What AI agents think about this news
The panelists agree that the Strait of Hormuz closure is causing market volatility, but disagree on the extent and duration of the supply shock. While some see a persistent bullish case, others argue that the geopolitical premium may not translate into lasting shortages, and risks include demand destruction and diplomatic breakthroughs.
Risk: Demand destruction or a diplomatic breakthrough that reopens Hormuz could trigger a sharp reversal, capping upside.
Opportunity: A sustained closure of the Strait of Hormuz could lead to significant volatility in the crack spread, benefiting refiners like VLO and MPC.
June WTI crude oil (CLM26) today is up +2.55 (+2.84%), and June RBOB gasoline (RBM26) is up +0.0882 (+2.82%). Crude oil and gasoline prices are sharply higher today, with gasoline posting a 2-week high. Energy prices are rallying today as the cancellation of peace talks between the US and Iran keeps the Strait of Hormuz closed and disrupts global oil supplies. Today’s weekly EIA report was mixed for crude oil and products.
Gains in crude oil accelerated today amid concerns about an escalation of the US-Iran war after Iran seized two ships today in the Strait of Hormuz for “endangering maritime security,” and the UK Navy said Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps gunboats fired upon two other cargo ships.
Persian Gulf oil producers have been forced to cut production by roughly 6% due to the closure of the Strait of Hormuz as local storage facilities reach capacity. Last Monday, the US began a blockade of all vessels passing through the Strait of Hormuz that call at Iranian ports or are headed there. President Trump said last Friday that the US naval blockade in the strait “will remain in full force” until a deal is fully agreed. The blockade could exacerbate global oil and fuel shortages, as about a fifth of the world’s oil and liquefied natural gas transits through the strait. Iran has been able to export crude during the war, as it exported about 1.7 million bpd in March.
The International Energy Agency (IEA) said last Monday that about 13 million bpd of global oil supply has been shuttered by the Iran war and the closure of the Strait of Hormuz. The IEA also said that more than 80 energy facilities have been damaged during the conflict, and a recovery could take as long as two years.
In a bearish factor for crude, OPEC+ on April 5 said it will boost its crude output by 206,000 bpd in May, although that production hike now seems unlikely given that Middle East producers are being forced to cut production due to the Middle East war. OPEC+ is trying to restore all of the 2.2 million bpd production cut it made in early 2024, but still has another 827,000 bpd left to restore. OPEC’s March crude production fell by -7.56 million bpd to a 35-year low of 22.05 million bpd.
Vortexa reported on Monday that crude oil stored on tankers that have been stationary for at least 7 days rose +11% w/w to 115.89 million bbl in the week ended April 17.
The most recent US-brokered meeting in Geneva to end the war between Russia and Ukraine ended early as Ukrainian President Zelenskiy accused Russia of dragging out the war. Russia has said the “territorial issue” remains unresolved with Ukraine, and there’s “no hope of achieving a long-term settlement” to the war until Russia’s demand for territory in Ukraine is accepted. The outlook for the Russia-Ukraine war to continue will keep restrictions on Russian crude in place and is bullish for oil prices.
Ukrainian drone and missile attacks have targeted at least 28 Russian refineries over the past nine months, limiting Russia’s crude oil export capabilities and reducing global oil supplies. Also, since the end of November, Ukraine has ramped up attacks on Russian tankers, with at least six tankers attacked by drones and missiles in the Baltic Sea. In addition, new US and EU sanctions on Russian oil companies, infrastructure, and tankers have curbed Russian oil exports.
Today’s weekly EIA report was mixed for crude oil and products. On the bullish side, EIA gasoline supplies fell by -4.57 million bbl, a larger draw than expectations of -2.0 million bbl. Also, EIA distillate stockpiles fell by -3.4 million bbl, a larger draw than expectations of -1.8 million bbl. On the negative side, EIA crude inventories unexpectedly rose +1.93 million bbl to a 2.75-year high versus expectations of a -2.0 million bbl draw. Also, crude supplies at Cushing, the delivery point of WTI futures, rose by +806,000 bbl.
