Yacht Charter Cost Recovery 2026: What 100 Yachts Over 50 m Earn Against What They Cost

Between 2026 charter rates and 2026-08-10 fleet records, this study asks one question of 100 yachts of 50 metres and above: how much of a year's running cost does the charter market give back to the owner? Across the 71 private yachts we were able to rank, the answer is a mean of 73 per cent and a median of 72 per cent. Eight of them produce a positive annual cash result before depreciation and finance.

Everything below is reproducible. The cohort, the formulas, the assumptions and the per-yacht outputs are published in full, the dataset can be downloaded as CSV or JSON, and the interactive calculator on this page runs the same model with the same constants. Where a figure is observed it is labelled observed; where it is modelled it is labelled modelled. Nothing here is an appraisal, a valuation or an offer.

What This Study Measures

The metric is the cost recovery ratio: the owner's net charter income for a normal season divided by the yacht's modelled annual running cost.

A ratio of 100 per cent means the charter programme covered the operating cost of the vessel for a year — crew, insurance, maintenance reserve, berthing, owner-use fuel and management — and the owner's remaining exposure is capital: depreciation, finance and the eventual sale. A ratio of 60 per cent means the owner funds the missing 40 per cent each year in addition to carrying the capital.

Cost recovery is not yield, not return on capital and not internal rate of return, and it is deliberately not called profit. Used here, "profitable" means only that a charter programme covers or exceeds the running cost of the vessel it operates. No yacht in this cohort returns its purchase price, and the operating surplus of even the strongest performer is smaller than the depreciation it carries in the same year. Readers looking for an investment case will not find one in this data.

What the ratio does capture is the part of the equation an owner controls. Purchase price is a single negotiation and depreciation is a market, but chartered weeks, rate discipline, crew retention, refit timing and the choice of central agent are decisions. Ranking on recovery therefore ranks operating models as much as hulls.

Scope and Cohort

The cohort is defined mechanically, not editorially: the 100 longest yachts of 50 metres and above in the Blue Ocean Club fleet database that carry a published high-season weekly rate, as recorded on 2026-08-10. It is not a sample of the global fleet, it is not a random sample of anything, and it is biased toward vessels actively marketed for charter in the regions where we operate. Conclusions apply to that population.

Within the 100 records:

• 71 private yachts are ranked in the main table. These are vessels carrying fewer than 30 guests, where the weekly rate is set by the yacht itself.
• 15 high-capacity passenger vessels are ranked separately. These carry 30 guests or more, sell cabins into a fundamentally different demand curve, and would otherwise dominate a combined ranking for reasons that have nothing to do with yacht economics.
• 14 records are withheld from both rankings because our two valuation methods disagree by more than 3×. They are listed in full, with both figures, so that the exclusion can be audited rather than taken on trust.

Mixing those three groups in one league table was the single largest defect in the first version of this study. They are kept apart throughout.

Research Identity, Independence and Commercial Interest

This study is produced by Blue Ocean Club Research, the research desk of Blue Ocean Club, a yacht charter brokerage. That is a commercial interest and it is disclosed rather than hidden.

Three things follow, and they are the reason the method is published in this much detail:

1. We benefit when yachts charter. A study by a brokerage showing that chartering improves owner economics is exactly the study a brokerage would want to publish. Read the assumptions with that in mind — particularly the assumed chartered weeks — and re-run the model with your own numbers using the calculator on this page. 2. The rates are ours; the values are not. Weekly rates are observed in our own fleet records and are the strongest data in the study. Purchase prices are modelled, because transaction prices in this market are private. Every value carries an error bar of roughly ±25 per cent. 3. No yacht paid to be included or ranked. Inclusion follows the mechanical selection rule above. No owner, central agent or shipyard reviewed the ranking before publication.

Corrections are welcome and are logged publicly in the version history at the end of this article. Owners, central agents and researchers who can evidence a different figure — a real transaction price, an actual annual account, a corrected crew number — can write to research@blueoceanclub.com and we will amend the record and the version log.

Observed Data and Modelled Data

The distinction below runs through every table in this study.

No transaction price, no owner's management account and no audited operating statement was available to this study. Nothing here should be treated as one.

Valuation Method

Charter rates are published; purchase prices are not. Every figure in the value column is therefore a model output.

Each hull is valued twice, by two methods that fail in opposite directions.

Method 1 — depreciated replacement cost. New-build pricing for custom and semi-custom yachts rises steeply with length, because volume, systems complexity, class requirements and crew accommodation all compound as a hull grows.

Yard tiers are applied by category, not by yacht: a multiplier of 1.45 for northern European flagship yards whose hulls hold value on brand alone, 1.15 for established Dutch, German and Italian semi-custom builders, 1.00 for mainstream and regional custom yards, and 0.40 for conversions and commercially derived vessels whose original purpose was not private yachting.

Method 2 — the rate heuristic. Across the charter market a yacht's peak-season weekly rate sits close to one per cent of market value; our fleet data supports 1.05 per cent.

This method is anchored in a real commercial number and distorted by any yacht whose rate is set by something other than value. It is therefore disabled entirely for high-capacity passenger vessels, where the rate reflects cabin inventory rather than the asset, and those vessels are valued on the replacement method alone.

Blending and withholding.

Where the two methods disagree by more than 3×, we treat the disagreement as information rather than noise and withhold the record from the ranking. Fourteen yachts are withheld on that test; all 14 are listed later with both figures.

The honest error bar on any single modelled value is ±20 to 30 per cent. That is wide enough to matter for one yacht and narrow enough to be useful across 71, because the errors are largely independent: the model does not know which hull had a poor survey, but it is not systematically flattering any one yard.

The Running-Cost Stack

Six lines, all published, all adjustable in the calculator.

Crew payroll is costed at €72,000 per berth per year fully loaded — a blended figure across a captain, engineers and officers, interior and deck crew, plus flights, medical cover, training, uniform and the recruitment cost of replacing roughly a quarter of the team each year. It is the least compressible line in yachting.

