CX and UO traffic figures for June 2025

Abbreviation
Available Seat Kilometres “ASK”
Revenue Passenger Kilometres “RPK”

CX Jun 25 (CX+KA Jun 18)
ASK(000): 11,539,073 (12,794,574)
% Change VS JUNE 2024: 26.2%
Cumulative June 2025: 66,792,464

RPK(000): 9,876,538 (10,908,153)
% Change VS JUNE 2024: 29.3%
Cumulative June 2025: 56,650,891

Passengers carried: 2,300,801 (2,925,385)
% Change VS JUNE 2024: 25.2%
Cumulative June 2025: 13,626,576

Load factor: 85.6%

UO Jun 25
ASK(000): 1,452,824
% Change VS JUNE 2024: 32.1%
Cumulative June 2025: 8,810,411

RPK(000): 1,023,720
% Change VS JUNE 2024: 8.1%
Cumulative June 2025: 6,947,494

Passengers carried: 582,886
% Change VS JUNE 2024: 16.5%
Cumulative June 2025: 3,790,933

Load factor: 70.5%

CX+UO Jun 25 (CX+KA Jun 18)

ASK(000): 12,991,897 (12,794,574)
RPK(000): 10,900,258 (10,908,153)
Passengers carried: 2,883,687 (2,925,385)

New routes / service resumes:
UO 31/7 KWE (Guiyang)
UO 1/8 SZB (Kuala Lumpur)
CX 3/8 BRU (Brussels)
CX 11/11 ADL (Adelaide)
UO 27/11 BKI (Kota Kinabalu)
Brussels
------
(edited)
traffic figures for Jan to May (passenger carried and load factor only)

Jan
Passenger carried:
CX: 2,352,242
UO: 667,079
CX + UO: 3,019,321
Load factor:
CX: 86.4%
UO: 84.6%

Feb
Passenger carried:
CX: 2,058,938
UO:585,941
CX + UO: 2,644,879
Load factor:
CX: 82.9%
UO: 79.9%

Mar
Passenger carried:
CX: 2,256,242
UO: 616,098
CX + UO: 2,872,340
Load factor:
CX:82.7%
UO: 79.0%

Apr
Passenger carried:
CX: 2,373,541
UO: 695,607
CX + UO: 3,069,148
Load factor:
CX:86.4%
UO: 85.2%

May
Passenger carried:
CX: 2,284,812
UO: 643,322
CX + UO: 2,928,134
Load factor:
CX:84.7%
UO: 74.1%

What's surprising is the UO load factor. For a low cost airline - ouch. Scoot was 92.2%. Swire obviously haven't got the hang of how to run an LCC yet.

UO ticket with luggage runs very close to some full service airline eg HK air.

Unless the destination is solely provided by UO, I avoid it purely because its price runs so close to full service airline,

It is dragged by the weakness of the Japanese market - impacted by the earthquake rumors.

If I pay for the luggage and seats that are free with CX, it�s almost priced the same as flying with CX, and I won�t get the benefits of CX Gold.

Deleted

No reason to ever fly UO - it�s nearly the same
price as CX with a fraction of the service. They should just call it �Cathay Connect� put in their a320 business class seats and shut down the HK express brand.

Are they not the figures in brackets?

Yet to make a profit annually as well.
KA was at least profitable

Yes, indeed. Thanks!

Looking at the last available financial results for Scoot, their breakeven load factor is almost 90%! For comparison, Ryanair's is 84%. Meanwhile, even AirAsia is still not profitable with a 89% load factor.

But then, I've always scored very cheap fares with UO - significantly cheaper than the main line. Not sure how the others are playing the LCC game but they've got plenty of super specials happening throughout the year. You just need to know how to play that and make your trip truly LCC - no add-ons and be super flexible with timing.

i think another main reason is UO heavily capacity dumping to every regional destination that was ever possible near HK. the agressive expansion in just these 6 months alone is already insanity, its at least double the pre-covid size. combined with the japan fear im not suprised by this load factor.... suprised it wasnt lower.

UO has caused many foriegn airlines to leave these markets or heavily reduce capacity, because of poor passenger amounts. in the end no one wins....

but it does connect HK with a lot of new nonstop destinations.

If UO succeeds in driving out competition, then they have a good chance of "winning" unless if demand never materializes in the way they imagined, in which case they will pull out of those unprofitable routes.

Government grants help boosting the low load factor a bit I reckon. As an example, the load factor from Hong Kong to Hualien in June was 42.3%, but UO still maintains the service level. Some routes might seem "profitable" thanks to those grants.

Btw, half of UO's A320neo and an A320-200 aircraft are still grounded, which is definitely slowing down their network growth.

Apart from the other factors mentioned, UO is a heavily HK origin passenger focused airline and doesn't get the connecting traffic of CX. The market segment it serves is also lower income (yes maybe comparable after baggage fees etc. but not everyone is paying those). It might reflect that there is not enough spending power at the moment at the lower end of the HK market segment to keep those planes full in comparison to Scoot.