ShizukaKazu

#创作者冲榜 After a month of turmoil in the Middle East, why did the gold price trend reverse?
After a month of conflict in the Middle East, gold and crude oil shifted from the initial "gold down, oil up" to "both rise or fall together," which is a key signal that the market trading logic has undergone a fundamental change.
📊 Phenomenon confirmation: from divergence to resonance
· Gold (GC26M): Latest price (at the time of writing) 4610.3, up 1.16%, with significant intraday volatility, indicating strong buying interest at lower levels.
· Crude oil (Brent B26K): Latest price (at the time of writing) 116.60, up 3.39%, continuing its strength.
This confirms the core characteristic of the recent market: gold and oil are beginning to rise together, and gold shows stronger resilience during oil pullbacks (only a decline in gains).
🔍 Core analysis: why has the trend shifted to "both rising"?
Behind this logical switch is the transformation of the geopolitical conflict from a "risk event" into a "structural crisis":
1. Escalation of geopolitical conflict: from "event-driven" to "supply chain disruption"
The conflict has lasted a month and has seen substantial escalation:
· De facto blockade of the Strait of Hormuz: about one-quarter of global maritime oil trade (roughly 20 million barrels per day) is disrupted, with Gulf region exports now less than 10% of pre-conflict levels—this is the largest supply interruption in history.
· Spillover risks: Houthi forces officially involved; Kuwait oil tankers attacked; fighting spreading to energy infrastructure.
· Diplomatic negotiations and military escalation run in parallel: on one hand, countries like Saudi Arabia hold talks to mediate; on the other, Trump threatens to destroy Iran’s Halek Island, while Iran legislates to charge tolls on ships passing through the strait. The situation has not substantially eased.
2. Rebuilding the logic of gold: liquidity shocks end, safe-haven and stagflation trades return
This is the key to explaining "why gold is no longer falling":
· Liquidity crisis alleviated: the previous sharp decline in gold was mainly because gold prices were high, and worsening risk appetite caused liquidity squeezes (investors sold gold for liquidity). As leverage was unwound, gold and stock/bond markets began decoupling.
· Safe-haven attribute restored: as markets realize the conflict may not end soon and even threatens energy security, gold’s status as the ultimate safe-haven asset is reaffirmed.
· Stagflation trading becomes the main theme: sustained high oil prices quickly transmit inflation, while high interest rates suppress economic growth. Markets are beginning to trade the classic stagflation scenario (economic stagnation + high inflation), which is one of the most favorable environments for gold.
3. Macro expectations bottom out: no further room for rate cut expectations to worsen
· Previously, the main factor suppressing gold was the market completely abandoning rate cut expectations and even pricing in rate hikes.
· Currently, rate cut expectations are at rock bottom, with little room for further negative adjustments in the short term. Meanwhile, Fed officials’ hawkish comments are made, but markets are beginning to expect "high interest rates cannot be sustained," as this would impose huge pressure on the US’s massive debt.
4. Funding support: buying on dips and central bank gold purchases
· Institutional contrarian accumulation: during the significant correction in gold prices, long-term funds like pension funds increased their gold long positions.
· "Gold pit" effect: major Wall Street banks (such as JPMorgan, Citigroup, Fidelity) generally see this correction as a rare strategic buying opportunity, with the long-term logic (de-dollarization, currency devaluation, fiscal deficits) unchanged.
📈 Market outlook and strategic reference
Many institutions have provided three scenario analyses based on geopolitical evolution:
Scenario Assumption Core Conditions (Oil Price) Gold Trend Outlook
Optimistic (Strong stagflation) Prolonged conflict, oil stable above $150 Gold and oil strengthen together, gold hits new all-time highs, real interest rates turn negative, USD credibility damaged.
Neutral (Weak stagflation) Limited opening of the strait, oil at $80-100 Range-bound volatility. Liquidity remains tight, with opposing forces of central bank gold purchases.
Pessimistic (Near-recovery) Rapid resolution of conflict, oil drops back to $60 After recovery, oscillates upward. Gold quickly recovers its decline, returning to a rate cut trading logic.
Overall, the current outlook leans more toward a "neutral to optimistic" path. In the short term, the market finds strong support around $4,500, but high-level oscillations are inevitable, with the trend highly dependent on ceasefire negotiations and macro data like US non-farm payrolls.
Strategy suggestions for everyone:
· Short-term: avoid chasing highs. The simultaneous rise of gold and oil often indicates the market is entering a more intense bargaining phase; consider waiting for a pullback (e.g., gold price retesting $4,500 support) before deploying positions.
· Medium to long-term: focus on gold ETFs (such as 518800) or gold stock ETFs (such as 517400). Against the backdrop of de-dollarization and high global debt, gold remains a strategic hedge for credit.
