After the Strait of Hormuz Reopens: How Does U.S.-Iran Reconciliation Make Crude Oil, Gold, and Bitcoin Fall in Sync?

Local time June 23, Iran’s Permanent Representative to the United Nations Office at Geneva, Bahreini, officially confirmed that the Strait of Hormuz has been fully opened to global merchant shipping for a period of 60 days, during which no transit fees will be charged. Earlier, the U.S. and Iran finalized a roadmap within 60 days to rush to a final agreement in Bürgenstock, Switzerland. They set up a high-level committee to coordinate and advance efforts, while also simultaneously establishing special working groups on sanctions relief, nuclear issues, and dispute supervision, among others. A dedicated liaison hotline has been opened for the Strait of Hormuz, enabling rapid response to emergencies. This sequence of events marks a technical de-escalation window after months of regional standoff that has continued since the U.S.-Israel joint strike on Iran in February 2026.

For global commodity markets, the significance of the strait reopening goes far beyond the physical opening of a waterway—it means the “war premium” that had previously supported oil prices is being systematically stripped out of pricing models. According to statistics from the commodity data and analytics platform Kpler, as more oil is shipped out of the Persian Gulf, crude oil futures have fallen to their lowest level since the outbreak of the U.S.-Iran conflict. Reuters, citing shipping data, reported that on Wednesday, three tankers were en route out of the Strait of Hormuz, carrying a total of approximately 5 million barrels of crude oil. U.S. Energy Secretary Wright said that over the past 24 hours, a total of 72 vessels passed through the Strait of Hormuz, transporting about 20 million barrels of crude oil.

The logic for the disappearance of the geopolitical risk premium is straightforward: when the Strait of Hormuz— the world’s most important crude oil transportation chokepoint— is reopened, the market’s panic-driven pricing of supply disruption loses its most core support. But what needs to be asked is whether this premium fading is a one-off pulse, or whether it will trigger a deeper restructuring of asset pricing logic.

The pricing-logic switch behind crude oil’s 4.5% single-day plunge

On June 25, international oil prices plunged. NYMEX WTI crude oil futures fell 4.56% to $69.87 per barrel, the lowest since March 2. ICE Brent crude oil futures fell 4.45% to $73.38 per barrel. The intraday low of $73.22 had already approached the closing level of February 27— the day before the U.S.-Israel airstrike on Iran.

This is not a decline driven purely by news. In terms of price structure, Brent crude has cumulatively fallen by more than 40% from wartime highs. Dong Chao, a senior analyst for crude oil at Shenwan Futures, said this round of decline mainly contains two logics: first, a rapid reversal of geopolitical expectations— the $20 to $25 per barrel geopolitical premium formed earlier due to geopolitical conflict is being quickly digested; second, supply-addition expectations have strengthened significantly. OPEC+ raised production quota three consecutive times, for a cumulative increase of 650,000 barrels per day.

Based on the Geopolitical Risk Premium Index (GPR Index) for crude oil risk premia constructed using Shanghai Steel Union terminal data, the dissipatable panic premium (alpha) has returned to zero. The current premium consists entirely of structural residual value (beta), with no short-term panic premium that can be dissipated. Model calculations show that the geopolitical premium embedded in current Brent prices is only $6.67. This means oil prices are undergoing a paradigm shift from “geopolitical pricing” to “supply-demand fundamentals pricing.” Risk compensation that had previously been priced in due to geopolitical conflict is being removed on a large scale. However, whether the market’s pricing of this process is overly optimistic is still a question worth ongoing observation.

Gold Falls Below $4,000: Why Safe-Haven Assets Are Facing Pressure in Tandem

Oil is not the only asset under attack. As of June 25, London spot gold fell 3.17% to $3,991.7 per ounce; COMEX gold futures fell 3.21% to $4,016.4 per ounce. Spot gold broke through the $4,000 level for the first time since November 2025. Compared with the historical peak of $5,598.75 at the start of the year, it has retreated by about 30%. Silver fell even more sharply: London silver spot fell 6.79% to $57.374 per ounce.

Gold and crude oil falling together reveals a relationship often overlooked: the geopolitical risk premium is not unique to crude oil. When the U.S.-Iran conflict escalated, gold— as a traditional safe-haven asset— was priced with a “conflict premium.” When de-escalation signals appeared, that premium also faced clearing out. The deeper transmission mechanism is that falling oil prices ease inflation expectations, which in turn weakens the demand for gold as an inflation hedge. By June, the gold price had fallen more than 20% from its peak, and under market convention had already entered a bear market.

