#Gate广场四月发帖挑战 #美军封锁霍尔木兹海峡 Strait of Hormuz Reblockade: Oil Prices Surge, Gold Plummets, Stock Markets Diverge—How Will Capital Markets Price the US-Iran Confrontation?

The US and Iran military conflict erupted on February 28, 2026, lasting 39 days before reaching a temporary ceasefire agreement on April 8. As of today (April 13), negotiations between the US and Iran have not only failed to reach an agreement but have also escalated the confrontation in the Strait of Hormuz: the US Central Command announced that on the 13th at 10 a.m. Eastern Time (which is 10 p.m. Beijing time), it will impose a blockade on all maritime traffic entering and leaving Iranian ports, but ships traveling to and from non-Iranian ports through the Strait of Hormuz will not be disturbed, meaning ships doing business with Iran are targeted.
Iran’s chief negotiator and parliamentary speaker Kalibaf mocked in response: Enjoy the current gas station prices, because under the so-called “blockade,” you will soon miss $4-5 gasoline.
Originally, Iran planned to impose a blockade on the Strait of Hormuz but conditionally open it:
Ø Cargo ships from friendly countries (China, Russia, Pakistan, Iraq, India, Bangladesh)—allowed to pass
Ø Neutral countries and US allies—charged based on national tier
Ø The US, Israel, and countries involved in aggression—absolutely prohibited from passage, with the situation further complicated:
US military: All ships to and from Iranian ports, regardless of Iran’s permission, will be intercepted
Iran: All ships from hostile countries (such as the US, Israel), whether entering or leaving Iran, will also be intercepted
The result is: two sets of interception rules overlay, making the Strait of Hormuz nearly impossible to pass safely.
For China: ships importing crude oil from Iran → face direct risk of US military interception, even if rerouted through Gulf countries like Saudi Arabia or the UAE → ships may still be intercepted or charged by Iran
The ultimate situation is: supply chains caught between two sets of rules from the US and Iran, creating a dilemma. This negotiation isn’t just about talking in circles; it’s a big trap.
So, how will the capital markets react?
As expected, at the opening today, WTI crude oil surged 9.4%, with an intraday increase of over 10%, reaching $105.27 per barrel; Brent crude hit $103.36; spot gold plummeted 2.2%, giving back all last week’s gains, trading in the $4656–$4669 per ounce range; spot silver opened more than 3% lower, with a decline approaching 1.89%; the US dollar index jumped over 40 points, breaking above 99,
while the 10-year US Treasury yield rose about 5 basis points, with prices falling.
What about the stock market? The three major US stock index futures all opened lower, down over 1%; Japan and South Korea also opened lower; China’s Shanghai Composite opened down 0.38%.
Japan and South Korea reacted more sensitively, as countries highly dependent on oil imports, with stock volatility strongly correlated with the situation in the Strait of Hormuz, or rather, highly negatively correlated with oil prices.
The US-Iran negotiations, originally scheduled for two weeks, have now failed in the first round, with subsequent talks possible—either continuing or happening alongside military actions. Here, we won’t discuss war; instead, we focus on how our investments should respond under different war scenarios.
In fact, over the past 40+ days since the outbreak, the conflict has escalated from outbreak to escalation to ceasefire, not only causing chaos in the Middle East but also triggering wild swings in global capital markets—up and down, high and low. Let’s first review the performance of various assets in the capital markets during this period:
First phase: Conflict erupts, Strait of Hormuz blockade (February 28 – March 9, 10 days)
On February 28, the US and Israel launched a joint military strike against Iran codenamed “Epic Fury,” and Iran’s Supreme Leader Khamenei was killed. Iran immediately launched “Real Commitment-4,” attacking US military bases in the Middle East and firing numerous missiles and drones at Israel. On March 3, Hezbollah officially joined the fight; on March 2, Iran began a substantial blockade of the Strait of Hormuz. By March 8, the late Supreme Leader Khamenei’s son—Mujtaba Khamenei—became Iran’s new Supreme Leader.
