美伊冲突致油流中断，股市核心问题浮现，能源冲击会否终结风险资产行情

The market's focus on the oil flow disruption caused by the US-Iran conflict is not solely due to the renewed rise in crude oil prices. The real issue affecting the pricing of stocks, bonds, and crypto assets is whether this energy supply shock will reignite inflation, forcing the Federal Reserve to maintain high interest rates or even consider further tightening.

In July 2026, the US-Iran military conflict escalated again, leading to a sharp decline in vessel traffic through the Strait of Hormuz. The Red Sea shipping route also faced the threat of an expanded blockade by the Houthi forces. Brent crude rose above $93 per barrel on July 22, nearing six-week highs. For the stock market, the core question has shifted from how long the conflict will last to whether corporate earnings and valuations can withstand the combined pressure of higher energy costs, higher bond yields, and weaker consumer demand.

If the oil flow disruption is a short-term event, stock markets may continue to rely on tech company earnings and AI investments to maintain resilience. If the disruption lasts for weeks or longer, investors will have to reassess the combination of inflation, interest rates, and global growth, potentially altering the pricing foundation for risk assets.

Key Points

The US-Iran conflict has significantly reduced the oil and gas transport capacity through the Strait of Hormuz, with some tankers pausing transit or changing routes.

Brent crude rose to $93.85 per barrel on July 22, 2026, while West Texas Intermediate (WTI) rose to $87.27.

Before the conflict, the Strait of Hormuz carried about one-fifth of the world's oil supply, making it one of the most critical transport chokepoints in the global energy market.

The core issue for the stock market is not a single day's oil price increase, but whether the energy shock will reignite inflation and bond yields.

Pressure is likely to increase on airlines, transportation, chemicals, consumer goods, and high-valuation tech stocks, while energy, defense, and some commodity companies may benefit relatively.

Bitcoin may be affected in the short term by risk asset sell-offs and cannot simply be considered a stable safe haven asset in a conflict environment.

Investors should focus next on actual oil flows, tanker insurance, US inflation expectations, US Treasury yields, and corporate earnings guidance.

The Strait of Hormuz Oil Flow Disruption is Transitioning from a Risk Scenario to Reality

The market impact of the US-Iran conflict is no longer limited to military action itself. With the US reinstating a maritime blockade against Iran-related shipping and Iran continuing to attack targets in the Gulf region, commercial vessel traffic through the Strait of Hormuz has noticeably declined.

According to Reuters' tracking of shipping through the Strait of Hormuz, only three commodity transport ships passed through the strait on July 16, the lowest single-day level since May. No very large crude carriers (VLCCs) or LNG carriers completed the transit that day, with some tankers anchoring or turning around near the Gulf of Oman.

This means the market's concern is no longer just whether Iran will formally declare a closure of the strait, but whether ship owners, insurers, and energy traders are already proactively reducing transits due to security risks.

Reduced Vessel Traffic Alone Can Create a Supply Shock

The strait does not need to be completely blocked for global oil flows to be significantly impacted. As long as ship owners perceive an increased risk of attacks, seizures, or military miscalculations, tankers may delay departures, change routes, or demand higher freight rates.

Insurance companies may also raise war risk premiums, shorten coverage periods, or refuse to insure certain high-risk voyages. The end result is that even if oil fields are still producing, crude oil may not reach refineries on schedule.

The supply shock may therefore first manifest in transit times, spot premiums, and refinery feedstock composition, before being reflected in official export data.

Red Sea Route Faces a Second Layer of Pressure

The risk is not limited to the Strait of Hormuz. Yemen's Houthi forces have threatened to impose a maritime blockade on ships related to Saudi Arabia and may disrupt shipping near the Bab el-Mandeb strait.

AP News reporting on Houthi shipping threats notes that the Bab el-Mandeb strait handles about 12% of global trade. Even if the Houthis cannot completely blockade the waterway, sporadic drone, missile, or mine attacks could force ships to reroute around the southern tip of Africa.

If both the Strait of Hormuz and the Bab el-Mandeb are simultaneously constrained, Middle Eastern energy exports will face transport pressure from both East and West. The global market will need to consider not just a single strait's temporary blockage, but a correlated disruption of the entire Middle Eastern energy logistics network.

Rising Oil Prices Are Changing the Stock Market's Macroeconomic Assumptions

According to Reuters' energy market report on July 22, Brent crude rose 3.12% to $93.85 per barrel, and WTI rose 3.47% to $87.27, both reaching their highest levels since June 11.

A rise in oil prices does not automatically lead to a bear market for stocks. What truly determines market direction is the duration of high oil prices, the scale of the supply disruption, and whether businesses and consumers can absorb the new costs.

The Market Previously Relied on the Disinflation Narrative

One of the key supports for the stock market was the gradual decline in US inflation, allowing the Fed to pause rate hikes and preserve room for rate cuts as the economy slowed.

An energy supply shock could disrupt this narrative. Rising crude oil prices first affect gasoline, diesel, and jet fuel, then transmit to a broader range of goods and services through costs in logistics, plastics, chemicals, agriculture, and manufacturing.

