Markets are preparing for a possible US war with Iran. Who wins, who loses

No breakthrough is expected in the ongoing negotiations between Washington and Tehran on the nuclear program yet — the US war with Iran may begin within a few weeks, Axios reported. According to one of the advisers to the American President Donald Trump, the probability of such a development is 90%. The markets are already reacting: oil is getting more expensive, and investors are calculating what will happen if the Strait of Hormuz, the most important fuel transportation route, is under threat. Izvestia investigated the threat of a possible escalation, who would benefit and who would be at risk, and whether the conflict would trigger a new commodity shock.

Primary risks

- From an economic point of view, the market at times of military escalation in the region almost always boils down to one question: will the physical flow of oil through the Strait of Hormuz be disrupted? It is one of the most important oil arteries in the world: in 2024, an average of 20 million barrels per day passed through the strait, which is about 20% of global consumption. Plus, significant volumes of LNG are transported through it, primarily from Qatar — about one fifth of global supplies. Asian countries are the recipients of 82% of the gas transported through the Strait of Hormuz. 12% goes to Europe, which is not much, but given the structural features of the European market, the effect of any potential supply problems will be disproportionately strong.

- Although Iran is unlikely to close the Strait of Hormuz for a long time (because it would damage it), even a temporary inability to transport oil and gas can lead to significant supply delays and increased transportation costs. This potential risk is enough to raise global energy prices. During the last round of tension in June 2025, when Iran's nuclear facilities were attacked, experts from Oxford Economics predicted what would happen to the cost of oil if Tehran disrupted shipping. It turned out to be $115 per barrel. But there were also higher estimates — $150 per barrel in case of a blockade.

- Asian countries may feel the most serious consequences of the closure of the Strait of Hormuz during a potential conflict. According to the US Energy Information Administration, Asian markets account for about 84% of the oil that passed through the strait in 2024. European buyers will also suffer, as oil flows through the strait not only from Iran, but also from Iraq, Saudi Arabia and other Persian Gulf countries. The global rise in energy prices guaranteed by this development will eventually hit consumers, to whom suppliers, wholesalers and retailers will partially shift their increased costs.

- In case of closure of the strait or threat to the safety of ships against the background of the conflict, a jump in prices for sea freight is expected. After the attacks on Iranian nuclear facilities by the United States in June last year, the rates for chartering ships passing through the strait more than doubled. Analysts from Clarksons Research reported that the cost of one day of freight for large-capacity tankers going from the Persian Gulf to China jumped from $20,000 to $50,000 in just a few days. The rising cost of transportation affects supply chains and inevitably leads to an increase in retail prices for goods. The war is turning "shipping" into a new source of inflation.

- Another nuance is that in the context of escalation, flight zones are being closed, fuel consumption is increasing due to the need to rebuild routes, flight delays are occurring, and insurance premiums are rising. The longer the flight path, the higher the fuel consumption and CO2 emissions. Thus, due to hotbeds of tension on some air routes between Europe and Asia, the costs of carriers increased to almost 40%. This directly affects tourist demand and "fast" B2B (business trips, urgent deliveries), as well as indirectly affects the inflation of services.

Nuclear breakthrough: Will the US and Iran reach a new deal

Despite the dialogue, the US military is preparing for a military operation against the Islamic Republic.

The copper issue

- Another important aspect is that Iran is among the top ten countries in terms of copper reserves (according to some estimates, they amount to 40-60 million tons, which is 4-6% of world reserves).

- Any destabilization in the Islamic Republic without changing supply chains could strengthen the position of China, which dominates the processing and refining of copper. At the same time, China is the main buyer of Iranian copper. If Iran remains isolated and does not wallow in chaos, then copper exports will go through countries that are ready to work in the sanctions circuit, primarily China. In this case, Iran becomes more dependent on one major buyer, which strengthens the latter's negotiating position.

- At the same time, Trump's Iranian campaign can be seen as an attempt to take control of copper resources, which the American economy urgently needs. But such a scenario looks weak, especially in the context of a large-scale war: strikes increase the risks to mines, energy supply, logistics and capital. Mining involves multi—year investment cycles and complex infrastructure, and policies can change at least every four years. In this case, a stable political deal will be required — without it, any "resource goal" will crumble. And even if the sanctions are partially lifted, banks, insurers and public companies will be careful — after the military conflict, the country remains a "high-risk jurisdiction."

Gold and USD

- The war increases the demand for safe haven assets: financial markets usually switch from the "seeking profitability" mode to the "saving money and liquidity" mode. The trend was fully demonstrated in 2025, when the price of gold set 53 historical highs (we wrote more about this here). In times of uncertainty, it is more important for an investor to be sure that an asset can be sold quickly and that the rules of the game will not change tomorrow. As a result, gold is going up, credit spreads are widening, and capital for emerging markets is becoming more expensive.

- In addition, with a sharp increase in geopolitical risks, the dollar traditionally temporarily strengthens. The reason lies not in sympathy for the United States, but in the structure of the global financial system: the dollar is the main settlement currency of commodity trading and an important "safe haven" tool for a huge number of participants. During periods of escalation, many players tend to transfer capital into dollar instruments as the most liquid. In addition, if countries have dollar debts, in case of instability they tend to buy currency in advance to service their obligations. This in itself creates additional demand for USD. At the same time, if the dollar strengthens and spreads grow, it becomes harder to service obligations, and new loans become more expensive. If investors avoid risk altogether, market access may be temporarily closed. As a result, countries either have to spend reserves or impose stricter budget discipline. This is the "geopolitics tax" that countries with weak financial stability pay. The United States will benefit from this — they receive capital inflows into dollar assets.

Nuclear bargaining: what Iran is ready to exchange for US guarantees

Tehran can offer Washington economic benefits

Who's in the plus, who's in the minus

- In a military scenario, those whose incomes grow along with the price of risk win. These are mainly oil and gas exporters who sell a barrel for more if their own infrastructure and export channels are not affected. The most obvious beneficiaries are Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Kuwait, Qatar, provided that the conflict does not paralyze their routes. Russia wins only in a soft scenario — with rising oil prices and maintaining transport accessibility. However, in the event of a serious escalation, increased maritime control and increased insurance, the effect may be negative: the price is higher, but it is more difficult to sell and deliver.

- Insurance and freight providers will obviously benefit: when the route becomes more dangerous, premiums and rates usually increase. Defensive assets will also benefit, because the war raises the demand for liquidity and hedge, even if they face a partial rollback during de-escalation.

- Major energy importers in Asia and Europe are losing out: historically, a significant share of supplies through Hormuz went to Asia, so any supply squeeze affects their trade balance and inflation. At the industry level, airlines, logistics, and all energy-intensive production are the first to suffer. The gas circuit is also vulnerable: even if Europe physically receives a smaller share of Qatari LNG, the global price usually adjusts under stress through competition for spot cargoes, and this can raise the cost of energy.

- In general, emerging markets with high external debt will be the losers. For them, risks are increasing on four fronts at once: they need external liquidity; they often have dollar obligations; their exports and budgets are sensitive to commodity and logistical volatility; and they are the first to fall under the "caution mode" of global investors. As a result, such countries can receive a triple blow: a weakening of the national currency, an increase in borrowing costs and a drop in capital inflows.