Markets poised for a near-term dip, crude can worsen the sentiment
Since the war started two weeks ago, the Nifty 50 and the Sensex 30 index have gained 1.59%. At the same time, crude oil prices have gained 2.19% to $76.57 per barrel.
The US has long been watchful about Iran's expanding nuclear programme, with tensions rising especially a couple of years ago when Iran's uranium enrichment neared 83.7% (very close to weapons-grade, 90% enrichment), said Alok Agarwal, head-Quant and Fund Manager at Alchemy Capital Management. 'This concern has now escalated to the point of direct US military action, making the situation more volatile, in our view," he added.
Read more: US strike on Iran raises oil shock, capital flow risks for India's economy
From an Indian investment perspective, the primary concern isn't just the geopolitical tension itself—which mostly affects market sentiment—but the potential surge in crude oil prices, which would have a direct economic impact, Agarwal added. Moreover, a sharp spike—especially beyond the $100/barrel mark—would be a major concern for Indian markets, as India imports over 80% of its crude requirements.
Crude price impact
Aniruddha Sarkar, CIO at Quest Investment Advisors, said that the key concern for the market is the impact of rising crude prices, which could widen the current account deficit, fuel inflation, and weaken the rupee due to higher forex outflows owing to a higher fuel bill and foreign institutional investors (FII) selling in risk-off mode from emerging markets.
The second stage impact, which could happen if the war persists for long, would be on sectors like oil marketing companies (OMCs), paints, and aviation, which could face cost pressures and perform negatively as crude prices climb, Sarkar added. However, he said that these impacts could remain short-lived as the war may not continue for a long time.
While other experts believe that no further retaliation by Iran might actually lead to an upside in the Indian markets.
"If Iran doesn't retaliate in a way that is surprising or nasty, markets could actually rally as investors reckon the tensions would abate, but if there are attacks on the Strait of Hormuz or on US bases, tensions could actually escalate and all bets would be off the table," said Nirmal Bhanwarlal Jain, founder of IIFL Group and managing director at IIFL Finance.
Anthony Heredia, MD & CEO, Mahindra Manulife Investment Managers, said, 'If there is no escalatory move from Iran now or over the next few days, you may actually see positivity extending as in a risk-on market environment, people anecdotally find reasons to be optimistic rather than the other way around."
Taking advantage
Markets have shown remarkable resilience so far in the face of international skirmishes and tariff threats, and if there could be further escalation of tensions in the coming weeks if Iran were to retaliate, investors would do well to keep the powder dry to take advantage of any market correction, said Sandeep Bagla, CEO, TRUST Mutual Fund.
Read more: Mint Explainer | Strait of Hormuz: Will Iran shut the vital oil artery of the world?
George Thomas, fund manager at Quantum Mutual Fund, said that in the coming few days, markets are expected to be very volatile. Hence, investors should invest in a staggered manner, as it helps average out the cost and reduces risk.
The India VIX index has fallen 9.13% since 13 June, when the war started.
From a technical standpoint, the prolonged phase of consolidation has notably impacted key indicators, said Sudeep Shah, deputy vice president, head - Technical & Derivatives Research at SBI Securities.
'The upward slope of the short and medium-term moving averages has slowed down, reflecting a loss of momentum. Simultaneously, the daily RSI (Relative Strength Index) continues to move sideways, in line with the RSI range shift concept that suggests a lack of directional bias. Further, the trend strength indicator – ADX (Average Directional Index), is currently quoting near the 13 level, which was the lowest level since July 2024, which shows a lack of strength in either direction," Shah added.
Shah added that the zone of 24,880-24,850 will act as immediate support for the Nifty 50 index. While on the upside, the zone of 25,200-25,250 will act as a crucial hurdle for the index, he said.
However, India is in a better place than other times when there has been tension, experts say.
'While we find ourselves in a more inflationary than disinflationary environment, India has never been in a better place than it is now to handle the repercussions of the latest round of tensions," said Kenneth Andrade, founder and CIO of Old Bridge Capital Management.
Even the Asian indices closed higher on Friday. The Hang Seng index closed 1.29% higher, the Kospi index closed 1.48% higher, and the CSI 300 index ended 0.09% higher.
Where's oil headed?
Under the severe outcome, oil prices could surge to $120-130 per barrel if the Strait of Hormuz is closed or there is a general Middle East conflagration, which could ignite retaliatory responses from major oil-producing countries, said JP Morgan in a report on 12 June.
Concerns are that if Iran closes the Strait of Hormuz, the global oil supply will be disrupted, which in turn will cause a rally in oil prices.
Read more: Donald Trump's war dilemma: Should America put boots on the ground in Iran or not?
