Connect with us

Business

Commentary: Why isn’t the stock market freaking out more over the Iran war? Here’s why

Published

on

Commentary: Why isn’t the stock market freaking out more over the Iran war? Here’s why

Since the end of February, the three major stock market indices — the Standard & Poor’s 500, the Dow Jones industrials and the Nasdaq composite — have fallen by a few percentage points.

One might ask: That’s all? Doesn’t the market know there’s a war on?

Yes, the stock market knows. It just doesn’t care as much as you might think it should.

It feels like this drawdown should be worse than this given everything going on in the world.

— Ben Carlson

Advertisement

History tells us that we shouldn’t be all that surprised. Although geopolitical events like the launch of military actions tend to rattle the securities markets in the short term, investors eventually shift to the long view, assuming that these conflicts will eventually be resolved and the door reopened to bullish sentiment.

The major downturns of the past, such as the crashes of 1929, 2000 and 2008, have been caused less by external events than by business and investment internals, such as threats to economic structure — over-leveraging in the first, the dot-com crash in the second and the housing crash in the third. Those were genuine crashes, not short-term downturns.

The Iran war hasn’t yet taken on the coloration of an economic threat, although that bulks large on the horizon if the disruption of oil supplies created by the closing of the Strait of Hormuz continues or tightens or the Middle East energy infrastructure sustains more damage.

Indeed, two of the most severe downturns of recent times are associated with oil — the Arab oil embargo of 1973, following the Yom Kippur War, which brought the S&P 500 down by more than 16% over a period of about six weeks, and Iraq’s seizure of Kuwaiti oilfields in 1990, which caused a 16% drop in the S&P over about two months.

Advertisement

Let’s take a look at the condition of the stock market since the U.S. attacks on Iran began on Feb. 28, and then place it in the context of market behavior after other major events, dating back to the start of World War II.

From Feb. 28 through Thursday’s trading close, the S&P lost 4.31%, the Dow, 5.05% and the Nasdaq, 3.57%. Those declines feel ugly, in part because they’ve occurred over a short time frame of about five weeks. But in the grand scheme of things, they’re modest.

“It feels like this drawdown should be worse than this given everything going on in the world,” Ben Carlson of Ritholtz Wealth Management posted last week. But Carlson observed that 5% pullbacks are common, in good times and bad — only three years since 1990 have gone without one.

There were two each in 2023, 2024 and 2025, which all ultimately delivered double-digit S&P returns. None, obviously, came close to the 10% pullback known as a correction, which by Carlson’s reckoning occurs on average every 1.8 years.

The latest pullbacks have come with the stock market percolating along at historically generous valuations. This year, the S&P’s price-earnings multiple has hovered around 30x, well above its historical average of less than 20x. That alone should have had investors bracing for a reversal or even a correction.

Advertisement

When similar events occur during bull markets, external events are often a trigger rather than a cause. Investors look for reasons to take profits, even though the rationales may have nothing to do with the market action.

To place things in a longer perspective, let’s review how the stock market has reacted to great global events of the past. (Thanks to Ryan Detrick of the financial advisory firm Carson Group for compiling these statistics.)

The Pearl Harbor attack of Dec. 7, 1941, brought the S&P down by 11% over the following three months — but one year later the market was up by 4.3%. One month after Richard Nixon’s resignation on Aug. 9, 1974, the market was down by 14.4%; one year later it was up by 6.4%. The market entirely shrugged off the Cuban missile crisis, the Kennedy assassination, the Hamas attack on Israel on Oct. 7, 2023, and Russia’s 2014 annexation of Crimea and its 2022 invasion of Ukraine; none was associated with a market decline over the following month.

Even when events did precede a market decline, stocks often recovered within weeks or months. North Korea’s invasion of the South in 1950, launching the Korean War, took the market down 12.9% over the next two weeks, but as Kelly Bogdanova of RBC Wealth Management documents, it made up the loss over the next 56 trading days. Similarly, the Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022 is blamed for a 7.4% decline over the following two weeks, but the market broke even 27 trading days later.

Bogdanova notes that after the 1990 Kuwait invasion, which knocked the market down by 16% over seven weeks, the market didn’t break even for an additional four months. But that was oil talking.

Advertisement

The current market environment may be unique, because it’s entirely in the hands of one reckless individual. As the late Michael Metz of Oppenheimer & Co. taught me, the stock market typically rises in times of economic growth and economic downturns, as long as investors know where things stand on the turn of the wheel.

What they hate is uncertainty, and no one revels in squeezing uncertainty until it screams for mercy like Trump. Consider how the market got whipsawed by his announcement of “Liberation Day” tariffs, a faux-protectionist stunt that took place on April 2, 2025, and therefore marked its one-year anniversary Thursday.

The draconian tariffs were announced, amended, partially withdrawn, reimposed, etc., etc., until investors got queasy on the merry-go-round. The Supreme Court finally put a stop to the shenanigans on Feb. 20.

