There is a number on your cruise contract you have probably never read. It is the fuel-supplement clause, and as of last month it stopped being theoretical. Two cruise lines are now actively billing it. The rest of the industry is watching.
Resorts World Cruises started in mid-March 2026. Guests on Star Voyager are paying HKD 200 per person per night — about $25 USD. Star Navigator out of Keelung is charging NTD 600, roughly $19. Dream Cruises is at SGD 15, around $11.70. The fee is automatic, applied to onboard accounts, and applies to every guest over the age of two. On a 10-day sailing for a couple that is up to $500 added at the gangway.
Why now
based on EIA daily data and Trading Economics, well above the $70 trigger most cruise contracts reference
Brent has been holding above $105 since the Strait of Hormuz disruption in early April. Most cruise ticket contracts wrote their fuel-supplement triggers years ago at $70 per barrel. The math has been quietly broken for weeks. The only question was who would move first.
Who is most exposed
Fuel hedging is the single biggest variable. A line that locked in a chunk of its 2026 fuel at last year's prices has a buffer. A line that did not is paying spot, and the temptation to recoup grows with every Brent print.
Royal Caribbean Q4 2025 earnings call, January 29, 2026 — annual hedge cost approximately $474 per metric ton
Norwegian Cruise Line Holdings disclosure as of January 16, 2026 — primarily heavy fuel oil and marine gas oil
Carnival hedges nothing. Their Q1 disclosures already attributed roughly $500 million in fuel-cost impact this year to the simple fact that they take spot.
| Line | 2026 fuel hedged | Active surcharge? | Contract clause exists? |
|---|---|---|---|
| Royal Caribbean | ~60% | No | Yes |
| NCL | ~51% | No | Yes |
| Carnival | 0% (unhedged) | No | Removed from current contract |
| MSC | Not publicly disclosed | No | Yes |
| Resorts World / Star / Dream | Not publicly disclosed | Yes — $11 to $25/night | Yes |
The surprise on this table is Carnival. The most fuel-exposed line, at first read, looks the safest for already-booked passengers — because they took the clause out. That decision is recent, it is partial protection only for guests whose contract was issued under the new language, and it is the kind of thing that quietly changes back when the lawyers reread the cash-flow statement.
What to actually do
If you are still shopping rather than booked, the calculus is simpler. Lines with high hedge ratios and no active surcharge are the safest hedge against your own travel budget — Royal Caribbean and NCL fit that profile right now. Lines with no hedge and an active clause are the most likely next shoes to drop. You can compare current ticket-contract language and per-night pricing across all the major operators at GoCruiseTravel.com, where the fuel-exposure column sits next to the all-in fare instead of buried under a brochure.
The bottom line for spring 2026 bookings
If you are already booked, check your ticket contract today. If you are still shopping, favor lines that hedged 50% or more of their 2026 fuel and have not invoked their clause — Royal Caribbean and NCL are the two clearest examples right now. Avoid Resorts World fares unless the surcharge is already priced in. Compare exposure side by side at GoCruiseTravel.com.
The fuel-supplement clause has been sitting in cruise contracts for two decades, mostly unused, mostly forgotten. It stopped being theoretical in March. Whether the rest of the industry follows is a question of nerve, not contract law.
