Oil price drops, shares jump as Trump announces Israel-Iran ceasefire
Iran's foreign minister denied that an official ceasefire agreement had been reached, but noted that Tehran would not continue its attacks as long as Israel halted its 'aggression'. At the time of writing, Israel had yet to comment.
The truce, which Trump is labelling the end of the '12-day war', came after Iran attacked a US base in Qatar on Monday, retaliating against the US bombing of its nuclear sites over the weekend.
In response to Tuesday's development, oil prices dropped as fears over a blockage to the Strait of Hormuz subsided.
About 20% of global oil and gas flows through this narrow shipping lane in the Gulf.
Brent crude, the international standard, dropped 3.83% to $68.74, while WTI dropped 3.85% to $65.87.
Last week, Brent reached over $78 a barrel, a level not seen since the start of this year.
Related
Why the Strait of Hormuz remains critical for the global economy
The dollar sees a rebound after US strikes Iran, but can it continue?
European markets opened in the green. The DAX was 1.99% higher at 23,730.98, the CAC 40 was up 1.71% at 7,666.69, while the FTSE 100 rose 0.81% to 8,828.83 in morning trading.
The STOXX 600 increased 1.48% to 542.93, while the EURO STOXX 50 rose 1.9% to 5,320.97.
Looking to the US, S&P 500 futures rose 0.97% to 6,135.75 on Monday, while Dow Jones futures increased 0.89% to 43,284.00.
Australia's S&P/ASX 200 jumped 0.89% to 8,550.10, South Korea's Kospi rose 2.75% to 3,097.28, and the Shanghai Composite index climbed 1.07% to 3,417.89.
Hong Kong's Hang Seng rose 2% to 24,162.70 and the Nikkei 225 increased 1.16% to 38,796.39.
The US Dollar Index slipped by 0.32% to 98.10. The euro gained 0.25% against the dollar while the yen dropped 0.48% in comparison to the greenback.
Economists had suggested that persistent threats to oil would increase the value of the US dollar and hurt other currencies such as the euro, notably as the US economy is more energy independent.
Greg Hirt, chief investment officer with Allianz Global Investors, told Euronews earlier this week that although the dollar may see a short lift on the Iran-Israel conflict, 'structural issues around a twin deficit and the Trump administration's volatile handling of tariffs should continue to weigh on an overvalued US dollar'.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
34 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Coke's shift to cane sugar would be expensive, hurt US farmers
By Marcelo Teixeira, Karl Plume and Renee Hickman NEW YORK (Reuters) -A possible move by Coca-Cola , and other beverage and food industries, to use cane sugar instead of corn syrup as a sweetener would be difficult and expensive to implement, while mostly negative for farmers in the United States. U.S. President Donald Trump said on Wednesday that Coca-Cola had agreed to use cane sugar in its beverages in the country after his discussions with the maker of the top soda pop brand. Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and activists from his Make America Healthy Again (MAHA) campaign have been pushing for changes in ingredients used by the food and beverage industry, claiming the proposed substitutes are healthier. Kennedy has said the consumption of both sugar and high fructose corn syrup are unhealthy, and scientists say sugar presents some nutritional benefits over high fructose corn syrup. Coca-Cola already sells Coke made from cane sugar in other markets, including Mexico, and some U.S. grocery stores carry glass bottles with cane sugar labeled "Mexican" Coke. In response to Trump's comment, Coca-Cola said "more details on new innovative offerings within our Coca-Cola product range will be shared soon.' PepsiCo also said on Thursday it would use sugar in its products like Pepsi beverages if consumers want it. Industry analysts, however, said changes in the formulation of the rest of the Coke sold in the U.S., and other beverages and candies, would involve significant adjustments to companies' supply chains, since corn syrup and sugar come from different producers. It would also involve changes to product labeling, and cost more. "Food and beverage industries started to use corn syrup in the U.S. in the past because of costs. It is cheaper than sugar," said Ron Sterk, a senior editor at SOSland Publishing, an information provider for the ingredients industry in the U.S. He said the beverage industry uses 55% High Fructose Corn Syrup, or 55HFCS, while bakers use 42% HFCS. The Corn Refiners Association said the complete elimination of high fructose corn syrup from the U.S. food and beverage supply would cut corn prices by up to 34 cents a bushel, resulting in a loss of $5.1 billion in farm revenue. "The resulting economic shockwave would lead to rural job losses and significant economic consequences to communities across the country," CRA said. Agricultural processors such as Archer-Daniels-Midland and Ingredion, two of the largest HFCS producers, grind corn at mills dotted around the Midwest farm belt to produce corn sweetener and other goods like ethanol biofuel. Shares of both companies fell on Thursday. ADM is estimated to ship 4 billion to 4.5 billion pounds of high fructose corn syrup every year, accounting for roughly 6% to 7% of projected 2026 earnings, said analyst Heather Jones of Heather Jones Research. "If Coke were to shift the entirety of its HF55 usage to cane, the cost increase would very likely