If investors begin to believe energy inflation is persistent, the bond market may raise long-term inflation compensation, and US Treasury yields could rise accordingly. High-valuation stocks would then face pressure not only from downward earnings revisions but also from valuation multiple contraction.

High Oil Prices Could Create an Environment of Coexisting Growth and Inflation

The worst combination for the stock market is not a standalone rise in oil prices, but a rise that simultaneously weakens consumption and corporate profits.

Households need to allocate more income to fuel, electricity, and transportation, potentially reducing other discretionary spending. Businesses face a choice between raising prices, compressing profit margins, or cutting costs.

This environment could create mild stagflationary pressures. Economic growth slows, but inflation does not fall quickly, making it difficult for the Fed to provide support through rate cuts. This combination is particularly adverse for stocks that already reflect high growth expectations.

The Core Question for the Stock Market is Whether Earnings Can Offset Valuation Pressure

The real test of the US-Iran conflict for stock markets is whether corporate earnings growth can continue to outpace the rise in financing and input costs.

Previously, some major indices could withstand geopolitical shocks because large tech companies had strong earnings, AI capital expenditures continued to grow, and banking performance remained resilient. However, if oil prices remain above $90 per barrel, the market needs to reassess whether these tailwinds can continue to offset macro headwinds.

Tech Stocks Are Not Immune to Interest Rate Environments

Large tech companies are generally not viewed as direct victims of higher crude oil costs, but their valuations are highly sensitive to long-term interest rates.

If energy prices push up inflation expectations, the market may reduce bets on rate cuts, and the 10-year Treasury yield could rise. A higher discount rate for future cash flows directly lowers the theoretical value of high-valuation tech companies.

AI infrastructure also requires vast amounts of data centers, electricity, copper, natural gas, and cooling equipment. Rising energy costs not only affect valuations but could also increase the actual cost of AI capital expenditures.

Therefore, whether tech stocks can continue to lead the market will depend on whether earnings growth is sufficient to cover higher discount rates and infrastructure costs.

Cyclical Industries Face Profit Margin Tests

Airlines, shipping, logistics, automotive, chemical, and industrial companies are more sensitive to fuel and raw material prices.

Some companies can pass on costs through fuel surcharges or price adjustments, but there is usually a time lag in transmission. In highly competitive or weak-demand industries, it may be difficult to pass on all costs to customers.

Retail and consumer service companies may also be indirectly affected. As household spending on energy and transportation rises, spending on dining, travel, entertainment, and non-essential items may be squeezed.

The Rise in Energy Stocks is Not Without Limits

Higher oil prices typically benefit upstream oil producers and some oilfield service companies. Improved cash flow can support dividends, share buybacks, and capital expenditures.

However, if the oil price increase ultimately triggers a global economic slowdown, expectations for energy demand will also decline. Refiners, petrochemical companies, and firms heavily reliant on specific routes could even face pressure from mismatched raw materials and logistics.

The energy sector may therefore be a relative short-term winner, but that does not mean all energy-related stocks will benefit equally.

Significant Divergence Expected Across Markets and Sectors

An energy shock does not affect all countries and assets uniformly. Dependence on crude oil imports, currency stability, fiscal subsidy capacity, and industrial structure will determine the actual impact on different markets.

Asian Crude Oil Importers Face More Direct Pressure

India, Japan, South Korea, and several Southeast Asian economies are highly dependent on energy imports. Rising oil prices can widen trade deficits, increase pressure for currency depreciation, and push up domestic inflation.

Reuters' report on global markets on July 13 showed that after the US-Iran conflict re-escalated, oil prices surged nearly 9% in a single day, putting pressure on global stock markets and pushing bond yields higher. The market reaction indicates that energy-importing countries face not only rising corporate costs but also potential capital outflows and currency pressure.

The Indian market is particularly sensitive to oil price changes, as energy import costs directly impact inflation, fiscal spending, and the current account. For governments that need to subsidize fuel prices, persistently high oil prices can also increase the fiscal burden.

The US Market Has Some Intra-Sector Hedging

The US is both a major oil consumer and a significant global oil and gas producer. High oil prices squeeze consumer purchasing power but also boost the revenue of shale oil producers and energy service companies.

This gives the US stock market some degree of intra-sector hedging capability. However, because major indices are heavily weighted towards tech and consumer companies, a rise in the energy sector may not be enough to offset the valuation decline of large-cap growth stocks.

Europe Faces Dual Constraints of Energy Security and Growth

After the previous natural gas crisis, Europe has adjusted its energy mix to some extent, but it remains sensitive to imported energy and global shipping.

A simultaneous rise in oil prices, natural gas prices, and transport insurance could once again increase industrial costs in Europe. The auto, chemical, aviation, and manufacturing sectors may face greater pressure than their US counterparts.

If the European Central Bank needs to weigh weak growth against a rebound in inflation, the risk premium on European stocks could rise further.

Which Leading Indicators Should Investors Track?