One of the main factors pressuring gold is precisely the U.S.-Iran war that broke out earlier: rising energy prices pushed up inflation and increased market expectations of Fed rate hikes. Now that oil prices are falling, this logic is operating in reverse.

Bitcoin Falls Below $60,000: A Reconfirmation of Risk-Asset Attributes

The crypto market has not been spared either. On June 25, Bitcoin briefly fell to $59,023.98, the lowest level since October 10, 2024. As of the time of writing, according to Gate market data, the BTC price is temporarily $61,712, with the 24-hour decline narrowing to 1.5%.

This move carries important structural implications. After the U.S.-Iran conflict erupted at the end of February 2026, Bitcoin fell from $73,000 to below $60,000 within a few weeks. Now that the geopolitical situation has eased, Bitcoin has not only failed to rebound but has probed even lower— and this pattern itself suggests that Bitcoin’s performance in a geopolitical crisis is closer to that of a risk asset than a safe-haven asset like gold.

Bitcoin’s decline coincided with the adjustment in technology stocks, as major tech companies are experiencing large-scale capital outflows. Analysts point out that the impact of geopolitical factors (U.S.-Iran related) is weakening, and the market’s focus is shifting to macro data (employment, CPI) and corporate earnings reports. This further reinforces a judgment: Bitcoin’s pricing logic has shifted from the “digital gold” narrative to a framework more centered on risk assets.

When the geopolitical risk premium fades from global asset pricing, Bitcoin not only does not receive safe-haven capital inflows, but is instead pressured by changes in overall risk appetite.

The transmission chains and divergence logic of the three assets

Crude oil, gold, and Bitcoin all weakened under the same event-driven catalyst, but their transmission mechanisms differ significantly.

Crude oil’s transmission is the most direct: the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz means the risk of supply disruptions has been lifted, and stranded tankers have been departing one after another. Washington has granted Tehran a 60-day sanctions exemption period, allowing Iran to sell oil during negotiations. Iran’s current crude oil exports are about 1.5 million barrels per day, and independent political analysts expect Iran may restore daily output to 1.6 million barrels within 4 to 8 weeks. The abrupt shift in supply expectations directly drags down prices.

Gold’s transmission path is more circuitous: oil prices fall → inflation expectations decline → changes in real interest rate expectations → the favorable factor of lower gold holding costs is offset by the fading safe-haven demand. Gold falling below the $4,000 level is also hit by a strengthening U.S. dollar and rising expectations that interest rates will increase further.

Bitcoin’s transmission involves a broader change in risk appetite. As geopolitical political risk dissipates and the market shifts from a “safe-haven mode” to a “recovery in risk appetite” mode, funds do not flow into Bitcoin; instead, they flow into traditional risk assets. Bitcoin tracks risk assets lower and is highly tied to the AI theme. This trend indicates that in the current macro environment, Bitcoin is closer to high-beta assets like technology stocks rather than safe-haven assets like gold.

There is also a deeper link among the three: crude oil prices are the anchor for global inflation. Falling oil prices ease inflation pressure and give central banks policy space. But at the same time, this also means the narrative logic that previously drove inflows into gold and Bitcoin due to anti-inflation demand is weakening.

How uncertainty in the 60-day window affects subsequent pricing

Although the market is pricing “peace,” the fragility of this agreement cannot be ignored. This agreement, in essence, is crisis management where both sides get what they need. The U.S. is eager to push for de-escalation. The blockage of the Strait of Hormuz kept international oil prices high, and domestic inflation pressure directly affects the midterm election’s prospects. For Iran, years of sanctions and military confrontation have placed enormous strain on its finances and on people’s livelihoods. Restoring oil exports and unfreezing assets can quickly bring in revenue. However, consensus is currently concentrated on technical areas such as the economy and navigation; the most core nuclear agenda item has not yet entered substantive talks.

Bahreini explicitly refuted the claim that “Iran agreed to expand IAEA inspections,” stating that related discussions will be left for the next stage.

The biggest external variable is Israel. The Lebanon-Israel ceasefire is the first litmus test for the agreement to take effect. Once fighting in southern Lebanon reignites, Iran may restart the Strait of Hormuz blockade at any time. The memorandum of understanding states that after signing, shipping through the Strait of Hormuz will be free for 60 days; but after 60 days, if Iran restarts controls or charges transit fees, it may trigger further Western sanctions or military responses. Both countries have hardliners that constrain the situation, and any slight shift could lead to back-and-forth reversals.