Second phase: Fiercer battles over energy infrastructure (March 10 – March 26, 17 days)
From March 10-13, Iran began using heavy precision-guided missiles to retaliate, while the US bombed Iran’s oil export hub at Harek Island, missing the oil facilities on the island, which accounts for about 90% of Iran’s oil exports. Iran escalated attacks in the Strait of Hormuz and surrounding areas, hitting at least three ships. By March 15, Iran’s foreign minister proposed ceasefire conditions and announced the Strait of Hormuz would not be open to US and allied ships. On March 17, Israel’s military killed two of Iran’s top leaders; on March 18, Iran and US allies attacked key energy infrastructure in the Persian Gulf. Israel attacked Iran’s South Pars gas field, which accounts for about 70-75% of Iran’s natural gas production. Qatar, an US ally, reported Iran attacked its Ras Laffan industrial city, the world’s largest liquefied natural gas export facility. On March 22, Trump demanded Iran open the strait within 48 hours or face destruction of its power plants. On March 23, Trump announced that the US and Iran were discussing ending the war—marking the first public sign of diplomatic negotiations since the conflict began. On March 25, Trump delayed the strike plan by five days citing “productive dialogue,” but Iran denied negotiations had taken place.
Third phase: Yemen Houthi rebels join the fight, diplomatic mediation (March 28 – April 8)
On March 28, Yemen’s Houthi forces joined the war, attacking Israeli military targets. From March 29 to April 5, military confrontation peaked. Iran claimed to shoot down multiple US F-35 and A-10 fighters; the US claimed to continue attacking Iranian infrastructure, but after Trump’s emotional and foul-mouthed threats, he delayed further strikes on energy facilities by a day. From April 1-7, Pakistan and China jointly called for a ceasefire. However, on the military front, Trump repeatedly issued ultimatums on social media, saying “civilization will perish,” and repeatedly postponed strike deadlines. An hour and a half before the final deadline, he suddenly announced acceptance of Pakistan’s ceasefire proposal, agreeing to a two-week ceasefire. On April 8, under Pakistan’s mediation, the US and Iran agreed to an immediate two-week ceasefire. Both sides agreed to negotiations in Islamabad on April 10. As of April 13, the temporary ceasefire remains in form, but military confrontation has significantly escalated.
As the conflict progresses, the capital markets are entirely dominated by geopolitical news, exhibiting extreme “news-driven” characteristics—asset prices fluctuate sharply and frequently between “conflict escalation” and “ceasefire negotiations.”
Crude oil: the most core and sensitive asset during the conflict. Price movements depend entirely on the smoothness of the Strait of Hormuz, a critical global oil transportation route. Escalation of conflict causes oil prices to surge sharply. For example, at the initial outbreak, Brent crude soared over 80%. When ceasefires or de-escalation occur, prices plummet—such as when the US and Iran announced a two-week ceasefire for negotiations, with international oil prices dropping over 13% in a single day.
Gold: shows a more complex pattern. Initially rising sharply at the start of the conflict, briefly reaching a new high of $5410; during escalation, it retraced over 20% from the high; after ceasefire agreements, it rebounded strongly, returning to around $4800. This seemingly counterintuitive pattern is actually due to market switching between “inflation/interest rate hike expectations” and “safe-haven” demand. Gold prices are influenced by multiple factors: safe-haven demand, inflation hedge, liquidity, and the weakening of the dollar system. At the start of the war, “safe-haven” was just a short-term market sentiment; as the conflict prolongs, gold becomes not only a safe haven but also an inflation hedge, as rising oil prices and inflation expectations push up market interest rate expectations, making high-yield assets more attractive and causing gold, a zero-yield asset, to decline. Conversely, when tensions ease, gold prices rise. Additionally, due to liquidity constraints in extreme crises, gold’s liquidity remains inferior to the dollar, as global institutions need dollars for contracts, debt repayment, and operations, which also suppresses gold prices. However, these are only short-term surface effects. Since 2023, the long-term upward trend in gold prices is driven by the “de-dollarization” wave and central bank gold reserves, which is the fundamental reason for gold’s rise. As long as the dollar system remains shaky and the global monetary system continues restructuring, gold remains in an upward channel or at least has solid support. Short-term war-related safe-haven, inflation expectations, and liquidity needs cause fluctuations in gold and the dollar, but these are minor waves within a larger cycle.
