Why the Strait of Hormuz remains critical for the global economy
The Strait of Hormuz is vital for gas and oil exporters in the Gulf region, as this is the only route by sea to export large volumes of oil and gas produced among the oil-rich countries in the region.
This narrow passage is located between Oman and Iran, connecting the Persian Gulf with the Gulf of Oman and the Arabian Sea.
It is about 167 km long, and at its narrowest point, 39 km wide.
According to the Joint Maritime Information Centre, June 2024 averaged 114 vessels transiting the strait daily and so far traffic in June 2025 is consistent with this. On 21 June, for instance, there were 122 vessels passing through the strait.
The passage is deep enough and wide enough to handle the world's largest crude oil tankers, and it is one of the world's most important oil chokepoints (narrow channels along widely used global sea routes that are critical to global energy security).
Related
Oil price drops, shares jump as Trump announces Israel-Iran ceasefire
Israel-Iran conflict fuels best month for energy stocks since 2022
The health of the world economy depends on the flow of oil from this region.
Oil tankers on average carry through the strait 20 million barrels per day (b/d), or the equivalent of about 20% of global petroleum liquids consumption, according to the US Energy Information Administration analysis.
'A potential Iranian blockade of the Strait of Hormuz would send shockwaves through the global economy," Professor Guido Cozzi, Chair of Macroeconomics at the University of St. Gallen, said to Euronews.
He added that any disruption to the oil flow in this narrow waterway would drive up energy prices, fuel inflation, and strain supply chains.
Related
What's at stake for Europe if the Strait of Hormuz is blocked?
Continental Europe and China are losing the most, both heavily reliant on imported energy and lacking domestic buffers.
"They would face rising costs, slower growth, and heightened inflation without any upside," Cozzi said.
Meanwhile, the US and the UK would see their exports become more competitive, as they are sourcing the majority of their energy from elsewhere. And if the strait would be closed, pushing prices up globally, that would benefit Western producers more than it would harm them, according to the professor.
Besides oil, global natural gas supply could also be seriously impacted, as Qatar, one of the world's biggest natural gas exporters uses the narrow seaway to export about 77 million metric tons of liquefied natural gas (LNG) a year. This is one-fifth of the global LNG supply.
"Alternative supply routes for Middle Eastern oil and gas are limited, with pipeline capacity insufficient to offset potential maritime disruptions through the Persian Gulf and Red Sea,' S&P said in an analysis.
'Any Iranian closure of the Strait of Hormuz would affect not only its own exports but also those of Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Kuwait and Qatar, potentially removing over 17 million b/d of crude oil from global markets,' added the analysis, saying that Saudi Arabia and the UAE have pipelines that can circumvent the strait.
Analysts expect oil prices to skyrocket and surpass $100 a barrel if Iran decides to close the passage.
Though insurance for the oil tankers passing through the strait increased and the situation is quite tense, according to the Joint Maritime Information Centre, there are no indications of threats to commercial shipping.
Related
The dollar sees a rebound after US strikes Iran, but can it continue?
After US attacks on three Iranian nuclear sites, on 22 June, the Parliament in Tehran voted to close down the strait. A step that has never been taken.
The decision is pending approval by the Islamic Republic's Supreme National Security Council.
Iran threatened several times in the past that it would cut this artery of oil in the past but it never followed through with the threat. US Vice-President JD Vance called the move 'suicidal' for Iran's economy on Sunday at a press conference.
Creating a major disruption in the strait would be extremely difficult due to various economic, political and military forces present in the region today, said the Robert Strauss Center for International Security and Law in an analysis.
Experts agree that Iran itself has a lot to lose and very little to gain as it would cut its own oil exports to major trade partners such as China. Besides losing a key source of revenue, Iran would also anger its oil-producing neighbours whose support they may not be able to afford to risk.
Related
Oil rises and Europe's markets open lower after US strikes on Iran
If Iran decides to close the passageway, another question is, for how long? The duration could be key, as global stockpiles are currently sufficient. The nations in need have at least 5.8 billion barrels of crude and fuel stockpiled between them, according to Bloomberg. This shows a healthy buffer, compared to the annual 7.3 billion barrels a year, passing through the strait.
According to Barclays, other possible scenarios include Iran trying to target the Strait of Hormuz using missile attacks, making ships and insurance firms hesitant to use Hormuz. They could also consider mining the strait, which would hit traffic to a greater extent.