exceed $1 billion given the current price gap between HF55 and cane sugar and the probability of very large price increases for the latter," Jones said in a research note. To produce one pound of HFCS, the industry uses around 2.5 pounds of corn, so a large shift in corn syrup use in the U.S. would hurt demand for the cereal, hurting corn growers, while probably boosting imports of cane sugar since there is not enough produced in the U.S. to satisfy American consumers' sweet tooth. SUGAR DEFICIT Around 400 million bushels of corn are used annually to make corn syrup for drinks and other food products, representing around 2.5% of U.S. corn production, according to U.S. government data. The U.S. produces around 3.6 million metric tons of cane sugar per year, half of that in Trump's home state of Florida, compared with around 7.3 million tons of corn syrup. Trump's ongoing trade wars, however, would make it difficult to cover the deficit, sugar analyst Michael McDougall said. "It will most likely come from Brazil," he said, referring to the world's top cane sugar producer, "but Trump just hit Brazil with a 50% import tariff." Not only does cane sugar cost more, but Coca-Cola has independent bottlers with hundreds of facilities already designed for use with high fructose corn syrup, said James McDonnell, partner at CIL Management Consultants. A reformulation would require additional investments, said McDonnell, and it is unlikely that bottlers would want to eat the cost. Consumers will also balk at the added cost, he said, "and you thought they were angry at the price of eggs!" Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Could Buying Lockheed Martin Stock Today Set You Up for Life?
Key Points The medium-term outlook for defense spending is positive, with both the U.S. and other NATO countries looking to ramp up investment. Lockheed Martin is well positioned to benefit from President Trump's defense budget. The company's execution issues have troubled it in recent years, and many defense companies have faced margin pressures. 10 stocks we like better than Lockheed Martin › There's a lot to like about defense giant Lockheed Martin's (NYSE: LMT) stock, but is it enough to make it an investment that investors can feel comfortable with, knowing it will generate life-changing long-term returns? The bulls' case for Lockheed Martin The investment case for the stock is relatively easy to understand. It's based on the enduring need for defense equipment and services, as well as its increasing importance in an age of geopolitical conflict. Not only is President Donald Trump seeking to ramp up the defense budget to a record $1.01 trillion, but NATO has also been enlarged, and its members have recently agreed to invest 5% of their gross domestic product (GDP) on core defense requirements as well as defense and security-related spending by 2035. Moreover, much of the spending, at least in the U.S., focuses on missile defense and tactical missiles, which Lockheed Martin specializes in. Indeed, discussing the matter on an earnings call in April, CEO Jim Taiclet said, "Our 21st century security strategy, where we integrate existing and new satellites, aircraft, ships, missile launchers, and command and control systems with constantly upgradable digital technologies, was tailor-made for [missile defense system] Golden Dome." Furthermore, Lockheed Martin's current backlog of $173 billion represents 2.3 years' worth of sales based on the midpoint of management's guidance for full-year 2025 revenue. It's also worth noting that its core customer, the U.S. government, is a highly reliable payer. Turning to valuation, the midpoint of management's guidance range calls for $23.15 in earnings per share and $6.7 billion in free cash flow (FCF). Based on the current price, it would put the stock at 17.2 times earnings and 16.3 times FCF. They are attractive valuations for a company with such solid growth prospects. So is it that case closed? As usual, investing is rarely that simple. The bears' case for Lockheed Martin The negative case for the stock can be seen in three interrelated arguments: Lockheed Martin's execution challenges in recent years, notably with its most important single program, the F-35 Lightning II Joint Strike Fighter, have damaged confidence in its ability to produce "long-run franchise" programs. Lockheed Martin, like many other defense contractors, including Boeing and RTX, has struggled to achieve margin expansion in recent years, as the U.S. government has become more adept at negotiating contracts, particularly through the use of fixed-price contracts. The current environment is highly conducive to defense spending, but that doesn't guarantee that it will be the case in the future. Lockheed Martin's execution and margin challenges The company's execution challenges are encapsulated in two events this year. First, a Department of Defense description of the proposed 2026 defense budget included reducing F-35 procurement. There's little doubt why procurement has been reduced. The DOD is focusing on making existing F-35s mission-capable (able to perform a core mission) rather than procuring new planes. According to just 51.5% of F-35s were mission-capable in 2024. High-profile delays and issues on the Technology Refresh 3 (TR3) on the F-35 have reduced that percentage. In addition, the cost overrun on the F-35 has been so significant that the military is now considering flying it less