Maintenance and refit reserve is 2.8000000000000003 per cent of value annually, rising to 3.5000000000000004 per cent for pre-2005 hulls. This is not the annual invoice; it is the annualised cost of a five-year cycle in which two years are cheap, two are ordinary and one involves a shipyard period.

Insurance is hull and machinery plus protection and indemnity at 0.65 per cent of value, a commercial-registry figure for a professionally crewed yacht.

Berthing is €5,000 per metre annually, reflecting a home berth with shoulder-season flexibility in a good Mediterranean or Caribbean marina.

Owner-use fuel and consumables is €3,000 per metre. During chartered weeks fuel is met by the guest through the Advance Provisioning Allowance, so this line covers repositioning, sea trials, owner cruising and generator hours.

Management and administration is 5 per cent of the lines above plus €120,000 fixed, covering yacht management, accounting, flag and class administration, ISM and MLC compliance, communications and shore-side support.

By size band, the 71 ranked private yachts model as follows.

What the Charter Market Pays the Owner

Published weekly rates are gross, and gross is not what reaches the owner.

A charter booked through the market pays a central agency fee and a retail broker's commission; the combined leakage is close to 20 per cent. A further 5 per cent is deducted for the incremental cost of chartering rather than sitting still: interior wear, tender and toy servicing, laundry, crew overtime and an accelerated maintenance cycle. The owner therefore keeps 76 per cent of the advertised gross. The baseline assumes the asking rate is achieved in full; the calculator lets you test the more realistic case where it is not.

What the owner does not pay is the guest-side cost of the charter. Under Mediterranean and Caribbean convention the Advance Provisioning Allowance — typically 25 to 35 per cent of the charter fee, paid in advance — covers fuel, food, beverage, port and marina fees during the charter, and communications.

Chartered weeks are assumed by segment rather than modelled per yacht, and this is the weakest assumption in the study:

• 6 weeks above 80 metres, where the client pool is measured in hundreds of families worldwide;
• 8 weeks between 60 and 80 metres;
• 9 weeks between 50 and 60 metres, the deepest part of the large-yacht market;
• 20 weeks for high-capacity passenger vessels, which sell cabins rather than yachts.

We hold no audited utilisation data for these yachts. The figures are conventions used by charter managers rather than measurements, and the sensitivity table below shows what happens when they are wrong.

Circularity, and What We Did About It

There is a structural circularity in any model of this kind, and it should be stated plainly rather than buried.

The weekly rate contributes 44.99999999999999 per cent of the modelled value. Value then drives two cost lines — maintenance reserve and insurance — which together are typically 32 per cent of annual cost. Charter income is also a function of the weekly rate. A high rate therefore raises both sides of the ratio, which damps the apparent effect of rate on recovery and makes the ranking more conservative than a rate-only model would be, not less.

Three things limit the damage. First, the replacement method carries the larger weight (55.00000000000001 per cent) and is independent of rate. Second, the clamp at 0.6× to 1.8× replacement cost prevents a distorted rate from running away with a valuation. Third, the two largest cost lines — crew and berthing, together 52 per cent of the average cost stack — are functions of crew count and length, both observed, and are entirely independent of rate.

Readers who want the circularity removed altogether can set the maintenance reserve manually in the calculator, which severs the largest remaining value-linked line.

Sensitivity

The ranking is only as good as the assumptions behind it, so here is what happens to the 71 ranked private yachts when the two softest assumptions move.

Two chartered weeks either way moves mean recovery by roughly 18%, which is larger than the gap between most adjacent yachts in the ranking. Positions within a few percentage points of each other should not be read as meaningfully different.

Findings

Recovery improves with size

50–60 m: 65% mean recovery across 44 yachts; 60–80 m: 86% mean recovery across 22 yachts; 80 m+: 86% mean recovery across 5 yachts. This is counter-intuitive given that large yachts charter fewer weeks, and the explanation is rate escalation: weekly rates rise faster with length than running costs do. Above 80 metres the trophy premium in charter pricing more than compensates for the thinner order book — provided the yacht actually fills its 6 weeks, which is a real and unhedged risk. Absolute exposure runs the other way: a shortfall at 55 metres is measured in hundreds of thousands, at 85 metres in millions.

Region matters more than build year

Rate, not utilisation, drives most of that spread — the weeks assumption is identical within each size band regardless of region, so every difference in the table above comes from rate and cost structure rather than from utilisation we have not measured. Regions with fewer than two yachts in the cohort are omitted because a single hull is not evidence of a market.

Build year is a weaker signal than most owners expect. A newer hull carries a higher modelled value, and therefore a higher maintenance reserve and insurance base, against a rate the market sets by segment rather than by build year. Newness sells weeks; on this data it does not sell them at a premium sufficient to cover what newness costs.

Shipyard reputation is a value story, not a cash story

Among yards with two or more yachts in the ranked private cohort:

Yards at the top of the valuation tier tend to sit lower on recovery for a mechanical reason: a higher modelled asset price raises insurance and the maintenance reserve without raising the achievable weekly rate proportionately. Their owners are compensated on resale, which this study does not measure. This is a property of the model as much as of the market, and it is one of the results we would most like to test against real accounts.

Rig

Motor yachts: 64 in the ranked cohort, mean recovery 76%. Sailing yachts: 7 in the ranked cohort, mean recovery 49%. Large sailing yachts are structurally disadvantaged in this model and in the market: the client pool is smaller, the season is shorter, rig maintenance is expensive and guest capacity is lower for a given length.

The Ranking — Private Yachts

All 71 ranked private yachts, ordered by modelled cost recovery. Values, weeks, income and costs are modelled estimates; length, year, builder, crew and weekly rate are observed. Sort, filter and search the same data in the interactive table on this page, or download it in full.

The Ranking — High-Capacity Passenger Vessels

These 15 vessels carry 30 guests or more. They sell cabins into a demand curve closer to boutique cruising than to yacht charter, they are valued on the replacement method alone, and they are assumed to charter 20 weeks a year. Their recovery ratios are not comparable with the private-yacht table above and should never be quoted alongside it.