However, historically, Iran has never fully closed the Strait of Hormuz, even during major conflicts like the Iran-Iraq War (1980-1988), the rise in US-Iran tensions after 2011, or the fallout from the Iran nuclear deal (2018-2020).
Experts say that this is because doing so would hurt Iran more than help it.
About 20% of the world's oil passes through the Strait of Hormuz, which is also a key path for liquefied natural gas exports, especially from Qatar, one of the biggest suppliers.
'US naval forces in the Persian Gulf act as a strong military deterrent, and any closure attempt by Iran would risk severe retaliation," said Yes Institutional Equities in a report dated 18 June. It further added that Iran depends heavily on the Strait for its own oil exports and critical imports, making a blockade counterproductive.
'Moreover, shutting the Strait would harm regional allies like Qatar and Iraq, who also rely on the waterway, potentially straining Iran's strategic relationships. It would also violate international maritime law, further isolating Iran diplomatically," Yes Institutional Equities said.
Hence, experts say that Iran has often used the threat of closing the Strait as a political tool to gain leverage in talks—without actually going through with it.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Deccan Herald
5 minutes ago
- Deccan Herald
EU's new sanctions on Russia to hit India's petroleum exports
Indian refiners purchased Russian crude at discounted rates. A substantial part of the refined products like diesel, petrol and aviation turbine fuel (ATF) were exported to European countries.
Time of India
5 minutes ago
- Time of India
Mehdi Hasan shuts down 20 Donald Trump fans in explosive jubilee debate – viewers call him a ‘National Treasure'
Mehdi Hasan is a British-American journalist who recently made a splash in progressive politics after departing from the MSNBC network to found his own independent media platform, known as Zeteo. Since then, Mehdi has spearheaded numerous investigative journalism and advocacy efforts, most notably concerning the ongoing war in Gaza, which he has termed a 'genocide'. Mehdi is also a staunch critic of the current Donald Trump administration, and has built up a reputation as a formidable debater. On July 20, he showcased his passion for debating once more by appearing on Jubilee's Surrounded. Surrounded is a YouTube series where a public debater deliberately disadvantages themselves by pitting themselves against 20 people of opposing viewpoints, with Mehdi facing off against hardline Donald Trump supporters who were staunchly anti-immigrant and openly supported many of the president's most controversial policies. Mehdi would later post a highlight reel of the over 90-minute debate on his X account, which got a lot of reactions, with James Allan calling Mehdi a "National Treasure". You're a National Treasure Mehdi. Netizens rally around Mehdi after his Jubilee debate Mehdi's highlight reel prompted a lot of responses on his X timeline, with many praising Mehdi's debating skills and commending him on facing off against America's radicalized right-wingers head on. User doomer_world called Mehdi an American hero, which he looked all too happy to hear. 🙏🏽 User Nick Warren said that the others brought a pencil sharpener to a gatling gun fight. They bought a pencil sharpener to a gatling gun fight... User jocamp thanked Mehdi for everything. 🙏🏽 User Rickey Williams commended Mehdi for taking 'hate and fascism' full on, and said there was no barometer to gauge the amount of 'crazy' among the 20 right-wingers. Words cannot express how much I appreciate you Mehdi, you took hate and fascism full on, there's no barometer to gauge the amount of crazy amongst those 20. User whereisjarule_ stated that Mehdi was the best debater he'd ever seen. Happy it's mehdi Hasan of all people going against them. He is the best debater I've ever seen! User thelefttake condemned the people Mehdi debated against, saying they should be 'put on a watchlist'. There are multiple people in this video who should be placed on a watchlist. It's actually scary knowing they walk among us. Not all responses to Mehdi's debate were positive, however, with seasters jones saying that Mehdi shouldn't have given the 'fascists' a platform. Had you never watched previous episodes? Just fascists getting crushed and acting like they won likely because they got to advertise/platform their hate. User Grounded Spaceman accused Mehdi of just talking over everyone. lol…this isn't the own you think it is. I'd wager that you can win a debate fair and square over the normal this is just you talking over ppl. Fast and loud doesn't win a debate dude User Landon Best said that Mehdi shouldn't call what he did a 'debate' because none of the 20 reactionaries he talked to had any ideas worth seriously considering. Your #1 issue is calling this a debate when it's not. Debate implies these ideas are in any way meant to be taken seriously. There is nothing serious about any of the 20 reactionaries you talked to. However, Landon was met with pushback by ValorieThomas, who pointed out that everyone in the video knew what they signed up for, and genuinely considered themselves debaters. It's important to note that every person in that room knew what they were signed up for. Every person in there knew who would be sitting across the table. Everyone in that room thinks they are debaters with relevant, cogent ideas & arguments. Mehdi Hasan has had a storied journalism career Before establishing his own media company, Mehdi Hasan spent a long time building his credentials as a journalist and activist. After doing a few stints on British networks such as ITV and BBC One, Mehdi rose to prominence as an anchor for Al Jazeera, following which he transitioned to MSNBC and hosted The Mehdi Hasan Show from 2020 to 2024. Aside from his work on Zeteo, Mehdi is also a regular columnist for The Guardian. To stay updated on the stories that are going viral follow Indiatimes Trending.