to reduce costs. These issues damage confidence in Lockheed Martin, not least as it faces upfront costs on programs in expectation of turning them into "long-run franchises." As such, there are questions about its ability to grow margins in the future. The second issue is the loss of the next-generation air dominance (NGAD) contract to Boeing, a decision highly likely to have been influenced by the issues with the F-35. Long-term defense spending This isn't the place to enter a detailed debate over the sustainability of government spending. Still, it's worth noting that if you are buying defense stocks based on the security of long-term growth in spending from the U.S. government (which currently accounts for two-thirds of NATO spending), then you will be comfortable with the following chart of U.S. public debt to GDP and the idea that the possibility of rising debt levels won't constrain spending on defense and other matters in the future. In addition, it's extremely difficult to predict where global defense priorities will be over the next few years, let alone a lifetime. Is Lockheed Martin stock a buy? On balance, defense stocks appear slightly undervalued; however, Lockheed Martin's issues with the F-35 may not make it the best way to capitalize on a positive medium-term outlook for defense spending. As such, Lockheed Martin isn't likely to be a stock that investors can make a life-changing investment in. Should you buy stock in Lockheed Martin right now? Before you buy stock in Lockheed Martin, consider this: The Motley Fool Stock Advisor analyst team just identified what they believe are the for investors to buy now… and Lockheed Martin wasn't one of them. The 10 stocks that made the cut could produce monster returns in the coming years. Consider when Netflix made this list on December 17, 2004... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $652,133!* Or when Nvidia made this list on April 15, 2005... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $1,056,790!* Now, it's worth noting Stock Advisor's total average return is 1,048% — a market-crushing outperformance compared to 180% for the S&P 500. Don't miss out on the latest top 10 list, available when you join Stock Advisor. See the 10 stocks » *Stock Advisor returns as of July 15, 2025 Lee Samaha has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool recommends Lockheed Martin and RTX. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy. Could Buying Lockheed Martin Stock Today Set You Up for Life? was originally published by The Motley Fool
CNBC
2 hours ago
- CNBC
Global week ahead: Banking bellwethers and a tariffs waiting game
Next week, the CNBC teams are back on the road – and it's all about the banks and the ECB. From Frankfurt to Milan, and Paris to London, the financials are in focus. The markets seem to be banking on the financial sector to keep up the positive earnings momentum this quarter. Citi described the first quarter as "remarkably resilient," with analysts now expecting Stoxx 600 earnings-per-share growth to turn positive year-on-year this quarter. Much of that optimism is centered on the big banks, while other sectors like luxury, autos and energy have been plagued by earnings downgrades. Unicredit kicks things off on Wednesday. The Italian banking giant will try to keep investors focused on the numbers, rather than its M&A ambitions. While its moves around Commerzbank have seen it increase its equity stake to 20%, Saxo Bank analysts highlight the uncertainty around its potential takeover of Banco BPM, after an Italian court blocked the move until further conditions are met. The stock is up over 50% so far this year, providing some cheer for CEO Andrea Orcel as he battles to keep his expansion plans on track. French financial BNP Paribas — the euro zone's largest lender by assets — reports earnings on Thursday. Last quarter, the bank soared past expectations driven by performance at its investment bank, but revised its profitability target slightly lower. On the same day, attention will turn to Frankfurt for Deutsche Bank's latest set of numbers. The German lender logged its best profit in 14 years last quarter, benefiting from increased trading volumes around the market volatility. CEO Christian Sewing told CNBC in June that he sees an opportunity for Europe to invest more in its own defense sector as a key growth area. For macro-watchers, the highlight of the week in Europe will come from the European Central Bank. President Christine Lagarde and her fellow policymakers are expected to keep rates on hold at 2% on Thursday. But there is a BIG catch… U.S. President Donald Trump's tariff threats are not expected to derail this meeting's outcome, according to Reuters, citing five ECB governing council member sources. But if Trump does push ahead with 30% tariffs on EU imports, there is a broad assumption the ECB will cut rates in response. Investors will have until Sept. 11 to assess the impact, as the ECB breaks for the summer after this week's meeting. In terms of the underlying economic conditions, Deutsche Bank warns that European inflation risks are "still being underestimated, with a remarkable complacency across key assets," with the tariff impact yet to fully trickle through. The bank's macro strategist also told CNBC's Squawk Box Europe that the Aug. 1 tariff deadline for negotiations between the U.S. and EU sets the stage for a late outcome to trigger a "very sharp market reaction."