The pattern is consistent and commercially interesting: capacity beats length. Revenue scales with berths sold, while the cost stack scales with crew and metres, so a vessel that can sell 30 or more guests into group, corporate and expedition demand recovers its running cost far more easily than a 12-guest yacht of the same length. It is also a fundamentally different business, with passenger certification, cabin-based marketing and a crew model that has more in common with a small ship than with a private yacht.

Withheld Records

Fourteen records are excluded from both rankings because the two valuation methods disagree by more than 3×. Rather than delete them, we publish both figures. In most cases the divergence signals either a rate set for reasons other than value, or a hull whose age has driven the replacement method to its floor.

Excluding them is a judgement, and it is a judgement that flatters the study: several would rank poorly. Anyone re-running the model can set the withholding threshold higher and include them.

Per-Yacht Notes: The Fifty Strongest Private-Yacht Programmes

Ranked by modelled cost recovery. Every figure below is produced by the formulas above; the observed inputs are stated so each note can be checked independently.

1. AFTER YOU SX 60 — 60.1 m Damen, 137% recovery

Built in 2025, 20 guests, 13 crew, marketed in the Northern Europe. The published high-season rate is €780,000 a week.

At the 8 chartered weeks we assume for this segment she grosses €6,240,000, of which €4,742,400 reaches the owner after commission and charter wear. Modelled running cost is €3,456,917 against a modelled value of €51,049,747 — a modelled surplus of €1,285,483 before depreciation and finance. Break-even would require 5.8 chartered weeks.

2. SYNTHESIS — 74 m Amels, 113% recovery

Built in 2021, 12 guests, 20 crew, marketed in the Caribbean. IMO 9794587. The published high-season rate is €800,000 a week.

At the 8 chartered weeks we assume for this segment she grosses €6,400,000, of which €4,864,000 reaches the owner after commission and charter wear. Modelled running cost is €4,291,075 against a modelled value of €56,245,002 — a modelled surplus of €572,925 before depreciation and finance. Break-even would require 7.1 chartered weeks.

3. KISMET — 122 m Lürssen, 111% recovery

Built in 2024, 12 guests, 36 crew, marketed in the West Mediterranean. IMO 9881627. The published high-season rate is €3,000,000 a week.

At the 6 chartered weeks we assume for this segment she grosses €18,000,000, of which €13,680,000 reaches the owner after commission and charter wear. Modelled running cost is €12,372,054 against a modelled value of €234,800,660 — a modelled surplus of €1,307,946 before depreciation and finance. Break-even would require 5.4 chartered weeks.

4. SILVER STAR 1 — 55.2 m Admiral Yachts, 107% recovery

Built in 2024, 12 guests, 11 crew, marketed in the West Mediterranean. The published high-season rate is €390,000 a week.

At the 9 chartered weeks we assume for this segment she grosses €3,510,000, of which €2,667,600 reaches the owner after commission and charter wear. Modelled running cost is €2,494,117 against a modelled value of €29,781,563 — a modelled surplus of €173,483 before depreciation and finance. Break-even would require 8.4 chartered weeks.

5. LEGASEA — 50 m ADA Yacht Works, 107% recovery

Built in 2025, 12 guests, 9 crew, marketed in the East Mediterranean. The published high-season rate is €325,000 a week.

At the 9 chartered weeks we assume for this segment she grosses €2,925,000, of which €2,223,000 reaches the owner after commission and charter wear. Modelled running cost is €2,085,184 against a modelled value of €23,872,581 — a modelled surplus of €137,816 before depreciation and finance. Break-even would require 8.4 chartered weeks.

6. ARIENCE — 60.9 m Abeking & Rasmussen, 105% recovery

Built in 2012, refitted in 2022, 12 guests, 16 crew, marketed in the Caribbean. The published high-season rate is €562,000 a week.

At the 8 chartered weeks we assume for this segment she grosses €4,496,000, of which €3,416,960 reaches the owner after commission and charter wear. Modelled running cost is €3,249,151 against a modelled value of €38,867,943 — a modelled surplus of €167,809 before depreciation and finance. Break-even would require 7.6 chartered weeks.

7. CLOUDBREAK — 75.3 m Abeking & Rasmussen, 104% recovery

Built in 2016, 12 guests, 22 crew, marketed in the East Mediterranean. IMO 1012763. The published high-season rate is €750,000 a week.

At the 8 chartered weeks we assume for this segment she grosses €6,000,000, of which €4,560,000 reaches the owner after commission and charter wear. Modelled running cost is €4,367,557 against a modelled value of €53,880,933 — a modelled surplus of €192,443 before depreciation and finance. Break-even would require 7.7 chartered weeks.

8. Q — 72.5 m Icon Yachts, 100% recovery

Built in 2012, refitted in 2025, 12 guests, 18 crew, marketed in the Caribbean. The published high-season rate is €606,000 a week.

At the 8 chartered weeks we assume for this segment she grosses €4,848,000, of which €3,684,480 reaches the owner after commission and charter wear. Modelled running cost is €3,670,382 against a modelled value of €43,632,353 — a modelled surplus of €14,098 before depreciation and finance. Break-even would require 8.0 chartered weeks.

9. LA DATCHA — 77 m Damen, 100% recovery

Built in 2020, 12 guests, 18 crew, marketed in the Caribbean. IMO 9849021. The published high-season rate is €649,000 a week.

At the 8 chartered weeks we assume for this segment she grosses €5,192,000, of which €3,945,920 reaches the owner after commission and charter wear. Modelled running cost is €3,960,483 against a modelled value of €50,597,171 — a modelled shortfall of €14,563 that the owner meets directly. Break-even would require 8.0 chartered weeks.

10. TRIDENT — 65.2 m Feadship, 98% recovery

Built in 2009, 12 guests, 17 crew, marketed in the Arabian Gulf. The published high-season rate is €500,000 a week.