There are also less aggressive ways to further disturb commercial shipping through Hormuz. For instance, the widespread jamming of GPS signals could make it harder to navigate safely in certain conditions.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
10 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Asia shares slip as investors remember the drag of tariffs
By Wayne Cole SYDNEY (Reuters) -Asia shares eased on Tuesday while the euro nursed its losses as investors pondered the downside of the U.S.-EU trade deal and the reality that punishing tariffs were here to stay, with unwelcome implications for growth and inflation. The initial relief over Europe's 15% levy quickly soured when set against the 1% to 2% that stood before President Donald Trump took office. Leaders in France and Germany lamented the outcome as a drag on growth, pulling down stocks and bond yields across the continent while slugging the single currency. Trump also flagged a "world tariff" rate of 15% to 20% on all trading partners that were not negotiating a deal, among the highest rates since the Great Depression of the 1930s. "While the worst case scenario was averted, the implied EU tariff increase from 1% in January is a significant tax increase on EU exports," wrote economists from JPMorgan in a note. "This is a very big shock that unwinds a century of U.S. leadership in global free trade," they warned. "While we no longer see a U.S. recession as our baseline from this shock, the risk is still elevated at 40%." A further risk to world growth came from a sudden spike in oil prices after Trump threatened a new deadline of 10 or 12 days for Russia to make progress toward ending the war in Ukraine or face tougher sanctions on oil exports. [O/R] Brent edged up 0.1% to $70.10 a barrel, having climbed 2.3% on Monday, while U.S. crude held at $66.73. The air of caution saw MSCI's broadest index of Asia-Pacific shares outside Japan slip 0.7%. Japan's Nikkei eased 0.8%, while Chinese blue chips fell 0.1%. European shares steadied after Monday's sell-off. EUROSTOXX 50 futures edged up 0.2%, while FTSE futures and DAX futures both added 0.1%. The euro was flat at $1.1592, after falling 1.3% overnight in the largest drop since mid-May. It now has chart support at $1.1556. The dollar index was up at 98.674, after the rush out of short dollar positions lifted it 1% overnight, while it touched a one-week high on the yen at 148.63. Wall Street held firm on hopes for upbeat results from mega caps this week that include Apple, Microsoft and Amazon. [.N] S&P 500 futures nudged up 0.1%, while Nasdaq futures added 0.2%. Yields on 10-year Treasuries held at 4.408% having crept higher on Monday as markets braced for another steady decision on interest rates from the Federal Reserve. Futures imply a 97% chance the Fed will keep rates at 4.25%-4.5% at its meeting on Wednesday and reiterate concerns that tariffs will push inflation higher in the short term. Analysts also assume one, or maybe two, Fed officials will dissent in favour of a cut and supporting wagers for a move in September. The odds could change depending on a slew of U.S. data this week including gross domestic product for the second quarter where growth is seen rebounding to an annualised 2.4%, after a 0.5% contraction in the first quarter. Figures on job openings are due later on Tuesday that will help refine forecasts for the crucial payrolls report on Friday. Canada's central bank also meets on Wednesday and again is widely expected to hold rates at 2.75% as it waits to see how trade talks with the U.S. wash out. In commodity markets, prices for copper and iron ore were under pressure while gold idled at $3,316 an ounce. [GOL/] 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
10 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Metals X Limited's (ASX:MLX) largest shareholders are retail investors with 47% ownership, public companies own 23%
Key Insights Metals X's significant retail investors ownership suggests that the key decisions are influenced by shareholders from the larger public A total of 13 investors have a majority stake in the company with 50% ownership 19% of Metals X is held by Institutions Trump has pledged to "unleash" American oil and gas and these 15 US stocks have developments that are poised to benefit. To get a sense of who is truly in control of Metals X Limited (ASX:MLX), it is important to understand the ownership structure of the business. We can see that retail investors own the lion's share in the company with 47% ownership. Put another way, the group faces the maximum upside potential (or downside risk). And public companies on the other hand have a 23% ownership in the company. In the chart below, we zoom in on the different ownership groups of Metals X. Check out our latest analysis for Metals X What Does The Institutional Ownership Tell Us About Metals X? Many institutions measure their performance against an index that approximates the local market. So they usually pay more attention to companies that are included in major indices. Metals X already has institutions on the share registry. Indeed, they own a respectable stake in the company. This implies the analysts working for those institutions have looked at the stock and they like it. But just like anyone else, they could be wrong. It is not uncommon to see a big share price drop if two large institutional investors try to sell out of a stock at the same time. So it is worth checking the past earnings trajectory of Metals X, (below). Of course, keep in mind that there are other factors to consider, too. We note that hedge funds don't have a meaningful investment in Metals X. APAC Resources Limited is currently the largest shareholder, with 23% of shares outstanding. In comparison, the second and third largest shareholders hold about 5.3% and 5.0% of the stock. A closer look at our ownership figures suggests that the top 13 shareholders have a combined ownership of 50% implying that no single shareholder has a majority. While it makes sense to study institutional ownership data for a company, it also makes sense to study analyst sentiments to know which way the wind is blowing. There is some analyst coverage of the stock, but it could still become more well known, with time. Insider Ownership Of Metals X The definition of company insiders can be subjective and does vary between jurisdictions. Our data reflects individual