Stock markets: generally plummeted (US and Asian markets broadly down, with even circuit breakers in Japan and South Korea), under pressure and highly volatile, until the ceasefire agreement on April 8, which led to a sharp rebound.
After all, war is a risk event and a disaster for everyone. Even if short-term war benefits energy, chemicals, military industries, and other commodities through price increases, in the medium to long term, higher prices may not translate into corporate profits or change the overall risk appetite.
The US dollar: continues to strengthen. When a crisis occurs, liquidity is the top priority; global institutions need dollars to settle contracts, repay debts, and operate, causing “physical demand” for dollars to explode, with liquidity preference overwhelming all other logic.
But the dollar’s rise is not because the US is strong, but because the world is chaotic. When a global crisis hits, the dollar is no longer “America’s stock,” but everyone’s “lifesaver cash.” After all, besides the dollar, no other currency can reflect the same level of creditworthiness.
US Treasuries: the traditional safe-haven halo has faded.
Unlike previous wars where funds flooded into US Treasuries, lowering yields, this time the 10-year Treasury yield rose from 3.96% to 4.14%, defying expectations. The main reason is that investors worry that the oil price surge caused by the war will exacerbate the already high US inflation, forcing the Fed to maintain tight monetary policy or even hike rates further, especially since recent Fed meetings have considered both rate hikes and cuts. The price trends of various assets today also follow this logic. What about future trends?
Crude oil
As a physical commodity, prices mainly depend on supply and demand. Spot prices are likely to continue fluctuating with the intensity of the conflict, focusing on the developments in the Strait of Hormuz blockade. Even if the war persists, market sensitivity has increased, and oil prices will inevitably fluctuate with the conflict.
Gold
Has largely moved independently of the war, mainly driven by inflation expectations. If the US and Iran remain deadlocked, with oil prices staying high, market focus will shift to “stagflation/recession expectations,” and gold’s safe-haven attribute will become more prominent. If tensions ease and oil prices fall, inflation expectations will decline, and room for rate cuts will reopen, which is positive for gold—just a matter of time.
Dollar
During the conflict, it remains the only liquidity option; as long as the war continues, the dollar will likely stay relatively strong.
US Treasuries
Have already lost their safe-haven status amid inflation expectations.
Regardless of how the US-Iran war develops, crude oil prices are unlikely to return to pre-war levels in the short term, as inflation expectations persist, and high oil prices pass through to industry costs, putting continued pressure on Treasury prices. The stock market, affected by overall risk appetite, remains impacted by the war, but after the recent shocks, markets have already priced in the conflict, and investors are gradually desensitized. Regardless of how the US-Iran situation evolves, the medium-term pricing power in A-shares is gradually returning to domestic fundamentals. For sectors benefiting from the war, such as energy, chemicals, military, and non-ferrous metals, the investment logic should return to profit realization driven by energy substitution and supply-demand gaps, rather than short-term speculation.
Additionally, note that in March, PPI turned positive year-over-year, ending a 41-month streak of negative growth, with PPI significantly outperforming CPI (March CPI rose 1.0%, below the expected 1.2%, with wholesale pork prices continuing to decline, dragging down food prices). The PPI turning positive ahead of CPI indicates a “cost-push inflation, demand-side deflation” divergence, which is a key macroeconomic signal. Under such circumstances, market differentiation may become more pronounced, benefiting resource-related sectors (such as new energy—photovoltaics, lithium batteries, AI computing power, etc.).