At the 8 chartered weeks we assume for this segment she grosses €4,000,000, of which €3,040,000 reaches the owner after commission and charter wear. Modelled running cost is €3,106,933 against a modelled value of €31,857,926 — a modelled shortfall of €66,933 that the owner meets directly. Break-even would require 8.2 chartered weeks.

11. R.M.F — 52 m Sanlorenzo, 98% recovery

Built in 2022, 10 guests, 9 crew, marketed in the West Mediterranean. The published high-season rate is €294,000 a week.

At the 9 chartered weeks we assume for this segment she grosses €2,646,000, of which €2,010,960 reaches the owner after commission and charter wear. Modelled running cost is €2,061,009 against a modelled value of €22,741,443 — a modelled shortfall of €50,049 that the owner meets directly. Break-even would require 9.2 chartered weeks.

12. COCOA BEAN — 74 m Trinity Yachts, 96% recovery

Built in 2014, 12 guests, 18 crew, marketed in the East Mediterranean. IMO 9638757. The published high-season rate is €550,000 a week.

At the 8 chartered weeks we assume for this segment she grosses €4,400,000, of which €3,344,000 reaches the owner after commission and charter wear. Modelled running cost is €3,491,639 against a modelled value of €38,350,287 — a modelled shortfall of €147,639 that the owner meets directly. Break-even would require 8.4 chartered weeks.

13. OKTO — 66.4 m ISA, 95% recovery

Built in 2014, refitted in 2022, 11 guests, 16 crew, marketed in the Caribbean. The published high-season rate is €510,000 a week.

At the 8 chartered weeks we assume for this segment she grosses €4,080,000, of which €3,100,800 reaches the owner after commission and charter wear. Modelled running cost is €3,261,854 against a modelled value of €37,943,233 — a modelled shortfall of €161,054 that the owner meets directly. Break-even would require 8.4 chartered weeks.

14. SOUNDWAVE — 63 m Benetti, 94% recovery

Built in 2015, refitted in 2025, 12 guests, 15 crew, marketed in the Caribbean. The published high-season rate is €476,000 a week.

At the 8 chartered weeks we assume for this segment she grosses €3,808,000, of which €2,894,080 reaches the owner after commission and charter wear. Modelled running cost is €3,067,172 against a modelled value of €35,444,370 — a modelled shortfall of €173,092 that the owner meets directly. Break-even would require 8.5 chartered weeks.

15. TOP FIVE II — 61 m Hakvoort, 93% recovery

Built in 2021, 12 guests, 19 crew, marketed in the Caribbean. The published high-season rate is €519,000 a week.

At the 8 chartered weeks we assume for this segment she grosses €4,152,000, of which €3,155,520 reaches the owner after commission and charter wear. Modelled running cost is €3,379,740 against a modelled value of €36,188,830 — a modelled shortfall of €224,220 that the owner meets directly. Break-even would require 8.6 chartered weeks.

16. AIR — 81 m Feadship, 93% recovery

Built in 2011, 12 guests, 21 crew, marketed in the West Mediterranean. IMO 1011472. The published high-season rate is €925,000 a week.

At the 6 chartered weeks we assume for this segment she grosses €5,550,000, of which €4,218,000 reaches the owner after commission and charter wear. Modelled running cost is €4,528,529 against a modelled value of €59,089,818 — a modelled shortfall of €310,529 that the owner meets directly. Break-even would require 6.4 chartered weeks.

17. CC-SUMMER — 95 m Lürssen, 93% recovery

Built in 2019, 12 guests, 28 crew, marketed in the Caribbean. IMO 9807956. The published high-season rate is €1,380,000 a week.

At the 6 chartered weeks we assume for this segment she grosses €8,280,000, of which €6,292,800 reaches the owner after commission and charter wear. Modelled running cost is €6,788,327 against a modelled value of €103,617,037 — a modelled shortfall of €495,527 that the owner meets directly. Break-even would require 6.5 chartered weeks.

18. SOLACE — 57 m Feadship, 93% recovery

Built in 2005, refitted in 2025, 12 guests, 14 crew, marketed in the Arabian Gulf. The published high-season rate is €337,000 a week.

At the 9 chartered weeks we assume for this segment she grosses €3,033,000, of which €2,305,080 reaches the owner after commission and charter wear. Modelled running cost is €2,488,872 against a modelled value of €22,958,508 — a modelled shortfall of €183,792 that the owner meets directly. Break-even would require 9.7 chartered weeks.

19. AFTER YOU — 55 m Heesen, 91% recovery

Built in 2011, refitted in 2022, 12 guests, 14 crew, marketed in the East Mediterranean. The published high-season rate is €330,000 a week.

At the 9 chartered weeks we assume for this segment she grosses €2,970,000, of which €2,257,200 reaches the owner after commission and charter wear. Modelled running cost is €2,468,597 against a modelled value of €22,862,592 — a modelled shortfall of €211,397 that the owner meets directly. Break-even would require 9.8 chartered weeks.

20. BELLA VITA — 75.6 m Lürssen, 89% recovery

Built in 2009, 12 guests, 22 crew, marketed in the Caribbean. The published high-season rate is €562,000 a week.

At the 8 chartered weeks we assume for this segment she grosses €4,496,000, of which €3,416,960 reaches the owner after commission and charter wear. Modelled running cost is €3,825,691 against a modelled value of €38,853,038 — a modelled shortfall of €408,731 that the owner meets directly. Break-even would require 9.0 chartered weeks.

21. QUINTA ESSENTIA — 55 m Admiral Yachts, 88% recovery

Built in 2016, refitted in 2026, 12 guests, 13 crew, marketed in the East Mediterranean. The published high-season rate is €320,000 a week.

At the 9 chartered weeks we assume for this segment she grosses €2,880,000, of which €2,188,800 reaches the owner after commission and charter wear. Modelled running cost is €2,480,734 against a modelled value of €25,284,575 — a modelled shortfall of €291,934 that the owner meets directly. Break-even would require 10.2 chartered weeks.

22. DB9 — 52.1 m Palmer Johnson, 88% recovery

Built in 2010, refitted in 2025, 12 guests, 11 crew, marketed in the West Mediterranean. The published high-season rate is €265,000 a week.

