호르무즈 해협 폐쇄로 영향을 받을 3개 ETF. 매수해야 할까?

Key Points

Vanguard Energy ETF will benefit, at least temporarily, from high oil prices.

Vanguard Consumer Staples ETF is likely to suffer in the near term, but it is filled with reliable businesses.

If there's a recession, Vanguard Consumer Discretionary ETF would likely be hit particularly hard.

• 10 stocks we like better than Vanguard World Fund - Vanguard Energy ETF ›

Investors are always looking for an edge when a large global event is expected to impact financial markets. In some cases, that means buying assets to make a profit. In others, it can mean selling assets to stave off losses. The geopolitical conflict in the Middle East has some clear winners, but there are also longer-term implications investors need to consider. Here are three Vanguard exchange-traded funds (ETFs) that could be affected materially by the Middle East turmoil.

Vanguard Energy ETF: High Oil Prices

If there's an obvious winner from the impact of the geopolitical conflict in the Middle East, it's oil and natural gas producers. Such companies are what populate Vanguard Energy ETF (NYSEMKT: VDE). The ETF has an expense ratio of 0.09%, a yield of roughly 2.2%, and $13 billion in assets.

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 »

The key, however, is that its portfolio of roughly 100 holdings provides diversified exposure to the energy sector. About 39% of assets are in integrated energy companies, with nearly 23% in oil and gas exploration businesses. The rest is spread around the energy sector, but given the closure of the Strait of Hormuz, even companies in the refining arena are seeing strong results despite the high cost of oil. Indeed, the shutdown has limited the supply of both oil and the products it is turned into.

The problem is that Vanguard Energy ETF has already moved materially higher so far in 2026. It is a solid choice if you are looking for a diversified energy play, but more conservative investors should probably tread with caution. Oil prices are volatile and have always fallen after steep increases, suggesting there could be material downside risk when the conflict eventually ends.

Vanguard Consumer Staples ETF: Margins could be a problem

The closure of the Strait of Hormuz has reduced fertilizer availability. High oil prices, meanwhile, increase shipping and production costs. These will be material issues for companies that make food products and other consumer staple items. And that spells trouble for Vanguard Consumer Staples ETF (NYSEMKT: VDC).

The ETF has an expense ratio of 0.09%, a yield of 2.1%, and roughly $9 billion in assets. In an environment where consumers are already worried about rising costs, the roughly 100 consumer staples companies that populate this ETF could see margins contract as their costs rise. That would lead to weak earnings, which investors already appear to be preparing for, since the ETF has been trending lower since March.

That said, consumer staples makers sell products, like food and toothpaste, that consumers buy in both good times and bad. If Vanguard Consumer Staples ETF were to fall materially, it would probably be worth adding to your portfolio as a long-term holding.

Vanguard Consumer Discretionary ETF: A recession would be very bad news

The last ETF up is Vanguard Consumer Discretionary ETF (NYSEMKT: VCR). It is likely to pose the most risk because the portfolio is filled with businesses that are economically sensitive, like auto makers, retailers, and restaurants. If the geopolitical conflict in the Middle East pushes the global economy into a recession, Vanguard Consumer Discretionary ETF will likely fall even further than it has so far in 2026.

It has an expense ratio of 0.09%, a yield of 0.8%, and assets of around $6 billion. Like the other Vanguard ETFs above, it holds roughly 100 stocks. Given the cyclical nature of many of the stocks it owns, most investors should probably tread with caution here. Notably, the risk of a recession won't go away just because the conflict ends, given the lingering impact the event will have on global energy markets.

The best bet is likely to be consumer staples

When you step back, high oil prices are likely already reflected in the prices of energy stocks. So Vanguard Energy ETF may have more downside risk than upside opportunity. A recession would be very bad for consumer discretionary businesses, so buying Vanguard Consumer Discretionary ETF probably isn't worth it either. Vanguard Consumer Staples ETF, meanwhile, is filled with businesses that produce everyday needs. That makes it the most attractive option for most investors, though it might be best to watch for a more material downturn in the ETF before stepping aboard.

Should you buy stock in Vanguard World Fund - Vanguard Energy ETF right now?

Before you buy stock in Vanguard World Fund - Vanguard Energy ETF, 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 Vanguard World Fund - Vanguard Energy ETF 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 $580,872! Or when Nvidia made this list on April 15, 2005... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you’d have $1,219,180!

Now, it’s worth noting Stock Advisor’s total average return is 1,016% — a market-crushing outperformance compared to 197% 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 16, 2026. *

Reuben Gregg Brewer 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.