Latest news with #geopoliticalRisk
Bloomberg
6 days ago
- Business
- Bloomberg
Lots More on What's Going On in Iran's Markets
Listen to Odd Lots on Apple Podcasts Listen to Odd Lots on Spotify Subscribe to the newsletter Iran is a huge country with a sizable stock market. And yet, years of sanctions and other restrictions mean it's tough to even look up its stock prices (much less invest there.) In this episode, we catch up with Maciej Wojtal, CEO and CIO of AmtelonCapital, an Amsterdam-based fund that specializes in Iranian stocks. We talk about what the past week has been like for the market, what he's hearing from people on the ground in Tehran, plus disruptions to businesses and oil. We talk about how Iranian investors handle major geopolitical risk and the outlook from here.
Zawya
6 days ago
- Business
- Zawya
Financial markets surprisingly calm given Middle East conflict, ECB's VP says
Financial markets have taken the escalating conflict in the Middle-East in their stride but the situation could have a dampening effect on euro area growth, European Central Bank Vice President Luis de Guindos said on Thursday. "Markets perception on geopolitical risk has been overall quite benign, and markets have been surprisingly calm given developments in recent days," de Guindos told a financial event. "But markets tend to price geopolitical risks in a binary way: on or off. "While it is impossible to predict what will happen, developments may well have a dampening impact on growth in the euro area." (Reporting by Balazs Koranyi, Editing by Louise Heavens)
Yahoo
25-06-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Rupee ends a tad lower, month-end importer dollar bids weigh
By Jaspreet Kalra MUMBAI (Reuters) - The Indian rupee closed slightly weaker on Wednesday, weighed down by month-end importer dollar demand, while gains in local equities and a revival in risk appetite after a fragile truce between Iran and Israel cushioned the pressure. The rupee closed at 86.0775 against the U.S. dollar, down 0.1% from its close of 85.9750 in the previous session. The currency touched a peak of 85.8075 earlier in the day but reversed course on the back of corporate dollar demand, traders said. Slight weakness in the offshore Chinese yuan was also a dampener for the rupee, a trader at a private bank said. Risk sentiment remained upbeat with most Asian stocks logging gains after the truce between Iran and Israel appeared to hold. The Iran-Israel ceasefire is going well, U.S. President Donald Trump said on Wednesday. Each side claimed victory on Tuesday after 12 days of war, which the U.S. joined with airstrikes in support of Israel to take out Iran's uranium enrichment facilities. The dollar index was up 0.1% at 98.1 while Asian currencies were trading mixed. Brent crude oil futures rose about 1% to $67.8 per barrel. [USD/] [O/R] "We believe that the negative impact of the reduced geopolitical risk on the dollar has largely played out," ING Bank said in a note. The dollar could see some stabilisation at these levels but risks remain tilted to the downside, the bank added. Meanwhile, dollar-rupee forward premiums ticked up on the back of the Indian central bank's announcement of a measure to withdraw excess banking system liquidity that lifted near forwards, with the impact spilling over to far tenors as well. The 1-year dollar rupee implied yield rose 7 bps to 1.96%. Fehler beim Abrufen der Daten Melden Sie sich an, um Ihr Portfolio aufzurufen. Fehler beim Abrufen der Daten Fehler beim Abrufen der Daten Fehler beim Abrufen der Daten Fehler beim Abrufen der Daten
News.com.au
23-06-2025
- Business
- News.com.au
US-Iran crisis reveals US dollar's waning safe haven status
We're entering an era of multi-polar safe havens, writes Nigel Green. As the world holds its breath waiting for Iran's next move following targeted US airstrikes on its nuclear infrastructure, global financial markets are offering a parallel story – one just as consequential. The story is this: the US dollar, once the unchallenged sanctuary in global crises, no longer commands the same automatic confidence. Historically, events like these – volatile, unpredictable, and geopolitical – would have sent investors rushing into the dollar. It was the default play: the bigger the risk, the stronger the greenback. Not this time. Yes, the dollar edged higher following the strikes. But the climb was shallow, cautious, and short-lived. Investors, it seems, are no longer all-in on the greenback as the world's panic room. This is a striking departure from the past. In the wake of the Gulf War, after 9/11, and during the global financial crisis, capital sought refuge in the dollar almost reflexively. It wasn't even a debate. The currency was seen as a bastion of liquidity, legal stability, and unrivalled central bank credibility. Today, that narrative is fraying. A big part of the shift lies in the sheer accumulation of economic risk tied to Washington. The dollar has already shed 8.6% this year against a basket of its major peers – a loss that coincides not just with geopolitical uncertainty, but with growing disquiet over US debt, erratic policymaking, and the long shadow of tariffs under President Donald Trump's administration. Trade policy now functions more as a weapon than a framework. Allies are alienated, supply chains are disrupted, and investors are left parsing tweets rather than policy briefs. The result? A growing discomfort with relying solely on the US financial ecosystem in turbulent moments. This latest crisis underlines how deep that discomfort runs. Markets are nervous, yes. But they're increasingly directing their anxiety elsewhere – into gold and Bitcoin, into commodities, into the Swiss franc, and into asset classes outside of the dollar's traditional sphere of dominance. What's emerging is a quiet but consequential