Tunnusluvut
Riskitaso
Keskimääräinen: 5 / 7
Huomioi, että vaikka osakerahastoihin säästäminen on pitkällä aikavälillä tuottanut hyvin, tulevasta tuotosta ei ole takeita. On olemassa riski, että et saa sijoittamiasi varoja takaisin.
Tunnusluvut
Juoksevat kulut
2,06%Omaisuusluokka
OsakeKategoria
Sektori energia osakkeetPerusvaluutta
USDLainoitusaste
80%Avaintietoasiakirja
Tietoa rahastosta
MST World Energy-rahasto pyrkii US-dollarimääräiseen arvonnousuun sijoittamalla maailmanlaajuisesti listattuihin yrityksiin, joiden liikevaihdosta merkittävä osuus koostuu energian tutkimuksesta, kehittämisestä, tuotannosta tai jakelusta. Rahasto sijoittaa myös yrityksiin, jotka pyrkivät kehittämään uusia teknologioita energian tuottamisessa tai etsimään vaihtoehtoisia energiamuotoja.
Vastaavan tyyppisiä rahastoja
Omistukset
Päivitetty 31.8.2026
Jakauma
- Osakkeet99%
- Lyhyt korko1%
Asiakkaat katsoivat myös
Foorumi
Liity keskusteluun Nordnet Socialissa
Kirjaudu
6.9.Oil has become a supply story, and that changes the case for energy equities Brent is trading around $95 after its strongest weekly gain since mid-July, and the obvious question is whether oil has simply become too expensive. I think that is the wrong question. What has changed this year is not that the world suddenly wants dramatically more oil, but that fewer barrels are reliably reaching the market. The evidence is consistent across three fronts. Reuters reported on 4 September that only four commercial vessels transited the Strait of Hormuz on Thursday, against a ten-day average of roughly 15 and around 125 per day before the conflict began on 28 February. On 1 September Reuters reported that, for the first time on record, Iran had gone about seven weeks without shipping meaningful crude through Hormuz, with no cargoes reaching China since the blockade was reinstated on 14 July. Tehran is still loading 220,000 to 255,000 barrels per day and drawing on floating storage, so this is not a complete stop, but it is a long way from March levels of roughly 2 million barrels per day. Meanwhile, Ukrainian strikes have taken Lukoil's NORSI refinery and the Novatek complex at Ust-Luga offline, which matters less for global crude supply than for refined products and regional balances. Against that, OPEC+ left October output policy unchanged on 6 September, and Jorge León at Rystad Energy said plainly that the group currently has very limited power over the physical oil market. That is the heart of it. What increasingly sets the price is which barrels can physically reach a buyer, not what spare capacity exists on paper. The IEA puts the global deficit at around 1.8 million barrels per day this quarter, and the analyst estimates Reuters compiled on 31 August range from 1.65 million to 3.5 million. If that persists, the deliverable barrel keeps repricing higher. This is where my position in BGF World Energy comes in. The fund is not a leveraged bet on Brent. BlackRock's mandate is to hold at least 70 per cent of assets in companies whose predominant activity is the exploration, development, production and distribution of energy, and as of 31 July the largest positions were Shell, Chevron, TotalEnergies, ExxonMobil and Valero. That spread matters, because a prolonged supply shock does not hit just one link in the chain. Higher crude prices can lift upstream cash flow, tight product markets can support refiners, and constrained infrastructure can benefit selected midstream names. The integrated majors have exposure across several parts of the value chain. So the variable I care about is not whether Brent prints $120. It is whether the market stays tight long enough for higher prices to convert into free cash flow, dividends and buybacks. The bear case is serious and I want it stated properly. Goldman Sachs' March analysis put the impact of a full one-month closure of Hormuz at roughly $15 per barrel absent offsets, which is far below the more dramatic numbers being thrown around. Reuters' own analyst poll on 31 August produced a 2026 Brent average of about $85, below spot. The IEA cut its 2026 demand forecast on 12 August precisely because of Hormuz, so demand destruction at these levels is live. And on 6 September Reuters reported that Iran's leverage is eroding while mediators discuss a formula around shipping fees. We have already seen how fast this can unwind: in mid-June, as a framework agreement approached signing in Geneva, Brent fell roughly 5 per cent on two consecutive days to $78.24, its lowest since 3 March. So the biggest risk to the thesis is not weak demand. It is de-escalation. If Hormuz normalises and Iranian