At the 9 chartered weeks we assume for this segment she grosses €2,385,000, of which €1,812,600 reaches the owner after commission and charter wear. Modelled running cost is €2,063,473 against a modelled value of €18,612,376 — a modelled shortfall of €250,873 that the owner meets directly. Break-even would require 10.2 chartered weeks.

23. SUNDAY — 59.7 m Benetti, 87% recovery

Built in 2006, 12 guests, 15 crew, marketed in the East Mediterranean. The published high-season rate is €310,000 a week.

At the 9 chartered weeks we assume for this segment she grosses €2,790,000, of which €2,120,400 reaches the owner after commission and charter wear. Modelled running cost is €2,428,238 against a modelled value of €18,571,643 — a modelled shortfall of €307,838 that the owner meets directly. Break-even would require 10.3 chartered weeks.

24. SOUTH — 54.9 m Heesen, 85% recovery

Built in 2012, 12 guests, 13 crew, marketed in the Caribbean. The published high-season rate is €277,000 a week.

At the 9 chartered weeks we assume for this segment she grosses €2,493,000, of which €1,894,680 reaches the owner after commission and charter wear. Modelled running cost is €2,231,038 against a modelled value of €18,414,851 — a modelled shortfall of €336,358 that the owner meets directly. Break-even would require 10.6 chartered weeks.

25. CONTIGO — 50 m Sanlorenzo, 85% recovery

Built in 2024, refitted in 2026, 10 guests, 11 crew, marketed in the Caribbean. The published high-season rate is €281,000 a week.

At the 9 chartered weeks we assume for this segment she grosses €2,529,000, of which €1,922,040 reaches the owner after commission and charter wear. Modelled running cost is €2,264,483 against a modelled value of €24,648,249 — a modelled shortfall of €342,443 that the owner meets directly. Break-even would require 10.6 chartered weeks.

26. LUNA B — 66 m Oceanco, 84% recovery

Built in 2005, refitted in 2020, 12 guests, 19 crew, marketed in the West Mediterranean. The published high-season rate is €450,000 a week.

At the 8 chartered weeks we assume for this segment she grosses €3,600,000, of which €2,736,000 reaches the owner after commission and charter wear. Modelled running cost is €3,244,785 against a modelled value of €31,303,936 — a modelled shortfall of €508,785 that the owner meets directly. Break-even would require 9.5 chartered weeks.

27. QUANTUM OF SOLACE — 72.6 m Turquoise, 84% recovery

Built in 2012, refitted in 2023, 12 guests, 19 crew, marketed in the Caribbean. IMO 1011135. The published high-season rate is €496,000 a week.

At the 8 chartered weeks we assume for this segment she grosses €3,968,000, of which €3,015,680 reaches the owner after commission and charter wear. Modelled running cost is €3,578,123 against a modelled value of €38,975,367 — a modelled shortfall of €562,443 that the owner meets directly. Break-even would require 9.5 chartered weeks.

28. SAMURAI — 60.3 m Alia Yachts, 84% recovery

Built in 2016, refitted in 2019, 12 guests, 15 crew, marketed in the Caribbean. The published high-season rate is €385,000 a week.

At the 8 chartered weeks we assume for this segment she grosses €3,080,000, of which €2,340,800 reaches the owner after commission and charter wear. Modelled running cost is €2,797,310 against a modelled value of €28,620,848 — a modelled shortfall of €456,510 that the owner meets directly. Break-even would require 9.6 chartered weeks.

29. SOLANDGE — 85 m Lürssen, 82% recovery

Built in 2013, refitted in 2024, 12 guests, 34 crew, marketed in the East Mediterranean. IMO 1011575. The published high-season rate is €1,150,000 a week.

At the 6 chartered weeks we assume for this segment she grosses €6,900,000, of which €5,244,000 reaches the owner after commission and charter wear. Modelled running cost is €6,430,285 against a modelled value of €83,530,303 — a modelled shortfall of €1,186,285 that the owner meets directly. Break-even would require 7.4 chartered weeks.

30. ITOTO — 61 m Custom, 78% recovery

Built in 1987, refitted in 2025, 12 guests, 5 crew, marketed in the East Mediterranean. The published high-season rate is €200,000 a week.

At the 8 chartered weeks we assume for this segment she grosses €1,600,000, of which €1,216,000 reaches the owner after commission and charter wear. Modelled running cost is €1,551,573 against a modelled value of €12,419,355 — a modelled shortfall of €335,573 that the owner meets directly. Break-even would require 10.2 chartered weeks. The result is driven by a hull old enough to sit on the depreciation floor, which holds the capital-linked cost lines down and a pre-2005 maintenance reserve of 3.5000000000000004 per cent of value.

31. CHAMPAGNE SEAS — 50 m Trinity Yachts, 78% recovery

Built in 2012, refitted in 2025, 12 guests, 10 crew, marketed in the Central America. The published high-season rate is €216,000 a week.

At the 9 chartered weeks we assume for this segment she grosses €1,944,000, of which €1,477,440 reaches the owner after commission and charter wear. Modelled running cost is €1,898,522 against a modelled value of €16,632,765 — a modelled shortfall of €421,082 that the owner meets directly. Break-even would require 11.6 chartered weeks.

32. STARSHIP — 56.4 m Delta Marine, 78% recovery

Built in 2001, refitted in 2021, 12 guests, 11 crew, marketed in the Caribbean. The published high-season rate is €238,000 a week.

At the 9 chartered weeks we assume for this segment she grosses €2,142,000, of which €1,627,920 reaches the owner after commission and charter wear. Modelled running cost is €2,098,760 against a modelled value of €15,453,817 — a modelled shortfall of €470,840 that the owner meets directly. Break-even would require 11.6 chartered weeks. The result is driven by a pre-2005 maintenance reserve of 3.5000000000000004 per cent of value.

33. FRIENDSHIP — 52.8 m Oceanco, 78% recovery

Built in 2000, refitted in 2022, 12 guests, 12 crew, marketed in the West Mediterranean. The published high-season rate is €245,000 a week.

