{"id":38616,"date":"2023-03-22T15:41:43","date_gmt":"2023-03-22T18:41:43","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/datamarnews.com\/?post_type=noticias&p=38616"},"modified":"2023-04-17T17:17:38","modified_gmt":"2023-04-17T20:17:38","slug":"ports-ranking-dataliner-jan-2023-vs-jan-2022-brazil-and-plate","status":"publish","type":"noticias","link":"https:\/\/datamarnews.com\/noticias\/ports-ranking-dataliner-jan-2023-vs-jan-2022-brazil-and-plate\/","title":{"rendered":"Ports Ranking | DataLiner | Jan 2023 vs. Jan 2022 | Brazil and Plate"},"content":{"rendered":"

See below the ranking of ports in Brazil and the Plate region regarding container exports and imports in January 2023 compared to the same month last year. The data is from DataLiner, Datamar’s business intelligence tool:<\/p>\n

Brazil<\/strong><\/h4>\n

The Port of Santos leads the ranking of containerized exports in Brazil with 76,342 TEUs exported in January, a drop of 20.06% compared to January 2022. The Port of Paranagu\u00e1, the runner-up in the ranking, increased exports via containers by 6.40%. See the full ranking below:<\/p>\n

Ranking of Brazilian Ports | Exports | Jan 2021 vs. Jan 2022 | TEU<\/strong><\/p>\n

\n

\n \n \n\n \n \n \n \n\n\n wdt_ID<\/th> Rank<\/th> Ports<\/th> Jan | 2022<\/th> Jan | 2023<\/th> % Change<\/th> <\/tr>\n<\/thead>\n \n\n \n \n\n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n
1<\/td>\n 1<\/td>\n SANTOS<\/td>\n 95.497<\/td>\n 76.342<\/td>\n -20.06%<\/td>\n <\/tr>\n
2<\/td>\n 2<\/td>\n PARANAGUA<\/td>\n 30.428<\/td>\n 32.375<\/td>\n 6.40%<\/td>\n <\/tr>\n
3<\/td>\n 3<\/td>\n NAVEGANTES<\/td>\n 31.551<\/td>\n 27.472<\/td>\n -12.93%<\/td>\n <\/tr>\n
4<\/td>\n 4<\/td>\n ITAPOA<\/td>\n 15.006<\/td>\n 15.576<\/td>\n 3.80%<\/td>\n <\/tr>\n
5<\/td>\n 5<\/td>\n RIO GRANDE<\/td>\n 13.625<\/td>\n 13.696<\/td>\n 0.52%<\/td>\n <\/tr>\n
6<\/td>\n 6<\/td>\n SALVADOR<\/td>\n 6.648<\/td>\n 6.635<\/td>\n -0.20%<\/td>\n <\/tr>\n
7<\/td>\n 7<\/td>\n RIO DE JANEIRO<\/td>\n 8.882<\/td>\n 5.682<\/td>\n -36.03%<\/td>\n <\/tr>\n
8<\/td>\n 8<\/td>\n VILA DO CONDE<\/td>\n 4.011<\/td>\n 2.522<\/td>\n -37.12%<\/td>\n <\/tr>\n
9<\/td>\n 9<\/td>\n NATAL<\/td>\n 2.842<\/td>\n 2.296<\/td>\n -19.23%<\/td>\n <\/tr>\n
10<\/td>\n 10<\/td>\n VITORIA<\/td>\n 4.222<\/td>\n 2.144<\/td>\n -49.22%<\/td>\n <\/tr>\n
11<\/td>\n 11<\/td>\n PECEM<\/td>\n 3.571<\/td>\n 1.862<\/td>\n -47.87%<\/td>\n <\/tr>\n
12<\/td>\n 12<\/td>\n FORTALEZA<\/td>\n 2.020<\/td>\n 1.700<\/td>\n -15.84%<\/td>\n <\/tr>\n
13<\/td>\n 13<\/td>\n MANAUS<\/td>\n 1.522<\/td>\n 1.265<\/td>\n -16.89%<\/td>\n <\/tr>\n
14<\/td>\n 14<\/td>\n SUAPE<\/td>\n 1.640<\/td>\n 1.175<\/td>\n -28.35%<\/td>\n <\/tr>\n
15<\/td>\n 15<\/td>\n ITAGUAI<\/td>\n 1.453<\/td>\n 1.068<\/td>\n -26.50%<\/td>\n <\/tr>\n
16<\/td>\n 16<\/td>\n ITAJAI<\/td>\n 5.438<\/td>\n 27<\/td>\n -99.50%<\/td>\n <\/tr>\n
17<\/td>\n <\/td>\n OTHERS<\/td>\n 41<\/td>\n 22<\/td>\n -46.34%<\/td>\n <\/tr>\n
18<\/td>\n <\/td>\n TOTAL<\/td>\n 228.397<\/td>\n 191.858<\/td>\n -16.00%<\/td>\n <\/tr>\n <\/tbody> \n\n \n \n \n <\/table>\n\n<\/div>