reordering of global capital flows. If Iran retaliates forcefully, and oil prices spike, we may indeed see a rush to safety, but it won't necessarily land in the same place it used to. Some capital will still move to the dollar. But some will shift elsewhere, and crucially, it will shift more cautiously. This isn't just a reaction to the latest headlines. It's the result of a slow, multi-year reassessment. Since the 2008 financial crisis, confidence in the dollar's durability has been steadily chipped away. Unprecedented money printing under quantitative easing undermined long-term value. In parallel, the US's political dysfunction, ballooning deficit, and frequent use of economic sanctions as a foreign policy tool have made the currency feel less like a safe asset and more like a lever of power that could be turned off. It's no surprise, then, that central banks have been quietly diversifying. A growing number are adding to gold reserves, trimming their dollar holdings, and exploring alternatives. The rise of central bank digital currencies, and the sustained interest in Bitcoin and other decentralised assets, are all expressions of the same trend: the hunt for safety is evolving. None of this means the dollar is finished. Its size, liquidity, and institutional depth remain enormous. But the gravitational pull it once exerted over markets is weakening. That is the unmistakable takeaway from this week's hesitant reaction. There's also a broader shift at play. Investors today have more tools, more information, and more optionality than ever before. The idea that safety only comes in one shade – the green of the US dollar – is no longer credible. We're entering an era of multi-polar safe havens. What worries me most is that many institutions still operate as if the old order holds. They make decisions based on a playbook written in the 20th century. But that playbook is rapidly becoming obsolete. If this crisis deepens, as seems increasingly likely, the market reaction may reinforce the trend. More investors will start questioning not just whether the dollar is safe, but whether it's still the safest, and that's a subtle but seismic shift. The challenge for policymakers in Washington is to understand the implications before it's too late. Restoring trust in the dollar's role as the world's primary haven will take more than reactionary rhetoric. It will require fiscal discipline, policy consistency and a less antagonistic approach to international trade and diplomacy. Until then, the dollar's aura will continue to fade. We're watching Tehran closely. But we should also be watching the flows of capital, and where they're no longer going. That, too, tells us everything we need to know about the current state of global trust. Nigel Green, is the group CEO and founder of deVere Group, an independent global financial consultancy. The views, information, or opinions expressed in the interviews in this article are solely those of the author and do not represent the views of Stockhead.
Arab News
23-06-2025
- Business
- Arab News
Risky business: how firms can survive in an era of turmoil
The past two decades have ushered in an era where geopolitical uncertainty is no longer an occasional disruptor but a persistent and systemic condition shaping global business. Traditional risk models based on assumptions of relative stability and predictable disruptions are proving inadequate in a world marked by escalating conflicts, fracturing supply chains, and a geopolitical landscape in flux. The stakes are enormous: Companies spanning finance, industry, energy, and technology face a fundamental challenge not only in managing risk, but also in fundamentally rethinking how they understand and navigate uncertainty itself. Historically, firms confronted geopolitical risk as a series of isolated shocks: wars, sanctions, or political upheavals that, while disruptive, were relatively bounded and transient. The 1990s and early 2000s witnessed this episodic framing, where firms relied on crisis management, insurance, and post-hoc operational fixes. Yet recent years have made clear that uncertainty has morphed into a more complex phenomenon — what academics might term 'deep uncertainty' or 'Knightian uncertainty,' where probabilities are unknowable and the future resists prediction. The protracted conflicts in the Middle East, great power rivalries, and the weaponization of trade and technology have created an environment of continuous geopolitical tension. Supply chains are no longer linear and stable but web-like, interdependent, and vulnerable to cascading failures triggered by remote events. The pandemic's disruption of global logistics compounded by the Russia-Ukraine war's impact on energy markets highlight how multiple risk vectors interact unpredictably. This multidimensional uncertainty forces firms to abandon conventional risk frameworks based on expected value calculations and instead adopt more dynamic, resilience-focused approaches. In response, firms have institutionalized geopolitical risk analysis in ways unrecognizable even a decade ago. Once confined to academic circles or boutique consultancies, political risk analysis is now central to corporate strategy and governance. Major multinational firms have expanded in-house intelligence capabilities, building Palantir-like data environments that synthesize satellite imagery, open-source intelligence, shipping data, and insurance trends to triangulate risk exposure in near real-time. This integration of heterogeneous data sources enables earlier detection of emerging threats than traditional quarterly risk reports or government advisories. Supply chains are no longer linear and stable Dr. John Sfakianakis But data and technology alone do not suffice. Firms increasingly recruit former diplomats, military analysts, and intelligence officers to serve