barrels return quickly, Brent could fall sharply and energy equities could hand back the geopolitical premium. If the disruption persists, the opposite gets more interesting. At $95, the real question is whether the market is underestimating the value of the barrels that can actually be delivered. That is the part of the oil story that makes me constructive on BGF World Energy. Disclosure: I hold a position in BGF World Energy. Not investment advice. These are my own views. Research, source verification and drafting were assisted by AI. Sources: Reuters, 6 September 2026: OPEC+ keeps oil output policy unchanged for October https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/opec-set-keep-oil-output-policy-unchanged-sunday-sources-say-2026-09-06/ Reuters, 6 September 2026: Iran's Hormuz leverage wanes as US economic squeeze bites https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/irans-hormuz-leverage-wanes-us-economic-squeeze-bites-2026-09-06/ Reuters, 4 September 2026: Gulf shipping traffic via Hormuz keeps below 10-day average https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/gulf-shipping-traffic-via-hormuz-keeps-below-10-day-average-data-shows-2026-09-04/ Reuters, 1 September 2026: Blockade succeeds where sanctions failed as Iran oil exports stall https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/blockade-su
Well-written! I have a large part of my PPM here, but I'm thinking of saving a bit on Nordnet too, but I don't know if one dares to go in now....- 5.9.Pickaxe Mountain, Brent and my energy fund: the risk is the response, not the strike Trump has repeatedly named Kuh-e Kolang Gaz La, or Pickaxe Mountain, as the next target in Iran. The tunnel complex sits south of Natanz, roughly 100 metres underground, never inspected by the IAEA, and Israeli intelligence has reportedly told Washington that centrifuges have been moved inside. The doctrine is stable across administrations: the US will not accept an Iranian nuclear weapon. The constraint is physical, not political. Experts believe the tunnels sit deeper than even the GBU-57 can reach, which is why the mountain is still standing after months of threats. For energy exposure, the strike itself is not the trade. A nuclear site is not a terminal, so nothing hits the supply balance directly. The entire transmission runs through Iran's response, and Tehran has already told CNN it would be devastating. Most of the war premium is already priced. Brent traded above $96 Thursday at six week highs, and Hormuz throughput has collapsed from 21.6 to 4.9 million b/d, down 77 percent. The EIA sees Brent averaging $87 in 2026 with no return toward pre-war supply until early 2027. The tail is violent in both directions: dated Brent cleared $140 in March with Hormuz effectively shut, then fell to $69 on July 2 on the US-Iran memorandum before rebounding to $105 by July 23. I hold this through BGF World Energy A2 rather than a single name, and in this regime that structure matters more than usual. The fund runs at least 70 percent in global energy equities, with Shell, Exxon, Chevron and TotalEnergies each near 10 percent as of the end of March. That is diversified integrated exposure across jurisdictions, so no single asset seizure, sanction or missile changes the thesis. The integrated model also cuts both ways in a supply shock: upstream captures the crude uplift, while downstream margins have been supported by damaged refining capacity across the Middle East and Russia with insufficient replacement elsewhere. The trade-off is that a basket of majors gives up some of the torque a pure upstream name delivers on a headline spike. Two things to keep honest about. NAV stood at USD 35.15 on July 31 against a 52 week range of 25.10 to 36.39, so I am buying near the top of the range, not into weakness. And the share class is USD denominated, meaning a Norwegian holder is running an unhedged currency leg on top of the oil beta. My read is that the skew is still to the upside near term, but the edge is not in guessing whether the mountain gets hit. It is in owning diversified production outside the conflict zone and sitting through the noise. The real risk is adding on a headline top and holding into a deal that takes Brent back to the seventies in weeks. Question for the forum: is the current war premium too thin given Hormuz is running at a fifth of capacity, or is the market already pricing a reopening that is not coming? Disclosure: I hold BGF World Energy A2, plus a position in AuAg Silver Bullet. Not investment advice. This post was researched and drafted with the help of AI, and all sources are linked below for verification. Sources: https://www.vg.no/nyheter/i/m0WJMl/trump-sier-usa-kan-snart-angripe-iransk-atomanlegg https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/5983210-trump-threatens-pickaxe-mountain-strike/ https://www.pbs.org/newshour/world/what-to-know-about-irans-pickaxe-mountain-home-to-an-underground-nuclear-site-threatened-by-trump https://www.cnbc.com/2026/09/03/oil-price-today-iran-war-strait-hormuz.html https://www.eia.gov/outlooks/steo/report/global_oil.php https://www.blackrock.com/no/individual/products/229918/blackrock-world-energy-a2-usd-fund https://citywire.com/funds-insider/fund/blackrock-global-funds-world-energy-fund/c63882