One month after the initial announcement, investors still didn’t know what to make of it. The S&P was virtually flat, the Dow had lost 2.15% and the Nasdaq was up 2.1%. Since then, investors have learned enough about Trump’s decision-making to disregard the chatter. (This is the TACO trade, for “Trump Always Chickens Out,” in action.) As of Thursday, the S&P had gained 13.7% since Liberation Day, the Dow was up 9.1% and the Nasdaq was up 19.3%.

The Iran war is driving a whipsaw all its own. The market has been rising and falling in accordance with whether investors buy into Trump’s optimism or grow downcast at the absence of any endgame, a judgment that can change minute by minute. But it has remained in a tight range of 3 to 5 percentage points.

Advertisement

The latest week provides a good illustration: Tuesday saw shares turn in their best day in months, with the Dow gaining 1,125 points, or 2.49%, and the other indices roughly matching its performance.

But on Thursday, the stock index futures markets plummeted after Trump’s vacuous address to the nation, ostensibly due to disappointment that he didn’t provide an ending date or show that he knows what he’s doing. Yet investors didn’t show the same anxiety once trading started, sending the indices into a sort of fugue state. The S&P gained a meager 7.37 points, or 0.11%, the Dow lost 61.07 (0.13%) and the Nasdaq gained 38.23 points (0.18%), all on volume a fraction of what it has been in recent weeks. The trading range held.

It’s possible, of course, that the market will be stirred out of its slumber by a major development. A ceasefire, say, or something bad. Or that the Iran war will transition to a new phase that makes it resemble the oil embargos of the past rather than a transitory disruption of the status quo. We won’t know until it happens.

Until then, the average investor’s choice is between moving everything into cash, or strapping in for the ride.

Advertisement

Business

Here’s How Much More You’re Spending on Gas Because of the Iran War

Published

on

Here’s How Much More You’re Spending on Gas Because of the Iran War

Since the war with Iran broke out, the average American household has spent an extra …

$190.47 on gasoline.

For many households, that is the equivalent of a month’s electricity bill.

Advertisement

Or a week’s worth of groceries for a couple.

The gasoline calculation is part of an analysis conducted by researchers at Brown University as they and others try to assess the economic costs of the prolonged fighting.

Advertisement

Calculating the cost of war — a skipped meal or a drive not made — is an imperfect science. But these estimates can offer a sense of how fighting far away can change behaviors large and small each day, disrupting American life.

Discomfort has not been spread evenly. As the price of gasoline has shot up, the national average is now …

Advertisement

$4.55 a gallon

In Illinois, it is more expensive …

$4.99 a gallon.

In California, it’s …

Advertisement

$6.13 a gallon.

Diesel, which is used to power factories and move most goods around the country, also quickly climbed.

Taken together, the amount of extra money Americans have collectively spent on gasoline and diesel since Feb. 28, when the United States and Israel attacked Iran, is staggering:

Advertisement

$0.0 billion

Hunting for cheaper gas, Americans are going to Costcos and Sam’s Clubs more often to fill up their tanks.

Advertisement

Drivers visited Sam’s Club gas stations 18 percent more in the last week of April than the same time last year.

They are filling their tanks with less gas.

One gallon fewer at a time.

Advertisement

They are riding more subways and commuter trains.

They are using bike shares more often.

Advertisement

People rode more buses in March than before the war:

45 million more rides.

People are spending less on essentials.

Advertisement

More than 40 percent of people in a recent poll said they were spending less on groceries and medical care.

They are putting less into savings.

Advertisement

Richer households are spending a relatively small share of their income on gas:

2.7%.

Poorer households are spending far more:

4.2%.

Advertisement

This is not the first time in recent years that the economy has been shocked by war.

After Russia invaded Ukraine in 2022, oil prices spiked, sending gasoline soaring. At its peak, the national average was …

$5.02 a gallon.

Advertisement

Where things go this time around is anyone’s guess. When the war does end, it will still take weeks or months for energy supplies to level off.

Advertisement

Nearly three out of four goods move across the country by truck.

Many of those trucks are powered by diesel, making them much costlier to drive, and what’s inside them costlier for consumers.

Last month, a tomato cost …

Advertisement

40% more

than it did the same time last year.

More expensive fuel isn’t the only culprit for rising costs. Extreme weather, tariffs and other factors have forced prices up for many industries. Gasoline also becomes more expensive as the summer approaches.

Advertisement

But inflation last month rose at its fastest pace in nearly three years, and gasoline was among the fastest rising categories.

Continue Reading

Business

Another California tech company lays off thousands

Published

on

Another California tech company lays off thousands

The layoffs bludgeoning the tech industry continued this week as artificial intelligence reshapes the industry.

Mountain View-based Intuit, the maker of TurboTax, on Wednesday said it was laying off 17% of its workforce, or about 3,000 employees, as part of its restructuring to cut costs and invest in artificial intelligence.

