Market evolution: Aromatic naphtha (CN 270750) — 2015–2025

Introduction

This report examines the evolution of EU trade in aromatic hydrocarbon mixtures classified under customs code 270750 over the 2015–2025 period. Aromatic naphtha is a key petrochemical feedstock used in the production of plastics, synthetic fibres, and other chemical intermediates. Over the past decade, the EU's position in this market has undergone a profound structural transformation: the bloc shifted from being a substantial net exporter — with a trade surplus of €657 million in 2015 — to a net importer, recording a deficit of €193 million by 2025. This reversal was driven by the simultaneous collapse of Asian export markets, a dramatic reconfiguration of import supply chains following the Russia–Ukraine conflict, rising domestic consumption, and a sustained increase in unit prices. The analysis below is structured around three main dynamics.

1. From Net Exporter to Net Importer: The Structural Reversal of EU Trade

EU aromatic naphtha exports fell by nearly 40% in volume over the decade

Between 2015 and 2025, EU exports of CN 270750 declined from 2.65 million tonnes to 1.60 million tonnes — a drop of 39.6%. Export value fell from €1.38 billion to €1.00 billion (−27.4%), cushioned only partially by a 20.2% rise in unit export prices (from €523/t to €628/t). The collapse was most pronounced in flows to Asia, which had previously constituted the EU's largest export market. Over the full decade, the trade balance swung from a surplus of €657 million to a deficit of €193 million, with the worst year recording a shortfall of €852 million. Net import reliance moved from −40.0% (indicating a net-exporting position) to +17.2% (indicating net import dependence).

Imports grew steadily, driven by rising domestic demand

On the import side, volumes rose from 1.39 million tonnes to 1.79 million tonnes (+29.2%), and import value climbed from €725 million to €1.20 billion (+64.9%). The import price increase (from €523/t to €667/t, +27.5%) outpaced the export price increase, reflecting both tighter global supply and the post-2020 energy price environment. Import prices consistently exceeded export prices from 2021 onward, suggesting that the EU was sourcing from more expensive or more distant suppliers following the loss of cheap Russian volumes.

EU production expanded strongly while export propensity collapsed

Perhaps the most revealing indicator is the divergence between EU production volumes and export propensity. EU production of aromatic naphtha grew from 2.68 billion kg to 4.00 billion kg, an increase of 49.3% in quantity and 84.6% in value (from €1.30 billion to €2.40 billion). Yet the share of production that was exported — the export propensity — fell from 61.2% to just 33.6% (−45.0%). This implies that the EU's aromatic naphtha output is increasingly absorbed by its own petrochemical sector rather than shipped abroad. Combined with rising imports, this suggests a significant increase in apparent EU domestic consumption over the decade. Trade intensity also declined, from 70.8% to 57.0% (−19.4%), further confirming a structural shift toward greater domestic orientation.

Sources: General Overview, Net import reliance, Export propensity, Production volumes

2. A Tectonic Reshuffling of Trade Partners

China and Southeast Asian markets all but disappeared as EU export destinations

The most striking geographic shift occurred on the export side. In 2015, China was the EU's top export destination for CN 270750, absorbing €607 million in value. By 2025, Chinese imports from the EU had fallen to just €2.5 million — a decline of 99.6%. Similarly, exports to Singapore fell from €165 million to €1.8 million (−98.9%), and exports to Malaysia dropped from €114 million to essentially zero (−100%). These three markets alone accounted for a combined loss of approximately €883 million in annual export value. The near-total evaporation of Asian demand — likely linked to the expansion of regional refining capacity in China and the broader shift in global petrochemical trade flows — fundamentally altered the EU's export geography.

At the same time, new or previously minor export destinations grew sharply. Exports to Gibraltar — a key maritime bunkering hub — surged from €14 million to €352 million (+2,340%). Within the EU, Belgium's exports grew from €30 million to €155 million (+416%), and France went from €0.2 million to €133 million, suggesting a reorientation of EU trade toward intra-European and nearby Mediterranean routes. Exports to the United States remained relatively resilient, declining only 16.2% from €200 million to €168 million.

Source: Top partners by value — exports

Türkiye replaced Russia as the EU's dominant import supplier

On the import side, the Russia–Ukraine conflict and subsequent EU sanctions fundamentally altered supply chains. Russian imports of aromatic naphtha, which stood at €200 million in 2015 (making Russia the second-largest supplier after the United Kingdom), fell to just €89,000 by 2025 — effectively a complete cessation (−100%).

The void was filled almost entirely by Türkiye, which grew from €27 million in 2015 to €594 million in 2025 (+2,062%). By 2025, Türkiye alone accounted for nearly half of all EU imports by value. Other suppliers also expanded to fill the gap: Azerbaijan grew from €4 million to €34 million (+673%), and the catch-all category of "unspecified territories" rose from €27 million to €210 million (+691%). The United Kingdom, while remaining the second-largest supplier, saw its share decline from €231 million to €177 million (−23.5%). Norway also contracted, from €48 million to €20 million (−59%).