- 4.9. · MuokattuCold Winter, Continued Hormuz Disruption: Gas Is the Trade, Crude Is the Backdrop Cold winter plus continued Gulf disruption is a clean bull case for European gas. For crude, it is mostly backdrop. TTF is above €70/MWh, the highest since early 2023, with Gulf LNG, including Qatar, constrained by the Hormuz disruption. Europe entered autumn with relatively low storage, and inventories typically bottom at winter's end. A cold December through February can drain storage faster, leaving February and March most exposed, precisely when refilling for the following winter becomes urgent. Goldman flags December TTF potentially above €100 if Middle East supply normalises only gradually; Morningstar sees €90 to €120 in a cold-winter scenario. Brent is global. The Hormuz premium outweighs European weather, and the EIA sees Brent around $85 in Q3 before easing toward $69 in 2027 as supply normalises. Cold weather is a second-order factor for crude itself. The trade also only works if the disruption holds: a durable ceasefire and reopening of Hormuz could drain the premium quickly, and equities may only partially capitalise a premium viewed as temporary. For positioning, the distinction is clear. Equinor is the sharp instrument: gas-weighted, with Norwegian pipeline gas becoming more valuable precisely when Gulf LNG is constrained, offset by Norway's petroleum tax and potential NOK strength. BGF World Energy is the blunt one, more oil-weighted, so a TTF spike reaches the portfolio in diluted form. Shell and TotalEnergies bring meaningful LNG exposure, while Valero and Marathon Petroleum are primarily crack-spread plays rather than direct bets on the crude price. The key question: is late winter 2027 underpriced as an energy catalyst, or is it already embedded in the forward curve? Written with assistance of AI. Sources: https://www.euronews.com/business/2026/08/31/european-natural-gas-price-tops-70-for-first-time-since-january-2023 https://www.cnbc.com/2026/08/27/europe-gas-storage-prices-winter-lng.html https://www.eia.gov/outlooks/steo/ https://www.iea.org/reports/oil-market-report-august-2026 https://tradingeconomics.com/commodity/eu-natural-gas/news/523929
- 29.7.The War Has Reached Egypt: The Energy Conflict Widens The war has now reached Egypt. A drone attack on a US owned floating LNG storage facility off Damietta on Egypt's Mediterranean coast shows that the conflict in the Middle East continues to expand geographically. According to Reuters and maritime security firm Ambrey, the floating storage vessel Energos Winter was struck by at least one drone during cargo discharge operations, with the resulting fire spreading to a second vessel, Gaslog Salem. The crew was evacuated and the fire brought under control, and the vessels were moved outside the port area. No group has claimed responsibility, and Egyptian authorities have so far stopped short of formally describing the incident as an attack while the investigation continues. This comes as the United States and Saudi Arabia have carried out joint strikes against Iran backed groups in Iraq, while tension around the Strait of Hormuz and the Red Sea remains elevated. For energy markets this matters. Egypt is a central hub for LNG exports to Europe, with the Idku and Damietta terminals both feeding European supply. As energy infrastructure is hit across an increasing number of countries, the risk of new disruptions to oil and gas supply grows. That can help keep the geopolitical risk premium in the energy market elevated for longer. The conflict now touches or affects energy infrastructure in Iran, Israel, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Yemen and now Egypt. It illustrates how quickly a regional conflict can spread across several of the world's most important energy producing and transit regions. How do you see this affecting European gas supply and pricing going into autumn, and is the market still underpricing