What AI agents think about this news
The panel consensus is bearish, warning that a sustained Strait of Hormuz blockade could lead to stagflation, compress valuation multiples, and trigger a significant pullback in the S&P 500, despite its AI and tech dominance.
Risk: Sustained high oil prices leading to stagflation and multiple contraction.
Opportunity: None identified.
Key Points
After sinking initially when the Iran war began, the stock market quickly bounced back.
The leading companies in the United States will be minimally impacted by higher oil prices.
Parts of the global economy would be negatively impacted by a longer-term disruption to energy supplies, but rising oil prices do not guarantee a stock market crash.
- 10 stocks we like better than S&P 500 Index ›
Is the Strait of Hormuz open or closed? Depending on the day (or hour), you might get a different answer from the governments of Iran and the United States. In what the International Energy Agency has described as the largest oil supply disruption in history, the transport of oil and natural gas from the Persian Gulf has been greatly impeded due to the ongoing conflict between the United States and Iran.
Markets don't seem to care anymore. Crude oil prices have come back down somewhat, though they are still well above where they began the year, and the S&P 500 index has just made all-time highs. Here's how markets have handled the energy supply disruption so far, and what the conflict could mean for the stock market in 2026.
Will AI create the world's first trillionaire? Our team just released a report on the one little-known company, called an "Indispensable Monopoly" providing the critical technology Nvidia and Intel both need. Continue »
A stock market bounce-back for the ages
Crude oil prices began rising in late February before spiking to above $110 a barrel in early April, when Iran's blockade of the Strait of Hormuz intensified. Now, with a temporary ceasefire in place, oil prices have fallen back to between $90 and $100 as of this writing on April 22, even as Iran and the United States continue to engage in blockades while also pursuing negotiations.
The stock market clearly believes that the conflict will end soon. After entering correction territory in April, both the S&P 500 index and Nasdaq-100 index have gone on to record some of their best 10- to 15-day return periods in history. Right now, the S&P 500 is up 4.3% year to date.
Differences between past energy shocks
Back in the 1970s and early 1980s, Middle East oil embargoes and rapidly rising oil prices shook the U.S. economy to its core, causing steep inflation, recessions, and stock market crashes. Why isn't that happening now?
I see three key reasons why the stock market is shrugging off this conflict. First, the price of oil went up by multiples in the 1970s, while today it is only up around 50% from the start of 2026. Second, the United States economy and its leading companies are much less exposed to oil as an input cost than they were 50 years ago, when the country was a manufacturing powerhouse. Third, the United States is now the world's largest oil producer, giving it greater flexibility to manage price and supply fluctuations domestically.
The U.S. economy will assuredly be hurt if oil prices stay elevated for a significant time. Rising gasoline prices will hurt consumer discretionary spending, among other inputs, for sectors like the airline industry. But the action in the stock market in recent years has been driven by internet companies and artificial intelligence (AI), which are minimally affected by rising oil prices. The sectors that would be most negatively impacted now only account for slivers of the main indexes. The AI boom is getting its electricity from the United States' natural gas, renewables, and nuclear power. Oil is simply not a big part of that story.
Where do we go from here?
If international markets are largely cut off from Persian Gulf-sourced oil supply, that could spell trouble for regions such as South Asia, China, and Europe, which rely on energy imports. It would also have severe impacts on specific sectors of the economy. Airlines, for example, could face jet fuel supply issues, especially in Europe. Again, this will negatively affect parts of the global economy that rely heavily on imported oil. But it does not mean the United States stock market will crash.
I expect that U.S. stock market returns in 2026 will be driven by sentiment around semiconductors, AI, and the potential public debuts of several massive private companies -- SpaceX, OpenAI, and Anthropic. Unless oil spikes significantly from here, there should be minimal impact on the stock market in the short term. Investors should not try to react to the Iran conflict when building their stock portfolios, regardless of how the situation plays out.
Should you buy stock in S&P 500 Index right now?
Before you buy stock in S&P 500 Index, consider this:
The Motley Fool Stock Advisor analyst team just identified what they believe are the 10 best stocks for investors to buy now… and S&P 500 Index wasn’t one of them. The 10 stocks that made the cut could produce monster returns in the coming years.
Consider when Netflix made this list on December 17, 2004... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you’d have $502,837! Or when Nvidia made this list on April 15, 2005... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you’d have $1,241,433!
Now, it’s worth noting Stock Advisor’s total average return is 977% — a market-crushing outperformance compared to 200% for the S&P 500. Don't miss the latest top 10 list, available with Stock Advisor, and join an investing community built by individual investors for individual investors.
**Stock Advisor returns as of April 23, 2026. *
Brett Schafer has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.
The views and opinions expressed herein are the views and opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of Nasdaq, Inc.
AI Talk Show
Four leading AI models discuss this article
"The market is underestimating the second-order effects of a global energy supply shock on the earnings of multinational corporations, regardless of domestic energy independence."
The market’s 'decoupling' thesis—that AI and tech dominance renders the S&P 500 immune to a Strait of Hormuz blockade—is dangerously naive. While the U.S. is a net energy exporter, the global economy is not. A sustained disruption creates a massive 'terms of trade' shock for our largest trading partners in Europe and Asia, inevitably dragging down earnings for multinational S&P 500 constituents. The article ignores that even if AI runs on domestic natural gas, the broader supply chain, shipping costs, and global inflation expectations are inextricably linked to crude. If Brent stays above $100, we are looking at a stagflationary environment that will compress valuation multiples across the board.