Source: Top partners by value — imports

Intra-EU trade consolidated around Northwestern European hubs

Within the EU, the Netherlands remained the single largest hub for both imports and exports. Dutch imports grew from €400 million to €704 million (+75.9%), reinforcing Rotterdam's role as the EU's petroleum gateway. Dutch exports, though falling sharply from €983 million to €210 million (−78.6%), still represented the largest member-state export figure — a decline largely attributable to the loss of the China-bound arbitrage that Rotterdam historically facilitated.

Sectoral specialisation data for 2025 reveals a distinct geographic pattern: Nordic and peripheral EU members (Sweden, Denmark, Finland, Portugal) show the highest revealed comparative advantage in this product, while Central and Eastern European members (Romania, Greece, Croatia, Slovenia, Czechia) display negative RSCA values, indicating they are net importers. Cyprus saw the most dramatic import growth among EU members (from €19 million to €292 million, +1,432%), possibly reflecting the island's role as a Mediterranean transhipment point.

Source: Top reporters by value

3. Rising Prices, Diverging Volatility, and Growing Import Concentration

Unit prices surged across both imports and exports, peaking during the 2022 energy crisis

Both import and export unit prices of aromatic naphtha rose substantially over the decade. Export prices increased from €523/t to €628/t (+20.2%), while import prices rose from €523/t to €667/t (+27.5%). The minimum prices recorded across the period — €345/t for exports and €357/t for imports — occurred during the low-price environment of 2015–2016, while the maximum (€956/t and €918/t respectively) was reached during the energy price spike of 2022. From 2021 onward, import prices consistently exceeded export prices, suggesting that the EU was forced to source from more expensive suppliers following the loss of Russian volumes and that the import market had become structurally tighter than the export market.

Export flows exhibited extreme volatility, particularly to Asian destinations

The coefficient of variation of export values was markedly higher than that of imports for most partner countries. Exports to Indonesia (CV 2.22), Singapore (1.48), China (1.42), Malaysia (1.17), and Canada (1.50) all showed very high instability, consistent with the boom-and-bust pattern of Asian demand over the decade. By contrast, the most volatile import partners — Saudi Arabia (0.92), Ukraine (0.93), and Libya (0.98) — still exhibited lower variance. The United Kingdom stood out as the most stable partner on both sides of the ledger (CV 0.33 for imports, 0.57 for exports), reflecting the depth and continuity of cross-Channel trade.

Three major price shocks were detected in the data:

• Singapore, 2022 — A price abnormality of 22.2σ coincided with a +358% unit-price shift, affecting 16.4% of total export value. This shock is consistent with the broader global energy market turbulence triggered by the Russia–Ukraine war.

• Indonesia, 2019 — A +175% price shift with a 14.5σ abnormality, capturing 6.5% of export value. This earlier shock may reflect regional supply disruptions or arbitrage dislocations in Southeast Asian markets.

• United Kingdom, 2022 — A +95.5% price shift (5.5σ), capturing 6.8% of export value. This likely reflects both the global energy shock and post-Brexit trade frictions affecting cross-Channel flows.

Import concentration increased sharply as Russian supply was replaced by Turkish dominance

The Herfindahl-Hirschman Index (HHI) for import concentration by value rose from 2,476 to 4,008 (+61.9%) — a level that signals a highly concentrated import market. This increase reflects the growing dominance of Türkiye as a single supplier, replacing the more diversified (albeit Russia-heavy) import base of 2015. In volume terms, the HHI followed a similar trajectory, rising from 2,587 to 4,105 (+58.7%).

By contrast, export concentration by value declined from 2,441 to 1,794 (−26.5%), as the EU's exports shifted away from the heavily concentrated China/Singapore/Malaysia cluster and became more evenly distributed among smaller destinations. While this diversification might appear positive from a risk perspective, it occurred in the context of an overall decline in export volumes and value, meaning the EU is exporting less to more places rather than more to more places.

Source: Concentration HHI

Conclusion

The decade 2015–2025 witnessed a fundamental restructuring of EU trade in aromatic naphtha. The EU transitioned from a position of net self-sufficiency — with a comfortable trade surplus and over 60% of its production destined for export — to one of net import dependence, with net import reliance reaching +17.2% by 2025.

This transformation was driven by three converging forces. First, the near-total loss of Asian export markets — above all China (−99.6%), Singapore (−98.9%), and Malaysia (−100%) — eliminated nearly €900 million in annual export revenue. Second, the geopolitical disruption of Russian energy supply chains after 2022 removed a €200 million import source virtually overnight, creating space for Türkiye to emerge as the EU's dominant supplier at €594 million — a concentration that raises new single-point vulnerability risks, as reflected in the import HHI climbing to 4,008. Third, a substantial expansion of EU domestic production (from 2.68 to 4.00 billion kg) combined with declining export propensity (from 61.2% to 33.6%) indicates that the EU's petrochemical sector is increasingly absorbing output internally rather than shipping it abroad.

Meanwhile, export flows became both smaller and more volatile, with extreme price shocks detected in several Asian-bound trade corridors. The EU's aromatic naphtha market at the end of the period is structurally more inward-looking and more dependent on a narrower set of external suppliers than it was at the start — a shift with clear implications for supply-chain resilience and European industrial policy.