Military news can trigger short-term price volatility, but what determines medium-term market direction are quantifiable factors like oil flow, costs, and financial conditions.

Actual Vessel Transit Counts

The market first needs to observe the daily number of crude oil tankers, LNG carriers, and product tankers passing through the Strait of Hormuz.

If vessel transits recover within days, the risk premium in oil prices could decline rapidly. If transit volumes remain persistently low, even without a formal blockade, the supply disruption could gradually be reflected in refinery inventories and spot markets.

Tanker Freight Rates and War Risk Premiums

Freight and insurance costs may reflect supply chain stress earlier than benchmark oil prices.

If tanker freight rates from the Middle East to Asia or Europe continue to rise, it indicates that physical traders are still paying extra costs for transport risk. Even if Brent crude falls temporarily, end-user energy costs may not decline in tandem.

Crude Oil Term Structure

The degree to which spot prices exceed forward prices can indicate the market's assessment of short-term supply tightness.

If the premium for near-month contracts widens (backwardation), it suggests refiners and traders are willing to pay a premium for immediate delivery. Conversely, if forward prices rise but the spot structure does not tighten significantly, some of the gains may be more due to risk premiums and financial trading.

US Treasury Yields and Inflation Expectations

The bond market remains the most critical transmission channel for stock markets. Investors should monitor the 2-year and 10-year Treasury yields, the implied expectations from TIPS (Treasury Inflation-Protected Securities), and the market's repricing of the Fed's policy path.

If oil prices rise but long-term inflation expectations remain stable, stock markets may absorb the shock. If yields and inflation expectations rise simultaneously, the pressure on high-valuation assets will increase significantly.

Investors can track real-time price changes of Bitcoin and major crypto assets on MEXC, combined with crude oil, USD, and stock market data to assess cross-asset risk appetite changes.

Can the Crypto Market Serve as a Safe Haven During the Energy Shock?

The US-Iran conflict and oil flow disruption also affect Bitcoin and other digital assets, but the transmission paths are not singular.

Bitcoin has a fixed supply cap, leading some investors to view it as a hedge against currency debasement and long-term inflation. However, during sudden geopolitical shocks, Bitcoin typically still suffers from liquidity contractions and risk asset sell-offs.

Bitcoin in the Short Term More Closely Resembles a High-Liquidity Risk Asset

When rising oil prices push up the USD, Treasury yields, and market volatility, leveraged investors may need to reduce risk exposure. Bitcoin, being traded 24/7 with relatively high liquidity, often becomes one of the assets investors use to quickly raise cash.

Therefore, in the initial phase of conflict escalation, Bitcoin may decline in tandem with tech stocks, rather than immediately behaving like a gold-like safe haven.

Only when the market begins to interpret the conflict as a risk of long-term fiscal expansion, currency devaluation, or capital controls might Bitcoin's scarcity narrative regain support.

Demand for Stablecoins May Receive Structural Support

Increased volatility in energy trade, cross-border settlements, and local currencies may boost demand for USD-pegged stablecoins in some markets.

Stablecoins do not eliminate risks related to the issuer, reserve assets, or regulation, but their 24/7 transfer capability can provide a supplementary channel when traditional bank settlements are constrained. Geopolitical conflicts may therefore simultaneously depress crypto asset prices while increasing the usage demand for stablecoin infrastructure.

Altcoins Face Higher Liquidity Risks

If the energy shock leads to tighter global financial conditions, capital typically flows out of assets with lower liquidity and valuations dependent on forward narratives.

Bitcoin and Ethereum may benefit from relative capital concentration, but small-to-mid-cap tokens, leveraged protocols, and high-yield strategies face greater liquidation pressure. Investors should not infer that the entire crypto market benefits from geopolitical risk just because Bitcoin has potential inflation-hedging properties.

Exclusive Views from the MEXC Crypto Pulse Research Team

The truly important aspect of the oil flow disruption caused by the US-Iran conflict is not whether Brent crude breaks $90 on a particular trading day, but that the global market's previously relied-upon narrative of low inflation and a soft landing is being tested by reality.

Recently, the stock market has been able to tolerate wars, tariffs, and fiscal risks because investors believed inflation would eventually fall, corporate earnings could grow, and the Fed retained room for rate cuts. If energy transport is blocked for an extended period, all three of these assumptions could be challenged simultaneously. Corporate costs rise, consumer demand weakens, and central bank policy space shrinks.

The market may misinterpret the situation by simply viewing rising oil prices as a positive for energy stocks or a negative for airlines. The real transmission core lies in the bond market. If energy prices do not push up long-term inflation expectations, the impact of the US-Iran conflict on stock valuations may be limited. If oil prices, inflation expectations, and US Treasury yields rise together, valuations could adjust preemptively, even if current corporate earnings remain solid.

What investors should focus on next is not the number of military actions, but the actual transport volume through the Strait of Hormuz, tanker insurance costs, the Brent crude term structure, and US inflation expectations. These indicators help determine whether the conflict has transitioned from a news-driven shock into a sustained economic shock.

For the crypto market, the biggest takeaway is that