The Hindu
5 minutes ago
- The Hindu
Temples of social justice
Recently, a political controversy erupted in Tamil Nadu on the issue of diverting temple funds for building colleges. Beyond the political debates, the issue throws light on a unique social justice model around the regulation of secular practices associated with religion. This model, predominantly developed in the erstwhile Madras Presidency, draws strength from a 200-year-old legislative framework which continues till date. It has gained more acceptance in south India. As elections approach in Kerala and Tamil Nadu, clarity on the issue will help diffuse attempts to polarise voters around it. Religious endowments law Through the Religious Endowment and Escheats Regulation 1817, the East India Company set up the earliest legislative architecture around regulation of religious endowments. When the British Crown assumed direct control over Indian territories in 1858, Queen Victoria issued a proclamation stating that the sovereign would restrict interference in religious affairs. This was necessary as there was concern about losing face from the 1857 Sepoy Mutiny, which was triggered by religious issues. However, the withdrawal of the British government from religious affairs was not complete. In fact, in the Madras Presidency, various British officials argued for continued oversight of religious endowments. Finally, the British government settled for a balanced approach: the sovereign would not interfere with practices that were essentially religious, such as rituals, but would exercise control over the lands and secular aspects of the religious endowments. The idea of the government supervising religious institutions came to be crystallised when the Justice Party was elected in 1920. One of the earliest legislative interventions by the Justicites was Bill No. 12 of 1922: Hindu Religious Endowments Act. When it was introduced in the Madras Legislative Council, it faced opposition, mainly due to the provision in the law that allowed surplus temple funds to be diverted for other purposes. The nub of the issue was whether funds provided to a temple could be used for secular purposes. The matter was debated and settled in 1925, when the law was enacted. Since then, every revised version of the plenary law, including the current law — The Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1959 — has retained the provision of surplus funds. Also read | Activist alleges 'criminal misappropriation' of temple funds by T.N. HR&CE Dept, Madras High Court calls for response Section 36 of the 1959 Act permits the trustees of religious institutions to appropriate any surplus funds for any purposes listed under the law, with the prior sanction of the Commissioner. 'Surplus' means any amount remaining after adequate provisions have been made for the maintenance of the temple and training of its officials. The Act also empowers the Joint Commissioner or the Deputy Commissioner to appropriate funds in cases where the original purpose has become impossible to fulfil. Endowments to temples have a long and rich history. Temples received lavish donations from the sovereign rulers from as far back as in 970 AD, when the Chola empire was at its peak. Historian Anirudh Kanisetti writes that Sembiyan Mahadevi, a Chola queen, made strategic donations of land and kind to temples. The practice continued during the Vijayanagara kingdom. Temples were not just places of worship; they were socio-cultural hubs and were also used for educational purposes. This is confirmed by the inscriptions on temple walls and the spacious mandapams (pillared halls) which were used to hold educational or cultural events. So the original intent argument would also support the theory of utilising temple resources for educational purposes. The 1959 Act has been tested and upheld by constitutional courts. Among the permissible uses of surplus funds under the 1959 Act is the establishment and maintenance of universities or colleges (Section 66). These educational institutions are also required to make available the study of the Hindu religion or Hindu temple architecture. Seen within this framework, building colleges from temple funds is not only legal, but a logical extension of these provisions. Social justice legacy The controversy around the use of temple funds cannot be restricted to discussing legal propositions, however; it also carries ideological and sociopolitical significance. In the pre-colonial era, the motivation for the rulers to support large-scale endowments was that the temples acted as channels through which State resources could be allotted for important welfare projects. Through colonial rule, the British East India Company and the Crown viewed sovereign involvement in the management of temple affairs as necessary for reasons of revenue and maintenance of local control. Over the last century, the Self-Respect Movement, which emerged from the Madras Presidency, viewed the regulation of temples and oversight of their resources as a critical feature of anti-caste reforms. Without this, there would have been no temple entry legislation in 1936 and 1947. Today, Tamil Nadu and Kerala are among the few States where governments have appointed priests from backward classes after a prolonged legal struggle. Ultimately, any argument against government control of temple affairs would be striking at the root of social justice. The role of the government in ensuring that surplus funds are appropriated in a lawful manner is settled. Any reversal of this would only result in a set back of the long legacy of social justice and religious reforms that south India has pioneered.
