JPMorgan Warns Iran War Could Cause 10% Market Correction

JPMorgan Warns Iran War Could Cause 10% Market Correction
JPMorgan Warns Iran War Could Cause 10% Market Correction

Wall Street spent last week treating the Iran war as an unpleasant headline cycle: alarming and costly, but perhaps still survivable with enough denial and a functioning commodities desk. JPMorgan Chase, however, simply put a number on that anxiety.

Bloomberg reported Monday that Andrew Tyler, the bank’s head of global market intelligence, has turned “tactically bearish” and warned that U.S. stocks are not ready for a full correction as the war in Iran drags on and oil rises above $100 a barrel. For Tyler, that means the S&P 500 is at risk of falling about 10% from its peak to around 6,270, even as his position remained predominantly neutral without extreme risk reduction.

The market, so far, has seemed almost suspiciously relaxed, barring some ups and downs. Even the CEO of Goldman Sachs, David Solomon, has expressed surprise at Wall Street’s “benign” reaction to the conflict. So why the sudden nerves? Well, oil continues to do its best wrecking ball impression. Crude rose to $120 a barrel on Monday as the war expanded and shipping through the Strait of Hormuz came under pressure. US stock futures fell, the VIX rose to 31.45 and even the Russell 2000 briefly reached correction territory.

This has been accumulating. West Texas Intermediate crude rose 35% last week (its biggest weekly gain since the contract was launched in 1983), but the S&P 500 fell just 2% and the Nasdaq only fell a little more than 1%. The dislocation has begun to look less like resilience and more like investors assuming this will all behave like any other geopolitical scare that smolders, shakes headlines, and then exits cleanly off stage left.

The uncomfortable thing for JPMorgan is that its own house was saying something much calmer just a few days ago.

On Friday, the bank’s analysts described the typical major geopolitical shock as a 5% to 6% drop that recovers within a few weeks. They even wrote that there is “a tendency among macro strategists to dismiss geopolitics and oversimplify the answer: simply buy the dip,” before concluding that “the current episode with the invasion of Iran is in fact a buy-the-dip scenario.”

JPMorgan’s tone has been changing day by day. Last Monday, JPMorgan strategist Mislav Matejka wrote that “the current geopolitical escalation should ultimately be an opportunity to add as fundamentals are positive,” and said investors with a longer horizon should “use the weakness to add.” A week later, Matejka’s tone had darkened: “Things may have to get worse before they can get better,” he wrote, even as he argued that the liquidation could still have a “relatively limited lifespan” measured in “days/weeks, rather than months/quarters.”

The reason for the chaos is not so much the war itself as what triple-digit oil does to inflation, growth and profit estimates. JPMorgan Asset Management wrote last week that energy shocks are uniquely unpleasant because they are recessionary and inflationary, and pointed to the Strait of Hormuz as the real pressure point because about a fifth of the world’s oil supply passes through it.

Analysts estimated that a complete shutdown could push oil above $100 a barrel and, if sustained, would produce a 1% to 1.5% shock to both inflation and US GDP growth. This is not a good time for any of that if you’re sitting on Wall Street. US inflation is already around 3% and February payroll figures showed the economy lost 92,000 jobs. That’s not exactly a welcome backdrop for another energy tax. It is a context that is beginning to show signs of stagflation.

On Monday, in a separate note from JPMorgan, the bank warned that an attack on Iran’s Kharg Island – which handles 90% of the country’s crude exports – would “immediately halt most” of those flows and would likely trigger retaliation in Hormuz or against regional energy infrastructure.

So no, JPMorgan is not warning of some major market extinction event. But he is doing something more direct: warning that Wall Street may still be underestimating the possibility of a foreign policy crisis turning into a fear of stagflation with consequences for profits. This is now an energy price problem, and it’s much harder to ignore.

Source link