Tank-to-Tank vs Tank-to-Vessel vs CIF

Which structure fits your bank, budget & timeline?

Hidden buyer question:
“Which structure is actually realistic for me — not just attractive on paper?”

Introduction — Structure Is More Important Than Price

Most commodity buyers focus on price.

Professional sellers focus on structure.

In EN590, Jet A1, LNG, and bulk commodities, the transaction structure determines:

• Whether your bank participates
• Whether inspection is allowed
• Whether title can transfer
• Whether the deal closes at all

Tank-to-Tank (TTT), Tank-to-Vessel (TTV), and CIF are not interchangeable.

Each one fits a different buyer profile.

1. Tank-to-Tank (TTT)

What it is:

Title transfers inside a storage terminal tank. No vessel is involved at the transaction stage.

How it works (simplified):

• Product is already in a terminal
• Buyer pays against title transfer
• Buyer later arranges lifting

What banks think:

• High-risk if buyer lacks experience
• Title verification is critical
• Often rejected by mid-tier banks

What sellers think:

• Fast for experienced buyers
• Dangerous with new buyers
• High rejection rate for ICPOs

Who TTT is for:

• Buyers with terminal relationships
• Buyers who understand title chains
• Buyers with strong banks

Reality check:

TTT looks simple.

It is not.

2. Tank-to-Vessel (TTV)

What it is:

Title transfers during loading from tank to vessel.

How it works:

• Product sits in terminal
• Buyer nominates vessel
• SGS conducts Q&Q during loading
• Title transfers at flange or manifold

What banks think:

• Cleaner risk profile
• Clear inspection point
• Preferred over TTT

What sellers think:

• More operational work
• Lower fraud risk
• Higher execution certainty

Who TTV is for:

• Buyers with shipping access
• Buyers using LC structures
• Buyers who want SGS certainty

Reality check:

TTV is the most balanced structure.

3. CIF (Cost, Insurance & Freight)

What it is:

Seller delivers cargo to buyer’s destination port.

How it works:

• Seller controls vessel
• Seller controls insurance
• Buyer pays against shipping documents

What banks think:

• Most familiar structure
• Document-driven
• Easier LC compliance

What sellers think:

• Higher operational cost
• More exposure
• Requires serious buyer

Who CIF is for:

• Buyers without shipping capability
• Buyers using standard MT700 LC
• Buyers prioritizing simplicity

Reality check:

CIF is expensive — but realistic.

4. Timeline Comparison

• TTT: Fast on paper, slow in reality
• TTV: Medium speed, predictable
• CIF: Longer lead time, fewer surprises

5. Budget Reality

• TTT requires operational cash
• TTV requires shipping liquidity
• CIF embeds costs into price

Cheap structure often means hidden costs.

6. Why Buyers Choose the Wrong Structure

Most buyers choose based on:

• Broker promises
• Lowest headline price
• Online deal templates

Professional buyers choose based on:

• Bank acceptance
• Inspection feasibility
• Execution certainty

FAQ — Choosing the Right Structure

1. Is TTT the cheapest?
   No — it just hides costs.
2. Is CIF safer?
   Yes — but more expensive.
3. Which do banks prefer?
   CIF or TTV.
4. Can beginners do TTT?
   Almost never successfully.
5. What do sellers prefer?
   Structures that close.

Conclusion — Be Honest About Your Position

The best structure is not the cheapest.

It is the one that:

• Your bank supports
• Your team can execute
• Your timeline allows

Choose structure first.

Price comes later.

In commodities, realism beats ambition every time.