At the 9 chartered weeks we assume for this segment she grosses €2,205,000, of which €1,675,800 reaches the owner after commission and charter wear. Modelled running cost is €2,161,871 against a modelled value of €15,861,184 — a modelled shortfall of €486,071 that the owner meets directly. Break-even would require 11.6 chartered weeks. The result is driven by a pre-2005 maintenance reserve of 3.5000000000000004 per cent of value.

34. ORIY — 50 m Custom, 74% recovery

Built in 2026, 12 guests, 12 crew, marketed in the East Mediterranean. The published high-season rate is €240,000 a week.

At the 9 chartered weeks we assume for this segment she grosses €2,160,000, of which €1,641,600 reaches the owner after commission and charter wear. Modelled running cost is €2,216,870 against a modelled value of €21,246,924 — a modelled shortfall of €575,270 that the owner meets directly. Break-even would require 12.2 chartered weeks.

35. BARACUDA VALLETTA — 50 m Perini Navi, 73% recovery

Built in 2009, refitted in 2024, 10 guests, 9 crew, marketed in the East Mediterranean. The published high-season rate is €185,000 a week.

At the 9 chartered weeks we assume for this segment she grosses €1,665,000, of which €1,265,400 reaches the owner after commission and charter wear. Modelled running cost is €1,733,090 against a modelled value of €14,152,922 — a modelled shortfall of €467,690 that the owner meets directly. Break-even would require 12.3 chartered weeks.

36. ZALIV III — 50.2 m Mondo Marine, 72% recovery

Built in 2011, 12 guests, 11 crew, marketed in the East Mediterranean. The published high-season rate is €195,000 a week.

At the 9 chartered weeks we assume for this segment she grosses €1,755,000, of which €1,333,800 reaches the owner after commission and charter wear. Modelled running cost is €1,857,529 against a modelled value of €13,367,810 — a modelled shortfall of €523,729 that the owner meets directly. Break-even would require 12.5 chartered weeks.

37. SKYFALL — 57.9 m Trinity Yachts, 72% recovery

Built in 2010, refitted in 2020, 12 guests, 14 crew, marketed in the Caribbean. The published high-season rate is €251,000 a week.

At the 9 chartered weeks we assume for this segment she grosses €2,259,000, of which €1,716,840 reaches the owner after commission and charter wear. Modelled running cost is €2,391,248 against a modelled value of €20,054,882 — a modelled shortfall of €674,408 that the owner meets directly. Break-even would require 12.5 chartered weeks.

38. MISCHIEF — 54 m Baglietto, 71% recovery

Built in 2006, refitted in 2018, 12 guests, 14 crew, marketed in the Oceania. The published high-season rate is €229,000 a week.

At the 9 chartered weeks we assume for this segment she grosses €2,061,000, of which €1,566,360 reaches the owner after commission and charter wear. Modelled running cost is €2,215,527 against a modelled value of €16,108,410 — a modelled shortfall of €649,167 that the owner meets directly. Break-even would require 12.7 chartered weeks. The result is driven by a 14-berth payroll that alone accounts for 45 per cent of running cost.

39. INVADER — 50 m Codecasa, 69% recovery

Built in 2000, refitted in 2019, 10 guests, 12 crew, marketed in the East Mediterranean. The published high-season rate is €200,000 a week.

At the 9 chartered weeks we assume for this segment she grosses €1,800,000, of which €1,368,000 reaches the owner after commission and charter wear. Modelled running cost is €1,980,692 against a modelled value of €12,243,065 — a modelled shortfall of €612,692 that the owner meets directly. Break-even would require 13.0 chartered weeks. The result is driven by a pre-2005 maintenance reserve of 3.5000000000000004 per cent of value.

40. VERA — 52 m Abeking & Rasmussen, 69% recovery

Built in 2000, refitted in 2024, 12 guests, 12 crew, marketed in the East Mediterranean. The published high-season rate is €210,000 a week.

At the 9 chartered weeks we assume for this segment she grosses €1,890,000, of which €1,436,400 reaches the owner after commission and charter wear. Modelled running cost is €2,081,555 against a modelled value of €14,172,242 — a modelled shortfall of €645,155 that the owner meets directly. Break-even would require 13.0 chartered weeks. The result is driven by a pre-2005 maintenance reserve of 3.5000000000000004 per cent of value.

41. XASTERIA — 52 m Perini Navi, 68% recovery

Built in 1995, refitted in 2019, 12 guests, 9 crew, marketed in the East Mediterranean. The published high-season rate is €168,000 a week.

At the 9 chartered weeks we assume for this segment she grosses €1,512,000, of which €1,149,120 reaches the owner after commission and charter wear. Modelled running cost is €1,678,074 against a modelled value of €10,117,601 — a modelled shortfall of €528,954 that the owner meets directly. Break-even would require 13.1 chartered weeks. The result is driven by a pre-2005 maintenance reserve of 3.5000000000000004 per cent of value.

42. ASPEN ALTERNATIVE — 50 m Trinity Yachts, 68% recovery

Built in 2010, refitted in 2022, 10 guests, 9 crew, marketed in the Caribbean. The published high-season rate is €172,000 a week.

At the 9 chartered weeks we assume for this segment she grosses €1,548,000, of which €1,176,480 reaches the owner after commission and charter wear. Modelled running cost is €1,726,030 against a modelled value of €13,958,043 — a modelled shortfall of €549,550 that the owner meets directly. Break-even would require 13.2 chartered weeks.

43. NITA K II — 52.1 m Amels, 68% recovery

Built in 2004, refitted in 2019, 12 guests, 13 crew, marketed in the Caribbean. The published high-season rate is €216,000 a week.

At the 9 chartered weeks we assume for this segment she grosses €1,944,000, of which €1,477,440 reaches the owner after commission and charter wear. Modelled running cost is €2,168,974 against a modelled value of €14,424,188 — a modelled shortfall of €691,534 that the owner meets directly. Break-even would require 13.2 chartered weeks. The result is driven by a pre-2005 maintenance reserve of 3.5000000000000004 per cent of value.