For investors, this means the market’s “peace pricing” may be overly optimistic. The geopolitical risk premium index shows that in the euphoria of peace, the market has temporarily “forgotten” the long-term structural damage the conflict has caused to oil prices.

Strait transit data is wildly volatile—on June 19, the single-day transit time surged to 141.5 hours, then dropped back to 5 hours the next day—indicating that the risk in the waterway has not been eliminated.

From geopolitical risk premium fading to structural pricing restructuring

The U.S.-Iran 60-day agreement roadmap and the official reopening of the Strait of Hormuz mark a technical de-escalation after months of Middle East standoff. The impact of this event on global asset pricing goes far beyond a one-day plunge in oil. From a more macro perspective, we are witnessing a turning point in pricing logic: geopolitical political risk is being rapidly stripped out of commodity pricing.

When WTI crude falls below $70, gold loses the $4,000 level, and Bitcoin probes down to $60,000, the rare phenomenon of all three assets weakening in sync points to a single core driving force: concentrated clearing of geopolitical risk premia. But market pricing has never been one-directional. The current rapid decline in oil prices is masking the real picture in the shipping market. Recently, some oil companies sought to charter very large crude carriers (VLCCs) for Iraqi crude, with quotes close to nearly three times the pre-conflict level.

Futures reflect expectations, while shipping reflects currently available transport capacity and the risk premium. Global commercial crude oil inventories decreased by 310 million barrels, refined product consumption by 430 million barrels, and countries also released 140 million barrels from strategic reserves. Overall inventories have fallen back to levels seen at the beginning of 2024. A supply gap as large as 700 million barrels is difficult to fill quickly in the short term. Restoring Middle East oil and gas production capacity is far more complex than “once the strait opens, production can resume immediately.” In fact, it is a gradual recovery curve that may span up to a year. It will take Iraq 6 to 12 months to restore output fully to full capacity. Structural repair schedules for some damaged refineries may extend into 2027.

In the next 60-day window, it is both a testing ground for the U.S. and Iran to verify each other’s commitment to the deal and a key observation period for global markets to reassess asset pricing logic in the “post-geopolitical premium era.” The window for peace is hard-won, but turning it into genuine structural change still requires bridging a trust gap far deeper than the Strait of Hormuz.

FAQ

Q: What are the specific contents of the U.S.-Iran 60-day agreement?

The two sides agreed on a roadmap to rush for a final agreement within 60 days, established a high-level committee to coordinate progress, and simultaneously formed special working groups on sanctions relief, nuclear issues, and dispute supervision. A dedicated liaison hotline for the Strait of Hormuz has been opened, enabling rapid response to emergencies. Iran confirmed that the Strait of Hormuz has been fully opened to global merchant shipping for 60 days, during which no transit fees will be charged. The U.S. Treasury issued oil export waiver permits, and Iran’s $12 billion in overseas frozen assets will begin unfreezing in batches.

Q: Why did crude oil, gold, and Bitcoin fall simultaneously?

The common driver behind their synchronized weakness is the concentrated clearing of geopolitical risk premia. Crude oil directly benefits (or suffers) from the removal of supply disruption risk; gold’s safe-haven demand fades as the conflict eases, while falling oil prices also ease inflation expectations; and Bitcoin’s decline further confirms its risk-asset attribute rather than a safe-haven attribute.

Q: How much is the geopolitical risk premium specifically?

Based on quantitative analysis using the Geopolitical Risk Premium Index, the $20 to $25 per barrel geopolitical premium formed earlier due to geopolitical conflict is being quickly absorbed. The dissipatable panic premium has returned to zero, and the current premium is entirely structural residual value. Brent crude oil has already accumulated a drop of more than 40% from its wartime highs.

Q: How likely is the agreement to fail after 60 days?

The agreement itself has multiple uncertainties. The nuclear agenda has not yet entered substantive negotiations; Israel is the largest external variable, and the Lebanon-Israel ceasefire is the first litmus test for the agreement’s implementation. Hardliners in both countries are constraining factors. The memorandum of understanding states that if Iran restarts controls or charges transit fees after 60 days, it may trigger further Western sanctions or military responses.

Q: What does this mean for cryptocurrency investors?

Bitcoin’s performance in geopolitical crises is closer to that of risk assets than safe-haven assets. When geopolitical political risk dissipates, Bitcoin does not receive safe-haven capital inflows; instead, it is pressured by changes in overall risk appetite. Investors should watch the progress of U.S.-Iran technical negotiations, because every negotiation signal could become a catalyst for repricing across asset classes.

#原油