insiders, capturing board members at the very least. Company management run the business, but the CEO will answer to the board, even if he or she is a member of it. Most consider insider ownership a positive because it can indicate the board is well aligned with other shareholders. However, on some occasions too much power is concentrated within this group. We can see that insiders own shares in Metals X Limited. It has a market capitalization of just AU$541m, and insiders have AU$18m worth of shares, in their own names. This shows at least some alignment. You can click here to see if those insiders have been buying or selling. General Public Ownership The general public-- including retail investors -- own 47% stake in the company, and hence can't easily be ignored. This size of ownership, while considerable, may not be enough to change company policy if the decision is not in sync with other large shareholders. Private Company Ownership It seems that Private Companies own 6.6%, of the Metals X stock. It's hard to draw any conclusions from this fact alone, so its worth looking into who owns those private companies. Sometimes insiders or other related parties have an interest in shares in a public company through a separate private company. Public Company Ownership Public companies currently own 23% of Metals X stock. This may be a strategic interest and the two companies may have related business interests. It could be that they have de-merged. This holding is probably worth investigating further. Next Steps: While it is well worth considering the different groups that own a company, there are other factors that are even more important. Be aware that Metals X is showing 2 warning signs in our investment analysis , and 1 of those makes us a bit uncomfortable... If you would prefer discover what analysts are predicting in terms of future growth, do not miss this free report on analyst forecasts. NB: Figures in this article are calculated using data from the last twelve months, which refer to the 12-month period ending on the last date of the month the financial statement is dated. This may not be consistent with full year annual report figures. Have feedback on this article? Concerned about the content? Get in touch with us directly. Alternatively, email editorial-team (at) article by Simply Wall St is general in nature. We provide commentary based on historical data and analyst forecasts only using an unbiased methodology and our articles are not intended to be financial advice. It does not constitute a recommendation to buy or sell any stock, and does not take account of your objectives, or your financial situation. We aim to bring you long-term focused analysis driven by fundamental data. Note that our analysis may not factor in the latest price-sensitive company announcements or qualitative material. Simply Wall St has no position in any stocks mentioned. 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


New York Post
11 minutes ago
- New York Post
CNBC's Jim Cramer drops F-bomb live on air while marveling over Trump's ‘great economy'
CNBC host Jim Cramer's excitement about President Donald Trump's latest trade deal got the better of him on Monday. Cramer blurted out 'What the f—!' during a segment of CNBC's 'Squawk on The Street' after seeing a graphic detailing the United States' recent trade deals with various countries, including a major trade deal made with the European Union on Sunday. 'Our biggest problem is we have so much growth that the Fed won't cut. What the f—!' the co-host exclaimed, regretting it as soon as he said it. 'Oh my God! I'm so sorry,' Cramer said. 'I'm so sorry. I take it right back. I take it right back. That was bad.' His co-hosts David Faber and Carl Quintanilla reassured their colleague it wasn't a big deal. 'It's OK. It's OK. It's OK!,' Faber told Cramer as he kept apologizing. 'We're in the moment. It's just the way we talk.' 4 Cramer blurted out 'What the f—!' during a segment of CNBC's 'Squawk on The Street'. MSNBC 'Real people doing live TV,' Quintanilla added. Cramer continued: 'I'm done. I think I'm out of here.' 'No, you're fine,' Faber replied, laughing. 'You're absolutely fine. You want me to say one?' Cramer said, 'No, I just feel like, enough with the rate cut and the economy's booming.' 4 'Oh my God! I'm so sorry,' Cramer said. 'I'm so sorry. I take it right back. I take it right back. That was bad.' REUTERS The anchor also apologized on X following the appearance. He wrote, 'I apologize to all viewers. I was too effusive in making my point about the great economy we have..' Trump averted a trade war and notched another win on Sunday. The president and European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen announced a trade deal between the U.S. and the European Union that set a 15-percent tariff on most EU goods imported into the U.S. 4 His co-hosts David Faber and Carl Quintanilla reassured their colleague it wasn't a big deal. MSNBC Von der Leyen said Europe will also purchase $150 billion worth of U.S. energy as part of the deal, in addition to making $600 billion in other investments. The agreement comes days after Trump secured a $550 billion trade deal with Japan. 'We just completed a massive Deal with Japan, perhaps the largest Deal ever made,' Trump wrote on Truth Social. 'Japan will invest, at my direction, $550 Billion Dollars into the United States, which will receive 90% of the Profits. This Deal will create Hundreds of Thousands of Jobs — There has never been anything like it.' 4 The agreement comes days after Trump secured a $550 billion trade deal with Japan. via REUTERS Some prominent critics of the president have admitted that they were wrong about the damage Trump's tariffs would do to the economy. Most recently, HBO host Bill Maher admitted on his 'Club Random' podcast that his predictions were incorrect. 'Just to take an example, tariffs. Now I remember that I, along with probably most people, was saying at the beginning, 'Oh, you know, by the 4th of July… the economy was going to be tanked by then,' and I was kind of like, 'Well, that seems right to me,'' he told guest, liberal pundit Brian Tyler Cohen. 'But, that didn't happen,' Maher said. 'It could happen tomorrow. I'm just saying, that's reality, so let's work first from the reality of that, not from 'I just hate Donald Trump,' because that's boring and doesn't get us anywhere and leads you to dishonesty.'