44. MARY-JEAN II — 61.7 m ISA, 68% recovery

Built in 2010, 12 guests, 15 crew, marketed in the Caribbean. The published high-season rate is €277,000 a week.

At the 8 chartered weeks we assume for this segment she grosses €2,216,000, of which €1,684,160 reaches the owner after commission and charter wear. Modelled running cost is €2,480,840 against a modelled value of €19,559,966 — a modelled shortfall of €796,680 that the owner meets directly. Break-even would require 11.8 chartered weeks.

45. ST DAVID — 60 m Benetti, 68% recovery

Built in 2008, refitted in 2019, 12 guests, 15 crew, marketed in the Caribbean. The published high-season rate is €281,000 a week.

At the 8 chartered weeks we assume for this segment she grosses €2,248,000, of which €1,708,480 reaches the owner after commission and charter wear. Modelled running cost is €2,521,300 against a modelled value of €21,071,070 — a modelled shortfall of €812,820 that the owner meets directly. Break-even would require 11.8 chartered weeks.

46. QUEEN MARE — 58 m Custom, 65% recovery

Built in 2013, refitted in 2025, 12 guests, 11 crew, marketed in the East Mediterranean. The published high-season rate is €200,000 a week.

At the 9 chartered weeks we assume for this segment she grosses €1,800,000, of which €1,368,000 reaches the owner after commission and charter wear. Modelled running cost is €2,097,761 against a modelled value of €18,190,768 — a modelled shortfall of €729,761 that the owner meets directly. Break-even would require 13.8 chartered weeks.

47. LA PELLEGRINA 1 — 50 m Couach, 64% recovery

Built in 2012, refitted in 2024, 12 guests, 11 crew, marketed in the East Mediterranean. The published high-season rate is €180,000 a week.

At the 9 chartered weeks we assume for this segment she grosses €1,620,000, of which €1,231,200 reaches the owner after commission and charter wear. Modelled running cost is €1,918,232 against a modelled value of €15,089,907 — a modelled shortfall of €687,032 that the owner meets directly. Break-even would require 14.0 chartered weeks.

48. PERSEFONI I — 53.6 m Custom, 64% recovery

Built in 2012, refitted in 2021, 12 guests, 13 crew, marketed in the East Mediterranean. The published high-season rate is €199,000 a week.

At the 9 chartered weeks we assume for this segment she grosses €1,791,000, of which €1,361,160 reaches the owner after commission and charter wear. Modelled running cost is €2,135,557 against a modelled value of €16,080,512 — a modelled shortfall of €774,397 that the owner meets directly. Break-even would require 14.1 chartered weeks.

49. MIRAGE — 53 m Feadship, 63% recovery

Built in 1979, refitted in 2020, 12 guests, 14 crew, marketed in the Northern Europe. The published high-season rate is €200,000 a week.

At the 9 chartered weeks we assume for this segment she grosses €1,800,000, of which €1,368,000 reaches the owner after commission and charter wear. Modelled running cost is €2,171,825 against a modelled value of €12,581,185 — a modelled shortfall of €803,825 that the owner meets directly. Break-even would require 14.3 chartered weeks. The result is driven by a 14-berth payroll that alone accounts for 46 per cent of running cost and a hull old enough to sit on the depreciation floor, which holds the capital-linked cost lines down.

50. ALEXANDRA — 50 m Benetti, 63% recovery

Built in 2002, refitted in 2018, 12 guests, 12 crew, marketed in the East Mediterranean. The published high-season rate is €180,000 a week.

At the 9 chartered weeks we assume for this segment she grosses €1,620,000, of which €1,231,200 reaches the owner after commission and charter wear. Modelled running cost is €1,965,888 against a modelled value of €11,903,347 — a modelled shortfall of €734,688 that the owner meets directly. Break-even would require 14.4 chartered weeks. The result is driven by a pre-2005 maintenance reserve of 3.5000000000000004 per cent of value.

Where Owners Lose Money Without Noticing

Four patterns recur across the weaker half of the ranking, and none of them is about the boat.

Rate discipline. A yacht that discounts to fill August has not gained a week; it has repriced the season. In the sensitivity table above, achieving 85 per cent of the asking rate rather than 100 per cent costs mean recovery 11%. Two weeks at full rate is usually better economics than four at a heavy discount, once wear and crew fatigue are counted.

Crew turnover. Crew is 40 per cent of the average cost stack in this cohort and the line least responsive to the yacht. Replacing a quarter of the team each year carries recruitment, training and handover costs that never appear as a line item, and shows up instead as maintenance found late and guest reviews that soften the rate.

Deferred maintenance. The reserve is an annualised number for a lumpy reality. Owners who do not fund it still pay it, usually at the worst moment, and frequently in a yard period that also costs a season's weeks.

Programme fit. A yacht positioned in a region where its size band is heavily supplied will discount. The regional table above shows the spread; the decision that produces it is made once, when the season is planned.

Building a Programme That Recovers Its Costs

On this data, the levers that move a hull from the lower half of the ranking to the upper half are, in order of effect: chartered weeks, rate discipline, crew stability and refit timing. Only the last of those is about the yacht.

The practical implication for an owner weighing a purchase is that the operating model should be chosen before the hull. On a median modelled value of €18.6M, the difference between a programme that sells its baseline weeks and one that sells two more is 18% of running cost every year — over a five-year hold, comfortably more than the difference in purchase price between two comparable hulls.

Full ownership is not the only structure. For four to six weeks of annual use, fractional and shared structures capture most of the usage benefit and a share of the capital position without the operating exposure that this study measures. Our companion analysis, Yacht Ownership vs Charter vs Fractional Ownership, works the same arithmetic through a single €15 million yacht over five years.

Limits and Known Weaknesses

We would rather state these than have them discovered.