The company said it had slowed down due to “too many organizational layers” and the cuts will simplify the organization to become a “faster, leaner, more focused company.” Intuit said it will close its offices in Reno and Woodland Hills and incur an estimated $300 million to $340 million in restructuring charges.

“We believe we can serve more customers and deliver breakthrough products that fuel our customers’ success by reducing complexity and simplifying our structure,” Sasan Goodarzi, chief executive of Intuit, said in a memo shared with employees.

Intuit announced the layoffs on the same day it reported its third-quarter results, in which revenue jumped 10% from a year earlier, to $8.56 billion.

Advertisement

Intuit adds to the count of more than 114,000 tech-sector employees laid off this year, according to Layoffs.fyi.

Meta laid off 8,000 workers on Wednesday, as the company cuts costs to ramp up investment in AI agents and infrastructure. The ever-expanding list of tech companies that have cut jobs includes Coinbase, Amazon, LinkedIn and more. Some have cited productivity gains enabling fewer workers to accomplish more with AI, while others pointed out restructuring and cost-cutting to prepare for the AI disruption.

In an earnings call, Intuit‘s chief financial officer, Sandeep Aujla, said the cuts were intended to make the organization leaner, and weren’t tied directly to Intuit’s AI use.

“AI is an important part of how we’re evolving as a company, but these decisions were not driven by AI replacing employees,” an Intuit spokesperson reiterated in an email .

Best known for its TurboTax platform, Intuit has branched into accounting with QuickBooks, credit scoring through Credit Karma and email automation via Mailchimp. Facing increased competition for AI-driven tax solutions, the company is integrating AI across its entire portfolio.

Advertisement

“Our AI agents are delivering value at scale, with our accounting AI agents powering recommendations across more than 50 million transactions each week, and business tax AI agents identifying millions of dollars in deductions,” Goodarzi said in the earnings call.

The restructuring will reduce overlapping roles in TurboTax and Credit Karma as the company integrates both into a single team.

A deep sense of anxiety has settled in the tech job market, propelled by consecutive layoffs and coding tasks being automated by AI.

Tech leaders have portrayed the role of human software engineers as a human in the loop, overseeing and verifying AI agents that do the work of coders.

By 2027, software developers are expected to see a 3% job contraction due to AI coding capabilities, according to Labor Automation Forecasting Hub by Metaculus, a popular website where forecasters predict how AI will reshape the workforce.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Business

Older AC and fridge chemicals amp up climate change. Trump just rolled back limits on them

Published

on

Older AC and fridge chemicals amp up climate change. Trump just rolled back limits on them

President Trump on Thursday announced that grocery stories and air conditioning companies will be allowed to keep using high-polluting refrigerants for longer than they would have under a law he signed during his first administration.

“This was a tremendous burden, a tremendous cost,” said Trump, surrounded in the Oval Office by executives from supermarket chains including Kroger, Fairway, Neimann Foods and Piggly Wiggly. “It was making the equipment unaffordable, and the actual benefit was nothing.”

The move loosens rules meant to restrict hydroflourocarbons, a class of climate-damaging chemicals used in cooling equipment. HFCs are known as “super pollutants” because their impact on climate change can be tens of thousands of times greater than carbon dioxide during their shorter lifespans.

In the move Thursday, the Environmental Protection Agency extends the deadline for companies to comply with a 2023 rule transitioning refrigerators and air conditioners off HFCs and onto new cooling technologies. Reducing these chemicals and moving to cleaner refrigerants has long been a bipartisan issue.

Trump is also proposing exemptions from a rule requiring leak repairs on large-scale refrigeration systems.

Advertisement

The administration framed the changes as part of its effort to bring down high grocery costs. EPA administrator Lee Zeldin said the actions will save $2.4 billion for Americans and safeguard 350,000 jobs.

“Americans who wanted to be able to fix their equipment were instead being required to buy far more costly new equipment and that just doesn’t make any sense,” said Zeldin.

David Doniger, senior attorney at the Natural Resources Defense Council, said the move will not only harm the climate, but U.S. competitiveness in global refrigerant markets as well.

“The EPA is catering to a small group of straggling companies by derailing the shift away from these climate super-pollutants,” he said. “The industry at large supports the HFC phasedown and has already invested in making new refrigerants and equipment, currently installed in thousands of stores.”

Danielle Wright, executive director of the North American Sustainable Refrigeration Council, an environmental nonprofit, said any perceived near-term savings from the rollbacks will be outweighed by the future costs.

Advertisement

“Business owners are far more worried about the escalating cost of keeping aging, high‑global-warming-potential equipment running than they are about the cost of installing new, compliant systems,” she said.

Trump dismissed the climate concerns, saying his changes “are not going to have any impact on the environment.”

He said he wants to get rid of the technology transition rule entirely in the future.

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending