Freight insurance costs have begun to rise rapidly. On April 13, the U.S. Navy launched a full-scale naval blockade of Iranian ports—the largest operation of this scale since the Korean War.
What is currently happening around the Strait of Hormuz may shape the economic reality for months ahead.
Timeline: From Strikes to Blockade
The conflict around Iran has developed rapidly. In February 2026, the United States launched Operation Epic Fury—a series of strikes on Iran’s nuclear and military infrastructure. Brent reacted with a 32% increase—the largest jump since Iraq’s invasion of Kuwait in 1990.
Iran responded by effectively blocking the Strait of Hormuz—a narrow corridor through which approximately 20% of global seaborne oil transportation passes daily. Insurance companies increased freight rates, and some vessels refused to enter the Persian Gulf.
Attacks continued until April 8, when the parties agreed to a temporary two-week ceasefire, which was supposed to include the resumption of shipping. However, by April 9, it became clear that Iran was not complying with the agreement. Instead of reopening the strait, Tehran introduced a transit fee of $2 million per vessel.
Negotiations took place in Islamabad on April 11–12, mediated by Pakistan. The round ended without results. U.S. Vice President J.D. Vance stated that “the ball is in Iran’s court.” Trump went further and, on April 13, announced a full naval blockade of Iranian ports by the U.S. Navy. Central Command clarified that the blockade would apply to the entire Iranian coastline but would not interfere with transit between non-Iranian ports.
As of April 15, the situation remains uncertain. Several vessels attempted to pass through the strait, and some were turned back. Trump hinted that negotiations could resume “within the next few days.” The ceasefire formally remains in place but expires next week (April 22).
Why Hormuz Is Not Just Another Hotspot
The Strait of Hormuz is the narrowest energy chokepoint on the planet. Millions of barrels of oil and significant volumes of liquefied natural gas pass through it every day. This supply is critical for China, India, Japan, and South Korea—countries that import a large share of their energy from Arab states.
The March report by the International Energy Agency (IEA) recorded an unprecedented event: global oil supply fell by 10.1 million barrels per day—to 97 million b/d. This is the largest supply disruption in the history of the oil market, exceeding any single crisis in the past.
For comparison: during the 1973 oil embargo, the deficit was approximately 4–5 million b/d; during Iraq’s invasion of Kuwait—about 4 million b/d. Today’s crisis exceeds both episodes, although part of the losses is offset by increased production in the United States, Brazil, and Canada.
The key problem is that even a partial restoration of supply will take time. Logistics chains are broken: tankers are in the wrong ports, insurance policies have been canceled, and supply contracts have been disrupted. Even if Hormuz fully reopens tomorrow, normalization will take several weeks.
Scenario Model: From Peace to a Supercycle
We have built a scenario model of Brent price movements depending on developments around Hormuz. The model is based on historical analogies and the current market structure.
De-escalation (peace agreement, reopening of the strait): Brent returns to around $80, i.e., approximately −$20 from current levels. This scenario assumes successful negotiations, gradual easing of sanctions, and the return of Iranian oil to the market. The probability of this scenario decreases with each day of blockade.
Blockade lasting more than 30–60 days: Brent rises to $120. A comparable situation is the market reaction to the start of strikes on Iran in the summer of 2025. Oil inventories begin to decline critically, and importing countries switch to using strategic reserves.
Blockade lasting more than 60 days: oil reaches $150. This represents a partial shock similar in scale to the Kuwait crisis of 1990, when oil prices doubled within a few months. At this level, demand destruction begins—consumers and industry reduce consumption.
Blockade lasting more than 90 days (supercycle): Brent may reach $180. The closest historical analogue is the 1973 Arab oil embargo, which increased prices by 135%. This scenario implies a complete disruption of global energy supply chains and a deep recession in most economies.
It is important to understand the asymmetry of this model. If everything goes well, oil loses about $20. If everything goes badly, it can gain up to $80. The market “pays” much less for peace than for escalation. This is a classic situation where geopolitical risk has a convex structure—which is why it attracts investor attention.
Macroeconomic Impact
The transmission chain of an oil shock into the real economy is well documented:
Rising oil prices → higher fuel and logistics costs → increased production costs → accelerated inflation → central bank response (rate hikes) → economic slowdown.
For Ukraine, the consequences are dual in nature. On the one hand, the country is a net importer of energy, so expensive oil and gas increase the trade deficit and put pressure on the hryvnia. On the other hand, Ukraine is a major exporter of agricultural products, whose prices rise along with the cost of fertilizers and logistics.
Entrepreneurs should take both of these vectors into account when planning their businesses for the coming quarters.
What This Means for the Investment Landscape
Since the beginning of the conflict in Iran, we have observed the start of a large-scale sectoral rotation—the flow of capital from the technology sector into real assets.
The logic is simple: when the world faces a physical shortage of energy, food, and security, the market revalues companies that produce these resources and lowers the valuation of companies whose business depends on cheap energy and stable supply chains.
Which sectors are likely to benefit?
First and foremost, oil-producing companies—both large integrated leaders and independent producers. The oilfield services segment—companies involved in drilling, maintenance, and transportation. Gas infrastructure is also gaining strategic importance, as LNG becomes an alternative to pipeline gas from unstable regions.
Beyond energy, attention is also drawn to agriculture (as mentioned above in the case of Ukraine), defense industry (as geopolitical tensions increase defense budgets worldwide), and uranium (as nuclear energy returns to the agenda as a stable baseload source).
Disclaimer: these observations do not constitute investment advice. Every investment decision requires individual analysis based on risk profile, horizon, and objectives. However, understanding sectoral trends helps form a more informed view of the market.
What to Watch Next
In the coming days, the market will focus on several key factors.
First, the second round of negotiations between the United States and Iran. Trump stated that discussions could resume in the near future. The market expects that a breakthrough could quickly push oil below $90, while failure could закрепить prices above $100 with potential movement toward $120.
Second, the ceasefire timeline. The two-week ceasefire expires next week. If it is not extended, the risk of full escalation increases significantly.
Third, the reaction of other players. Some European countries have announced a conference to create a multinational mission to ensure safe passage through the strait. China’s position—as the largest importer of Iranian oil—will also be critical.
Fourth, inventories. U.S. oil stocks have been rising for eight consecutive weeks, and the IEA notes that consumer countries have significant reserves to cover short-term shortages. The question is how sufficient these buffers are if the blockade continues.
Conclusion
The geopolitical environment remains the most tense since the 1970s. The Hormuz crisis is not just another news headline—it is a structural shift in the energy market, the consequences of which will be felt by every economy in the world.
For Ukrainian investors and entrepreneurs, the key conclusion is clear: ignoring what is happening in the Strait of Hormuz means ignoring the most significant factor influencing global inflation, energy prices, and capital flows in the coming months.
Artem Shcherbyna
Chief Investment Officer, Head of R&D at Capital Times