1. No transaction prices. Every value is modelled. The error bar is ±20 to 30 per cent per hull. 2. No audited utilisation. Chartered weeks are segment conventions, not measurements. This is the single assumption most likely to be wrong for any individual yacht, and the sensitivity table quantifies it. 3. No audited accounts. The cost stack is built from industry norms, not from owners' management accounts. 4. Selection bias. The cohort is drawn from one brokerage's actively marketed fleet, and skews toward vessels in the regions where we operate. 5. Depreciation, finance, VAT and tax are excluded throughout. Including them would make every recovery figure look far worse and would import assumptions about ownership structure that vary by owner. 6. The rate heuristic is partly circular with the maintenance and insurance lines, as set out above. 7. Regional groups are small. Several regions carry only two or three yachts, and those means are indicative at best. 8. Rates are asking rates. We do not hold achieved rates, and asking rates in a soft market overstate income.

Sources Consulted

This study relies primarily on Blue Ocean Club fleet data. The following external frameworks and public references informed the cost assumptions and are cited so readers can check them independently.

• International Labour Organization, Maritime Labour Convention, 2006 (as amended) — minimum standards for seafarer employment, hours, repatriation and medical cover that underpin the crew cost line. ilo.org
• International Maritime Organization, International Safety Management (ISM) Code — the compliance burden reflected in the management and administration line. imo.org
• Lloyd's Register and other IACS members, class survey cycles for large yachts — the five-year rhythm behind the annualised maintenance reserve. iacs.org.uk
• SuperYacht Times, Global Order Book and market intelligence — published new-build and brokerage market data used as a sanity check on the length-to-cost curve. superyachttimes.com
• Boat International, superyacht market and refit reporting — public commentary on refit cycles and running-cost norms. boatinternational.com
• Mediterranean Yacht Brokers Association, standard MYBA charter agreement and APA convention — the basis for the commission stack and the treatment of guest-side costs. myba-association.com

None of these organisations reviewed, endorsed or contributed to this study.

Suggested Citation

“Blue Ocean Club Research (2026). *Yacht Charter Cost Recovery 2026: Modelled purchase price, running costs and charter income for 100 yachts of 50 m and above.* Version 2.0, 2026-11-24. Blue Ocean Club. https://blueoceanclub.com/journal/most-profitable-yachts-for-owners”

Journalists and researchers may reproduce individual figures and tables with attribution and a link to this page. The full dataset is available as CSV and JSON from the download panel above.

Corrections and Version History

Material corrections are logged here rather than made silently.

To report an error, write to research@blueoceanclub.com with the yacht, the figure and the evidence.

Independent Review

We invite challenge on three specific points, because they are where this study is most likely to be wrong:

1. Chartered weeks by segment. If you manage large-yacht programmes and hold real utilisation data, we would like to replace our conventions with measurements. 2. The length-to-cost curve. Anyone with new-build pricing across a range of lengths can test the 2.35 exponent directly. 3. Crew cost per berth. €72,000 fully loaded is a blended figure; management companies will have better ones.

Reviewers who provide evidence that changes a result will be credited in the version history unless they ask not to be.

Frequently Asked Questions

Can a yacht ever pay for itself?

In operating terms, sometimes: 8 of the 71 ranked private yachts model a positive annual cash result before depreciation and finance. In capital terms, no. None of these yachts returns its purchase price, and depreciation on a modern hull typically exceeds any operating surplus. The realistic ambition is a largely self-funding operating programme, with the capital cost treated as the price of the asset.

How is cost recovery calculated?

Owner net charter income divided by modelled annual running cost. Owner net charter income is chartered weeks multiplied by the published weekly rate, less 20 per cent commission and 5 per cent charter wear. Annual running cost is the six-line stack published above: crew, maintenance reserve, insurance, berthing, owner-use fuel, and management. Depreciation, finance, VAT and tax are excluded.

How many chartered weeks are needed to break even?

Across the 71 ranked private yachts the median break-even is 11.9 chartered weeks at the published asking rate. That is above the 8 to 9 weeks the market typically supplies in the 50 to 80 metre range, which is why most yachts in this cohort recover part, not all, of their running cost.

Are the values in this ranking appraisals?

No. They are modelled estimates that blend a length-based replacement-cost curve and shipyard tier multiplier with a market heuristic in which the peak weekly rate approximates 1.05 per cent of value. The error bar on any single yacht is ±20 to 30 per cent. Use them to compare hulls within this study, not to price a transaction.

Why are some yachts excluded from the ranking?

Fourteen records are withheld because the two valuation methods disagree by more than 3×, which usually means the weekly rate is set by something other than the value of the asset. All 14 are published with both figures so the exclusion can be checked.

Why are high-capacity vessels ranked separately?

Vessels carrying 30 guests or more sell cabins into a boutique-cruise demand curve, charter far more weeks, and are valued on replacement cost alone because the rate heuristic does not hold for them. Ranking them alongside 12-guest yachts produced a league table dominated by a different industry, which was a defect in version 1.0 of this study.

What does the Advance Provisioning Allowance cover?

Typically 25 to 35 per cent of the charter fee, paid in advance, covering fuel, food, beverages, port and marina fees during the charter, and communications. It is the guest's money and is reconciled at the end of the charter. That is why the incremental cost of a chartered week to the owner is modest — modelled here at 5 per cent of gross.

Does chartering damage resale value?

Buyers discount evidence of hard use rather than charter history as such: worn interiors, deferred maintenance and incomplete service records. A chartered yacht with a full maintenance history, current class and a documented refit cycle often presents better than a lightly used private yacht whose systems have sat idle. This study does not measure resale outcomes, so treat that as market observation rather than as a finding.

Can I reuse this data?

Yes, with attribution and a link. Download the full dataset as CSV or JSON from the panel above, cite it using the suggested citation, and tell us if you find an error.

---

Blue Ocean Club is a yacht charter brokerage. This study is research, not advice and not an offer. Nothing here is a valuation, an appraisal or a recommendation to buy, sell or charter any vessel. Owners considering a purchase should commission an independent survey, a market appraisal and professional tax advice. Charter enquiries are handled separately from this research desk.