The author asserts physical oil delivery costs are much higher than futures prices, war damage has created a massive production shortfall, and new disruptions to shipping (Strait) are occurring. The market is ignoring these "plain facts," suggesting a mispricing between futures (market expectation) and the physical supply reality, which should correct upward. A long position in a broad oil ETF like USO is implied as a bet that oil prices will rise to reflect the sustained supply shock the author describes. The war could de-escalate faster than expected; global demand could weaken significantly; OPEC+ could release spare capacity; the market may already have priced in these risks more efficiently than the author perceives.
The author asserts physical oil delivery costs are much higher than futures prices, war damage has created a massive production shortfall, and new disruptions to shipping (Strait) are occurring. The market is ignoring these "plain facts," suggesting a mispricing between futures (market expectation) and the physical supply reality, which should correct upward. A long position in a broad oil ETF like USO is implied as a bet that oil prices will rise to reflect the sustained supply shock the author describes. The war could de-escalate faster than expected; global demand could weaken significantly; OPEC+ could release spare capacity; the market may already have priced in these risks more efficiently than the author perceives.