as geopolitical strategists, blending quantitative analytics with qualitative expertise. This human dimension is critical to interpreting ambiguous signals, contextualizing political developments, and anticipating non-linear outcomes that purely algorithmic models might miss. The 2020s could well be remembered as the decade when geopolitical strategists — combining analytical rigor with nuanced understanding of global affairs — became as indispensable as quants were to financial firms in the 2000s. Maersk's experience during the 2017 NotPetya cyberattack exemplifies how geopolitical risk now demands systemic resilience. The malware attack disrupted the company's IT systems worldwide, halting container operations and exposing the fragility of integrated global logistics networks. Far from treating the event as an isolated cyber incident, Maersk restructured its operational model to emphasize redundancy, modularity, and rapid recovery capabilities — core principles of resilience in complex systems theory. This shift acknowledges that in a deeply interconnected environment, firms must prepare not only for probable risks, but also for unforeseeable systemic shocks. JPMorgan Chase similarly offers insight into the evolution of financial risk management. The bank has woven geopolitical intelligence deeply into its credit risk assessments, investment strategies, and client advisory services. It uses scenario planning to model the geopolitical trajectories of rival powers and regulatory regimes, adjusting exposure dynamically rather than relying on static risk scores. JPMorgan's approach signals a broader shift within finance — from risk avoidance to strategic risk optimization — where understanding geopolitical volatility becomes a source of competitive advantage. Toyota's response to the 2011 Tohoku earthquake and ensuing nuclear crisis highlights the operational dimension of geopolitical uncertainty in manufacturing. Recognizing the risks inherent in geographically concentrated supply chains, Toyota diversified its suppliers and reconfigured production buffers to absorb disruptions. The company's strategy underscores an important insight: resilience is as much about redesigning physical and logistical infrastructure as it is about forecasting events. By embedding redundancy and flexibility into supply networks, firms reduce vulnerability to complex geopolitical shocks that defy precise prediction. The energy sector offers another critical lens on geopolitical risk. The vulnerability of global oil markets to chokepoints such as the Strait of Hormuz illustrates how physical infrastructure and security concerns translate directly into economic risk. War-risk insurance premiums for tankers, port congestion, and maritime route disruptions have surged, signaling that market participants price risk differently from traditional financial benchmarks. The disconnect between futures markets and shipping realities suggests that risk models must integrate granular, geospatial data alongside macroeconomic indicators to capture true exposure. Resilience must become a strategic asset Dr. John Sfakianakis Technology firms face a distinct, but equally complex, set of geopolitical risks. Trade restrictions, export controls, and supply chain weaponization — exemplified by tensions between the US and China — have fractured innovation ecosystems. Firms such as Intel and Cisco navigate regulatory uncertainty and evolving security frameworks that impact sourcing, research collaboration, and market access. Managing these risks requires integrating geopolitical analysis on multiple levels — from bilateral relations to international governance — into product planning, supply chain management, and R&D investment decisions. What do these trends imply for firms confronting an era in which 'nothing is certain'? The first is the inadequacy of predictive risk models that rely on probabilistic forecasts or historical analogues. In a world of deep uncertainty, firms must embrace strategies that prioritize adaptability, modularity, and rapid response over precise prediction. This entails decentralizing decision-making, empowering local managers to react to fluid conditions, and embedding scenario-based planning that stresses plausible alternative futures rather than a single forecast. Second, firms must cultivate intelligence ecosystems that combine real-time data analytics with expert judgment. The fusion of satellite tracking, open-source data, insurance analytics, and human expertise enables detection of early warning signals and triangulation of emerging risks. Such capabilities shorten the time lag between geopolitical events and operational adjustments, which can be critical in volatile environments. Third, resilience must become a strategic asset, not a contingency plan. Organizations should invest proactively in supply chain redundancy, cybersecurity, diversified sourcing, and flexible production capacity. This shift — from viewing resilience as a cost center to a competitive advantage — will differentiate leaders in an uncertain world. The contemporary geopolitical landscape is characterized not merely by increased risk, but also by a fundamental shift in the nature of uncertainty. Firms no longer operate in a world where stability is the default and disruptions are exceptions. Instead, persistent volatility and systemic interdependence demand that companies develop new cognitive and operational frameworks that accept uncertainty as a permanent condition. In this environment, success depends less on predicting the future than on designing organizations capable of thriving amid unpredictability. Geopolitical uncertainty is not a 'black swan' — it is the new baseline. The winners will be those who treat resilience and adaptive capacity not as defensive measures, but as central pillars of competitive strategy.