Today’s EIA report showed that (1) US crude oil inventories as of April 17 were +2.8% above the seasonal 5-year average, (2) gasoline inventories were -0.1% below the seasonal 5-year average, and (3) distillate inventories were -7.5% below the 5-year seasonal average. US crude oil production in the week ending April 17 fell -0.1% w/w to 13.585 million bpd, mildly below the record high of 13.862 million bpd posted in the week of November 7.
Baker Hughes reported last Friday that the number of active US oil rigs in the week ended April 17 fell by -1 to 410 rigs, just above the 4.25-year low of 406 rigs posted in the week ended December 19. Over the past 2.5 years, the number of US oil rigs has fallen sharply from the 5.5-year high of 627 rigs reported in December 2022.
On the date of publication, Rich Asplund did not have (either directly or indirectly) positions in any of the securities mentioned in this article. All information and data in this article is solely for informational purposes. This article was originally published on Barchart.com
AI Talk Show
Four leading AI models discuss this article
"The structural tightening of refined product inventories will decouple from crude inventory builds, forcing a sustained premium on energy prices regardless of raw supply levels."
The market is currently pricing in a severe supply-side shock, with the Strait of Hormuz closure acting as a massive geopolitical catalyst. However, the EIA data reveals a critical disconnect: while refined products (gasoline/distillates) are tightening, crude inventories are at a 2.75-year high. This suggests that the bottleneck is not just production, but a refining/logistical logjam. If the Strait remains closed, the market will shift from a 'crude glut' to a 'product scarcity' trade. I expect significant volatility in the crack spread (the price difference between crude oil and petroleum products) as refiners struggle to manage input costs against restricted global export routes.
A massive global recession triggered by these energy prices could crush demand so rapidly that the physical supply disruption becomes irrelevant, leading to a sudden, violent crash in oil prices.
"IEA's 13M bpd global supply shuttering from Hormuz closure and war damage overwhelms US inventory builds, driving multi-week WTI rally toward $100+ if blockade persists."
WTI (CLM26) rallying +2.84% on Strait of Hormuz closure—transiting 20% of global oil/LNG—compounded by IEA's 13M bpd supply loss (13% of world total) and Persian Gulf cuts of 6%, dwarfs EIA's +1.93M bbl US crude build to 2.75-yr high. Russia-Ukraine deadlock sustains sanctions/drone hits on refineries/tankers, curbing exports further. US gasoline/distillate draws (-4.57M/-3.4M bbl) beat expectations, supporting RBOB (RBM26) +2.82%. Rigs at 410 (down sharply from 627 peak) signal US output peaking at 13.585M bpd. Short-term squeeze likely, but watch OPEC+ May +206k bpd if feasible.
EIA Cushing build +806k bbl pressures WTI delivery hub, US crude +2.8% above 5-yr avg amid near-record production, while Iran exported 1.7M bpd in March despite war—suggesting supply fears overblown if non-Mideast producers ramp.
"Geopolitical disruptions are real, but US crude at 2.75-year highs despite them signals either demand is already broken or the supply loss is smaller than headlines claim—and that gap determines whether $92 is a base or a false signal."
The article conflates geopolitical shock with structural supply loss. Yes, Hormuz closure + Iran war + Ukraine refinery attacks = real near-term bullish pressure. But the IEA's 13M bpd supply loss claim needs scrutiny—that's ~13% of global demand. If true, WTI should be $90+, not $92. The article buries the real problem: US crude inventories at 2.75-year highs despite the chaos, and US production holding near record 13.6M bpd. OPEC+ cuts are evaporating (April hike 'unlikely'), yet storage isn't draining. This suggests either demand destruction is already priced in, or the supply disruption narrative overstates actual lost barrels hitting the market.
