The second quarter edition of the U.S. Bank Freight Payment, which was released this week, highlighted tightening over-the-road capacity amid ongoing pricing gains.
This report, which was initially launched in the third quarter of 2017, is comprised of data on freight shipping volumes and spending on both a national and regional basis. The report’s data is based on the actual transaction payment date and the highest-volume domestic freight modes of truckload and less-than-truckload, and is seasonally and calendar adjusted. Its historical data goes back to 2010, with a base point of 100, and its index point for each subsequent quarter marks that quarter’s volume in relation to the preceding quarter. U.S. Bank Freight Payment’s business processes more than $43 billion in annual freight payments for some of the world’s largest corporations and government agencies.
The report’s second quarter shipment index value, at 75.1, was off 1.1% compared to the first quarter, and was down 2.8% annually, following the first quarter’s 0.6% annual gain, for its first annual gain in four years.
“Shipments remain soft because the broader freight economy remains soft,” the report stated. “Federal Reserve factory output data for the first two months of the quarter suggested slightly more manufacturing freight, but the gain was narrow. Total factory output averaged 1.1% above first-quarter levels. Excluding aerospace, miscellaneous transportation equipment, and computer and electronic products, growth was 0.7%. Year to date, total production was up 1.1% from 2025, but was flat when those stronger categories were excluded. Carriers not serving those sectors likely saw limited manufacturing freight growth.”
On a regional basis, shipments saw a 0.5% sequential increase and a 5.5% annual gain in the Western U.S.; a 3.7% sequential decline and a 2.8% annual gain in the Midwest; a 0.0% sequential reading and a 2.0% annual decrease in the Northeast; a 0.6% sequential decrease and a 20.2% annual decrease in the Southwest; and a 0.9% sequential increase and a 6.5% annual decline in the Southeast. The report explained that these readings reflect uneven freight demand across the country.
As for spending, the second quarter spend index value, at 75.1, fell 1.1% compared to the first quarter and was up 28.1% annually, while remaining 17% below the second quarter 2022 peak, with much of the gains paced by fuel, at $0.75 per mile, based on data from DAT, topping the first quarter by $0.24 and up almost 80% annually.
“Higher fuel surcharges added to shipper costs during the quarter, but fuel was not the only factor,” according to the report. “In many markets, limited capacity appears to have been the larger factor. One favorable development for shippers was the late-quarter decline in diesel prices. After peaking above $5.64 per gallon in April, the national average diesel price ended the quarter nearly a dollar lower at $4.67 per gallon.”
Spend data largely showed gains across the board, with the West, up 12% sequentially and 35.9% annually; the Southwest, up 11.2% sequentially and 39.9% annually; the Midwest, down 0.8% sequentially and up 22.9% annually; the Northeast, up 5.0% sequentially and up 26.5% annually; and the Southeast, up 10.0% sequentially and up 23.7% annually.
“The Southwest continued to stand out this quarter,” said Bobby Holland, director of freight business analytics at U.S. Bank. “The gap between declining shipments and rising spending was more pronounced there than anywhere else in the country. It’s a signal that capacity conditions can have a significant impact on freight costs even when underlying demand isn’t growing.”
That sentiment was echoed by Bob Costello, American Trucking Associations Chief Economist and the report’s lead author, whom wrote in the report that capacity tightened during the second quarter as the national spending index significantly outperformed the shipments index.
“The market continued trends seen in Q1 with capacity tightening, which appears to reflect two forces,” said Costello. “First, after three-plus years of freight recession, small, mid-sized and large fleets continued to exit amid weak rates, rising costs and softer volumes. That gradual reduction did not fully align supply with low demand, but it narrowed the gap. Second, industry participants have pointed to federal safety and compliance initiatives that gained momentum over the past year, including English language provisions (ELP), non-domiciled CDL (Commercial Driver’s License) revocations and increased oversight of driver training schools. These actions may have helped bring supply closer to demand and, in some markets, pushed available capacity lower.”
Costello added that diesel prices also increased shipper outlays, with tighter capacity appearing to have been the larger contributor, explaining that tighter capacity appears to have been the larger contributor.
To that end, he said that carriers seeing more freight may be benefitting from fewer fleets pursuing available loads, and not due to a broad-based demand recovery.
