The US has entered the Israel-Iran war. However, despite an initial 4 per cent surge on the open, oil has settled where it has been since the conflict began in early June — around US$72 to US$75 a barrel.Trump claims the attacks from the US on Iranian nuclear facilities over the weekend are a very short, very tactical, one-off. This is something his base can get behind — some really big conservative players do not want a long-contracted war that sucks the US into external disputes.Whether this will be the case or not is up for debate, but there is a precedent from Trump's first presidency that we can look to. Iran had attacked several American bases in 2019, as well as attacking Saudi Arabia's most important oil refinery with Iranian drones. There wasn't a huge amount of damage; it was more a symbolic movement and display of capabilities by Iran.Initially, Trump didn't react — it took pressure from Gulf allies like the UAE and Israel for him to respond, which saw him order the assassination of the head of the Iranian Defence Force, Qasem Soleimani. This led to an Iranian response of ‘lots of noise’ and ‘cage rattling’, but minimal real action events, just a few drone attacks. Trump is betting on the same reaction now.If Iran follows the same patterns from the previous engagement, the geopolitical side of this is already at its peak.As of now, Iran is not going after or destroying major Gulf energy capabilities. Nor have there been any disruptions to the shipping traffic through the Strait of Hormuz. In fact, apart from a posturing vote to block the Strait, Iran has not made any indication that it is going to disrupt oil in any way that would lead to price surges.Additionally, despite the U.S. military equipment buildup in the region being its highest since the Iraq war, critical Iranian energy infrastructure is running largely unscathed.This all suggests that the geopolitics and the physical and futures oil markets remain disconnected. Oil will spike on news rumours, but the actual impacts in the physical realm to this point remain low. Of course, this could change in future. But, for now, the risk of seeing oil move to US$100 a barrel is still a minority case rather than the majority.
Key trends affecting assets
-
Automation: Using machine-learning tools to speed up internal checks and reduce operating costs, which may support efficiency ratios even as revenue grows modestly.
Signal: Better asset use -
Basel III pressure: New global banking rules may require banks to hold more capital to protect against risk, potentially constraining returns and dividend flexibility.
Watch: Capital buffer needs -
Investment pipeline: Strong deal activity across mergers, underwriting and institutional clients could support future fee growth if advisory volumes hold.
Watch: Advisory fees -
Private credit shift: More corporate loans are being moved to outside private credit firms instead of staying on bank balance sheets, shifting where fee revenue is captured.
Target: Higher returns
EPS above $5.61 | Fee pipeline acceleration
Investment banking recovery tracks ahead of expectations. Capital buffers absorb GSIB surcharges, supporting dividend flexibility and reinforcing confidence in advisory momentum.
Possible reaction: momentum may build if volume confirms the move and financial sector sentiment improves.EPS between $5.42 and $5.61 | Stable capital margins
Net interest income holds near expectations. Credit quality remains stable, with provisions rising only modestly. Advisory revenue improves but does not accelerate, while capital distributions remain on track.
Possible reaction: the stock may hold gains but lack a clear near-term catalyst for re-rating.EPS below $5.42 | Credit delinquency surges
Delinquency rates move higher across consumer credit and commercial real estate. Funding costs compress net interest margins, while advisory fees disappoint and guidance turns more cautious.
Possible reaction: financial sector sentiment may weaken, particularly if the miss points to broader credit or funding pressure.







