report a mismatch between promised and actual vessel performance. Descriptions tend to highlight best-case scenarios, such as speeds achieved under ideal conditions, while charter party clauses often make it difficult to claim damages when underperformance occurs.

When a voyage takes longer than expected, hire and fuel costs increase. These are avoidable losses that erode margins and disrupt planning.

2. Sister vessel benchmarking is unreliable

Looking at sister vessels may seem like a logical shortcut for assessing performance. But in reality, it is increasingly unreliable. Owners and operators vary widely in how they operate and maintain their vessels. Some invest in energy-saving technologies and route consistency, others may do so with very different priorities.

As the industry responds to new regulations and commercial pressures, these gaps are widening. Even vessels with identical designs can perform very differently. Evaluating each on its own merits is essential.

3. Past performance is not always a good indicator

A vessel that performs well on one route can struggle on another. Variables such as loading patterns, prevailing weather, or port congestion can have a significant impact on reliability.

Without route-specific performance context, charterers are forced to rely on assumptions that may not reflect the reality of the next fixture.

4. Operational issues are often missed

Short-term disruptions such as mechanical issues or port delays are rarely visible at the time of fixing. Traditional vetting relies on static snapshots or outdated records and often fails to capture recent events that can impact vessel performance.

Without these timely alerts or up-to-date context, charterers risk missing critical red flags that affect voyage outcomes.

5. Charter party terms reduce leverage

Owners frequently structure charter party terms in ways that limit the charterer’s ability to enforce claims. Even when a vessel underperforms, the burden of proof often rests on the charterer. Once the fixture is signed, leverage is lost.

This leads to a familiar cycle: operations teams scramble for documentation while legal teams spend weeks chasing claims. Even successful cases rarely recover the full financial impact.

Solving the problem at the source

When vessel selection fails, it’s the charterer who bears the cost. These losses show up in higher fuel bills, extended hire periods, lost time, and internal resources spent managing disputes. The risks are well understood, but continuing to rely on outdated or fragmented information is no longer working.

Pre-Vetting by Klaveness Digital was built to address these challenges head-on. Designed by charterers, for charterers, it delivers structured insights that help avoid surprises and improve margins.

To learn more about how Pre-Vetting is helping Klaveness and our customers make better vessel decisions and improve P&L, download our latest whitepaper below now.