Summary: The current "gold and oil rising together" signals that the market recognizes the geopolitical conflict has substantially impacted global energy supply chains. The liquidity crisis that previously suppressed gold has been resolved, and the trading focus is shifting to stagflation hedging. As long as the Strait of Hormuz remains blocked, this logic is unlikely to be invalidated.
This analysis is based on publicly available market information and does not constitute direct investment advice.

Why did Trump suddenly call a halt?
Thirty-two days after the start of the war, Trump suddenly said, "We’re about to negotiate peace."
That sounds a bit familiar—he said the same thing on the first day of the war.
But this time, it’s different.
Because numbers don’t lie.
A set of numbers that make the White House uneasy
First, look at the polls.
A joint survey by Reuters and Ipsos released on March 24th shows these figures:
Overall approval rating: 36%—the lowest since he returned to the White House
Economic satisfaction: 29%—the worst in both terms, even lower than during Biden’s worst days
Support for the Iran war: 35%—61% of Americans say "I don’t support"
Cost of living approval: 25%—a core promise of Trump’s 2024 campaign
Numbers are cold, but behind them is the real temperature of public opinion.
Since the war began, Americans’ expressions at gas stations about oil prices are probably as tense as watching a stock market crash.
More troubling for the White House: the financial ledger
War costs money.
How much exactly? Cross-referencing several data points:
Think tank CSIS estimates about $900 million per day
The Pentagon admits: nearly $1 billion daily
Democratic lawmakers reveal: $11.3 billion spent in the six days before the war
Latest Pentagon budget request: over $200 billion
Let’s do some simple math:
32 days × $900 million per day ≈ about $288 billion
What’s that concept?
A Ford-class nuclear-powered aircraft carrier costs about $130 billion.
So, after 32 days of fighting, they’ve burned through more than two carriers.
And that’s just direct military expenses—no accounting for veteran benefits, debt interest, or the "stability costs" that could last indefinitely.
Trump’s ledger: why he must call a halt
Businesspeople understand the importance of cutting losses.
Trump is a businessman. He’s calculated this war’s costs clearly.
What are the benefits of fighting?
Destroying some Iranian nuclear facilities—considered a partial success. But reports say Iran has already transferred some of its enriched uranium equipment—bombed but not completely destroyed.
What are the costs?
Spending $100 million daily, rising inflation at home, Republican lawmakers starting to frown during midterms, oil prices soaring to the point drivers are cursing…
It’s a losing business.
So, calling a halt isn’t because Trump suddenly became a peace advocate, but because:
Costs have exceeded benefits, and it’s time to cut losses.
April 6th: what might happen?
The ball is now in Iran’s court.
U.S. conditions: halt nuclear program, accept inspections, reduce regional influence.
Iran’s conditions: lift sanctions, guarantee regime security, compensate for war damages.
Their core demands don’t overlap at all.
So, the most likely outcomes are:
First (55% probability): Partial ceasefire
U.S. pauses airstrikes, Iran reduces counterattacks, both sides announce "significant progress in negotiations"—but the agreement is incomplete, issues unresolved, just a cooling-off.
Second (25% probability): Downgrade but no agreement
U.S. reduces involvement, Israel continues solo strikes. Trump can say "We won" externally, and internally, "I didn’t send ground troops."
Third (15% probability): Israel strikes alone
U.S. withdraws main forces, but Israel doesn’t stop. This is Israel’s best option—someone helps bomb for a while, Iran is weakened, and they haven’t exhausted their budget.
Fourth (5% probability): Full ceasefire
Impossible unless internal upheaval occurs within Iran.
A piece of geopolitical economic common sense
Great powers fighting small countries rely on resource dominance.
But when great powers fight each other, it’s about who can withstand internal political pressure first.
Can the U.S. beat Iran? Technically, yes.
But domestic public patience has a time window. When oil prices hit a certain critical point, Trump’s approval rating won’t just be a matter of 36%. It could threaten his 2028 nomination.
So, what’s really being negotiated at the table isn’t just a nuclear deal, but the internal political cost line of the U.S.
Some market judgments
Not strict predictions, just for reference:
Crude oil: $100 is the bottom; after an agreement, it could quickly fall back to $85–$90, but the risk premium on the Strait of Hormuz will persist long-term.
Gold: Remains high before April 6; after an agreement, there will be a phased correction, but if Iran’s issues aren’t resolved, there’s still hope later in the year.
U.S. stocks: The short-term opportunity in energy stocks has passed; defensive sectors and gold stocks are worth watching.
In conclusion
Trump is a "real person."
On the first day of the war, he said, "I will be very good at war," and after thirty-two days, he said, "We’re about to negotiate peace."
There’s no personality split here—just a businessman realizing the costs are too high, and reacting normally.
War is an extension of politics; politics is a reflection of domestic public opinion.
When approval ratings drop to 36%, even the toughest strongman has to start doing the math.
That’s probably why, on April 6th, it might really be a turning point.