Who gets the most out of their 737 MAX? |

The news flow would have you believe it's all gloom and doom for Boeing MAX operators. In a world where if it bleeds, it leads, every operational mishap is turned into clickbait. Please don't fall for it! Let's use real-world data from industry-leading data source Skailark to show you how well the MAX works for operators. We offer several charts to provide perspective on the segments in which the MAX operates. [caption id="attachment_82395" align="aligncenter" width="580"] Skailark; AirInsight[/caption] As Boeing's MAX 8 deliveries accelerated, operators deployed these aircraft to effect. The MAX 9 saw growing operations and remains far behind the A321neo. The scatter chart shows the average stage length by fuel burn. We are comparing the MAX 8/9 to the A320neo and A321neo. The data is from 2023. [caption id="attachment_82387" align="aligncenter" width="580"] Skailark; AirInsight[/caption] The scatter spreads far and wide because these aircraft are widely used. As workhorses, they cover several missions. The data shows these models are highly competitive. The following two charts compare the competitive models directly. The upper chart covers the smaller models, and the lower chart covers the larger ones. [caption id="attachment_82389" align="aligncenter" width="580"] Skailark; AirInsight[/caption] MAX 8 vs A320neo The MAX 8 demonstrates a broader range of stages. It also appears to have a better fuel burn in operational terms, which is consistent with its lighter weight. MAX 8 operators show it has a better utility than the A320neo. MAX 9 vs A321neo The chart shows the A321neo with a broader range of stages. On average, it also appears to offer better fuel burn over these ranges. Indeed, the A321neo has an impressive range of operational performance. A321neo operators show it has a better utility than the MAX 9. We get the following if we look at the data from operator types. The legend definitions are FSC = full-service carrier; ULCC = ultra-low-cost carrier; Value = US equivalent of LCC. [caption id="attachment_82391" align="aligncenter" width="580"] Skailark; AirInsight[/caption] ULCC airlines operate in a tight set of ranges, FSC airlines operate in the broadest set of ranges, and value airlines operate in a relatively broad set of ranges, with a distinct focus on shorter ranges. As expected, shorter ranges negatively impact fuel burn. Returning to the charts comparing aircraft models and selecting Value carriers, we see the following. [caption id="attachment_82393" align="aligncenter" width="580"] Skailark; AirInsight[/caption] Value carriers are doing great work with the MAX 8. Southwest Airlines is the most influential airline among MAX 8 operators. MAX 8 operators account for 69.7% of tracked operations in this segment. Regarding the larger models, Alaska Airlines is the largest operator and flies the MAX 9. The A321neo accounts for 60.8% of tracked operations in this segment MAX Operator Performance The charts above provide context and comparative performance. Each segment's Airbus and Boeing models show slight benefits for each OEM. The performance is close among the OEMs. The following charts list the MAX operators by model. The dashed lines reflect averages for each axis. The size of the balls demonstrates the number of flights. We rank the best quadrant as having the lowest fuel burn and longest stage length. The worst quadrant has the highest fuel burn and shortest stage lengths. The fuel burn spread is close for the MAX 8 at 14.5% and broader at 31.2% for the MAX 9. MAX 9 operators like Icelandair extract better performance by operating long stages. We see the same for A321neo operators, like Hawaiian, flying long stages. [caption id="attachment_82400" align="aligncenter" width="580"] Skailark; AirInsight[/caption] [caption id="attachment_82399" align="aligncenter" width="580"] Skailark; AirInsight[/caption] In summary, MAX operational data show these aircraft to be competitive. The MAX 8 is its segment leader. The A321neo is a step ahead of the MAX 9, and it is likely the MAX 10 would offer more competitive performance.

US Flight Planner - US DoT On-Time Data	Airbus vs Boeing - Official OEM Data
US Airline Schedule Performance - US DoT Data	Daily OEM Production & Deliveries -

Subscribe To Our Newsletter

Related News

Subscribe To Our Newsletter

Related News

Lufthansa Joins Emirates in Rejecting Early-Build 777-9s

FAA certifies Boeing 737 MAX 7; Crucial for Boeing

Airbus reports 1H 2026 Financials and Affirms Guidance