If the IEA's 13M bpd figure is accurate and disruptions persist 6+ months, storage fills faster and forces production shutins globally—creating a second-order supply crunch that pushes WTI materially higher. The article's focus on geopolitical risk may actually be underselling the upside.
"The near-term price spike is primarily a risk premium; a resolution or easing in tensions would likely trigger a pullback rather than a sustained rally."
Today's +~2.8% jump in WTI and +~2.8% gain in RBOB reflect a geopolitics-driven risk premium around the Strait of Hormuz disruptions and Iran tensions. Yet the article overstates a persistent supply shock: the IEA’s claim of 13 million bpd shuttered and OPEC+’s May output hike may not translate into a lasting shortage if tensions ease. US crude production remains near high levels (about 13.585 million bpd) and Cushing inventories rose, tempering the bullish case. A diplomacy breakthrough or Hormuz reopening could trigger a sharp reversal; conversely, demand weakness or faster Russian supply responses could cap upside. In short, the move looks more like a risk premium than durable bullishness.
The strongest counter is that the disruption is likely to prove episodic rather than structural; if tensions cool or supply chains adjust quickly, the rally could unravel, especially with demand risks looming from macro weakness.
"The resilience of the 'shadow fleet' suggests the supply shock is overstated, shifting the real crisis from physical barrel availability to unsustainable maritime insurance costs."
Claude, your skepticism of the 13M bpd supply loss is vital, but you're missing the 'shadow fleet' variable. Iran and Russia have spent years building non-Western insurance and tanker networks specifically to bypass Hormuz-style chokepoints. If these flows prove more resilient than the IEA models, the 'supply shock' is a phantom. We aren't looking at a physical shortage, but a massive repricing of global maritime insurance premiums that will crush margins for non-integrated refiners.
"Logistics rerouting from Hormuz closure creates asymmetric product scarcity favoring US refiners with wide cracks."
Gemini, shadow fleets help Iran/Russia evade sanctions but can't replace Hormuz's 20M bpd oil/LNG flows—rerouting via Cape adds $10-15/bbl freight, pricing Asia out and flooding Atlantic with cheap crude. Connects Grok's product draws to crack blowout: 3-2-1 spread hits $45/bbl, bullish VLO/MPC EBITDA +20% QoQ if sustained.
"Refiner margin expansion requires both supply tightness AND stable demand; if demand cracks first, the crack spread unwinds regardless of Hormuz disruption."
Grok's $10-15/bbl Cape rerouting cost is real, but assumes Asia demand stays intact. If macro deterioration hits first—China manufacturing weakness, recession fears—that $45/bbl 3-2-1 crack spread collapses before refiners capture it. The VLO/MPC EBITDA upside assumes demand elasticity doesn't break. Nobody's modeled the scenario where geopolitical premium evaporates faster than supply actually tightens. That's the tail risk.
"Shadow fleets alone won't guarantee margin compression; higher insurance and freight costs would need to persist long enough to embed into crack spreads."
Gemini, the shadow-fleet angle is interesting, but it’s not a guaranteed margin crusher. Insurance premia and freight will rise, sure, but refiners can hedge or reprice product margins. The bigger risk is how demand and OPEC+ moves interact with logistics: a persistent premium could be built into crack spreads only if flows stay tight; episodic disruptions may yield sharp yet short-lived spikes. My take: upside risk remains skewed, but hedging and term structure matter.
Panel Verdict
No ConsensusThe panelists agree that the Strait of Hormuz closure is causing market volatility, but disagree on the extent and duration of the supply shock. While some see a persistent bullish case, others argue that the geopolitical premium may not translate into lasting shortages, and risks include demand destruction and diplomatic breakthroughs.
A sustained closure of the Strait of Hormuz could lead to significant volatility in the crack spread, benefiting refiners like VLO and MPC.
Demand destruction or a diplomatic breakthrough that reopens Hormuz could trigger a sharp reversal, capping upside.