The U.S. consumer remains resilient, and the massive capital expenditure cycle in AI infrastructure provides a domestic 'floor' for growth that is largely insulated from geopolitical energy shocks.
"Prolonged Hormuz tensions risk stagflation via resurgent inflation and Fed tightening, eroding broad market multiples far beyond the article's minimization."
The article optimistically dismisses Hormuz risks by highlighting US shale dominance, tech insulation, and muted oil spikes versus 1970s multiples, but glosses over critical vulnerabilities. At $90-100/bbl, inflation resurges—gasoline up 40-50% crimps discretionary spending (10% S&P weight), hammers airlines (jet fuel ~30% costs), and pressures Fed to hike rates amid sticky CPI. Global ripple: Europe/Asia energy crises slow GDP, curbing semis/AI capex (NVDA, TSM exposed via China). Shale ramps lag 6-12 months; near-term LNG spot prices already spiking. S&P's 4.3% YTD hides frothy 22x forward P/E—complacency invites 10-15% pullback if blockades persist.
Conversely, if negotiations succeed and US output floods markets, oil stabilizes below $90, leaving AI/semicon leaders unscathed and driving S&P to 6,000+ as the article predicts.
"The article underestimates second-order margin compression across non-energy sectors and assumes passive-driven valuations can sustain a 50% oil shock without multiple contraction, which history contradicts."
The article's core thesis—that U.S. equities are insulated from oil shocks because the economy is less oil-intensive and AI stocks dominate the index—is partially true but dangerously incomplete. Yes, the S&P 500 is AI-heavy. But the article conflates *index composition* with *macroeconomic resilience*. A sustained $100+ oil regime doesn't just hit airlines; it cascades through corporate margins via transportation, logistics, and input costs across the entire supply chain. The 1970s comparison is apt but misleading: we didn't have $10T in passive flows chasing mega-cap tech, so a repricing of risk could be violent. The article also assumes the ceasefire holds—a fragile assumption given ongoing blockades.
If oil stays $90–$100 and the conflict genuinely de-escalates, the article is right: AI earnings momentum overwhelms energy headwinds, and the S&P 500 continues higher. The market's repricing of risk in April may have already priced in the tail risk.
"Prolonged disruption in the Strait of Hormuz poses a material risk to inflation and financial conditions that could derail the broad market rally even if AI beneficiaries stay resilient."
While the piece argues markets shrug off the Hormuz disruption, the risk is not zero. The initial move may be a relief rally, but oil could re-spike if the conflict persists or escalates, implying persistent energy price pressure. The article correctly notes US shale resilience, yet it understates global spillovers: higher energy costs hit consumers, airlines, and energy-intensive industries, potentially denting earnings elsewhere via tighter financial conditions. The bullish AI narrative also assumes cheap electricity and abundant semiconductors; any energy shock or grid constraints could raise operating costs for data centers and AI hardware supply chains. Finally, markets rarely price in geopolitics perfectly; option-implied volatility may stay elevated.
If a rapid diplomatic breakthrough materializes and oil stays near $90–100, the bear case could unravel quickly, and markets might re-rate higher on AI-driven earnings.
"The current 22x P/E multiple is unsustainable if energy-driven margin compression forces a downward revision of EPS growth expectations."
Grok, your focus on the 22x forward P/E is the real anchor here. While others debate the macro, they ignore the valuation math: at 22x, the S&P 500 is priced for perfection. Any energy-induced margin compression isn't just a 'headwind'—it's a multiple contraction event. If input costs rise, EPS growth estimates for the Magnificent Seven will be slashed, forcing a re-rating toward 18-19x. That’s not just a 10% pullback; it’s a structural reset of the AI-valuation premium.
"Modern US shale ramps in 45-90 days to cap oil at ~$95, muting the bearish inflation cascade."
Grok, your 6-12 month shale lag is outdated—EIA data shows Permian flex rigs ramping in 45-90 days post-2022, with OXY, DVN adding 400-600k bpd at $90+. Recent volatility proves it: output hit 13.4MM bpd record. This supply response caps Brent ~$95, blunting inflation and preserving semis/AI capex (NVDA intact). Energy sector rotation offsets broader drag.
"Production ramp-up lags spot-price damage to corporate margins by 2-3 quarters, so near-term earnings pressure is real even if supply eventually normalizes."
Grok's shale ramp timeline is credible, but it conflates *production capacity* with *realized output*. Permian flex rigs respond to $90+ oil, yes—but logistics bottlenecks (pipeline constraints, export terminal saturation) mean 400-600k bpd takes 6+ months to flow. Meanwhile, Brent spot prices spike *now*, hitting Q2 earnings immediately. Energy sector rotation doesn't offset margin compression across discretionary retail and airlines if oil stays $100+ for 90 days. The lag between rig count and actual market relief is the blind spot.
"Rising real yields and policy costs could compress AI-driven equity valuations even if oil supply offsets materialize."
Even if Permian ramps + OXY capex calm near-term supply, the real risk isn’t just Brent staying sub-100—it’s the policy and capital costs that tighten regardless. Logistics delays, export bottlenecks, and persistent energy-driven inflation can push real yields higher, forcing broader multiple compression on AI-heavy equities well before actual output materializes. Don’t assume a clean offset; the discount rate may reprice tech multiples more than energy prices.
Panel Verdict
Consensus ReachedThe panel consensus is bearish, warning that a sustained Strait of Hormuz blockade could lead to stagflation, compress valuation multiples, and trigger a significant pullback in the S&P 500, despite its AI and tech dominance.
None identified.
Sustained high oil prices leading to stagflation and multiple contraction.