The geopolitical risk premium is rapidly receding, but the shipping recovery in the Strait of Hormuz is far smoother than the oil price curve suggests.
On June 23, international crude markets sent a clear signal: WTI closed at $73.21/barrel, Brent at $76.85/barrel, both down about 1% for the day. Over the entire month of June, the two benchmarks fell nearly 16%, erasing almost all the risk premium accumulated since the conflict began. Markets seem to believe that the 60-day US-Iran ceasefire can quickly unclog this global energy artery.
However, industry public data paints a starkly different picture. As of June 23, 162 laden crude oil tankers with trackable AIS signals were stranded in and around the strait, carrying approximately 120 million barrels of crude and refined products. More alarmingly, a large number of Iran-linked tankers and small-to-medium product tankers have turned off their positioning signals, becoming 'dark ships,' meaning the real congestion is even higher. The daily number of transiting vessels remains less than 60% of pre-conflict levels, and the congestion deadlock is far from resolved.
Insurance: The First Hard Barrier to Shipping Recovery
Why are shipowners 'daring to go but not going'? The core pain point is war risk insurance premiums. Current rates in the strait, while down from their conflict peak, remain at around 1% of hull value, compared to 0.1% before the conflict. For a VLCC, a single transit of the Strait of Hormuz now costs $2 million in war risk premiums.
What does this mean? Shipping companies' profit margins are severely squeezed by insurance costs. Major lines are only sending a few vessels on trial runs, while smaller operators are rerouting via the Cape of Good Hope, increasing fuel and labor costs. Unless war risk premiums return to normal, the strait's throughput efficiency cannot recover to pre-conflict levels, and global crude transport turnover will remain under pressure. For refineries and traders reliant on Persian Gulf crude, this directly raises the uncertainty of landed costs.
Oil Price Plunge: Sentiment Release or Trend Reversal?
Oil prices fell 16% in a single month, suggesting excessive market optimism. Multiple institutional analysts point out that this correction is more a short-term release of sentiment than a fundamental reversal. The 60-day ceasefire is highly unstable, with deep-rooted disagreements among Middle Eastern parties unresolved, and the geopolitical situation could deteriorate at any time.
From a pricing logic perspective, the recent decline has already discounted the short-term benefit of restored navigation. Should there be another attack on vessels, channel control actions, or diplomatic escalation, the outflow of accumulated crude would be interrupted again, and risk premiums would quickly rebound. Refineries and traders who base long-term procurement costs on short-term price drops risk missing a potential rebound.
Industrial Chain Transmission: From Crude to Chemical Fibers
Fluctuations in the Strait of Hormuz directly impact raw material costs for China's textile industry. As the world's largest producer of chemical fibers, China imports large volumes of naphtha and PX for PTA production, with transport routes heavily dependent on Middle Eastern shipping lanes.
During the strait blockage, naphtha landed prices surged, driving up costs for polyester filament and staple fiber. Textile clusters like Keqiao and Shengze reported that raw material price volatility made order quoting extremely difficult—customers refused price increases, while factories couldn't absorb costs. The current oil price plunge offers temporary relief, but conservative shipowner strategies mean transport times and freight costs remain unstable, leaving the supply chain's 'last mile' fragile.