this risk? Sources: Reuters: https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/us-saudis-attack-iran-backed-groups-iraq-threatening-intensify-conflict-2026-07-29/ VG: https://www.vg.no/nyheter/i/M79p4E/droneangrep-mot-amerikansk-gasslager-utenfor-egyptisk-havn29.7.Why Is LNG Infrastructure Being Targeted? Possible Motives and Market Implications The drone attack on a US-owned floating LNG facility near Damietta, Egypt, introduces a new layer of geopolitical risk for global energy markets. The identity of the attackers remains unconfirmed, and there is currently no evidence that the primary objective was to halt LNG exports to Europe. However, the incident raises important questions about the strategic motives behind attacks on critical energy infrastructure. Potential motives could include increasing economic pressure on European countries supporting the US or Israel, driving higher energy prices by creating additional uncertainty in global supply chains, weakening Western energy security by targeting critical export facilities and transport routes, and demonstrating that the conflict can impact global energy flows far beyond the immediate battlefield. Although the intentions behind this specific attack remain unclear, the market consequences are significant. Any threat to LNG terminals, export infrastructure, or major shipping routes increases uncertainty around future energy supplies. This typically results in a higher geopolitical risk premium being priced into both natural gas and crude oil markets. The attack comes as tensions continue to escalate across the Middle East, with energy infrastructure and strategic transport corridors already affected or threatened in Iran, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Qatar, and now Egypt. For energy investors, the key takeaway is that geopolitical risk remains a major driver of oil and gas prices. Even without a direct disruption of supply, repeated attacks on critical infrastructure can tighten risk perceptions, increase volatility, and support higher energy market premiums. Sources: Reuters: https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/drone-hits-gas-storage-tanker-egypts-mediterranean-port-2026-07-29/ Reuters: https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/us-saudis-attack-iran-backed-groups-iraq-threatening-intensify-conflict-2026-07-29/ VG: https://www.vg.no/nyheter/i/M79p4E/droneangrep-mot-amerikansk-gasslager-utenfor-egyptisk-havn
- 29.7.Multiple wars are increasing pressure on global oil markets: Emergency reserves are being drained while BGF World Energy A2 benefits from geopolitical risk The oil market is now pricing in more than just the tensions surrounding the Strait of Hormuz. Several overlapping conflicts are affecting global energy security, and the combination of geopolitical instability, low inventories and the risk of supply disruptions is keeping a significant risk premium embedded in oil prices. For investors in the energy sector, including BGF World Energy A2, the key question is how long this risk premium can remain elevated and whether higher oil and gas prices will translate into stronger profitability for the companies held by the fund. The most important factor remains the confrontation involving Iran, the United States and their allies. The Strait of Hormuz is one of the world’s most critical energy chokepoints, with a significant share of global oil supplies normally passing through the area. A prolonged disruption would create a major supply shock. Although the market has not experienced a complete and sustained shutdown of the strait, investors continue to price in the possibility of further escalation. A second risk comes from attacks and threats against energy infrastructure in the Middle East. Saudi Arabia remains the world’s largest oil exporter, meaning any disruption to Saudi production capacity can have an outsized impact on global markets. Previous attacks on Saudi oil facilities have demonstrated how quickly supply expectations can change when critical infrastructure is targeted. Continued instability in the region therefore supports a higher geopolitical premium in oil prices. A third risk factor is the situation around the Red Sea and the Bab el-Mandeb strait. This route is strategically important for global energy transportation, and increased military activity involving the Houthi movement in Yemen has forced shipping companies to reassess risks and security measures. When both Hormuz and alternative transportation routes face uncertainty, concerns about global supply chains increase. The fourth major factor is the Russia-Ukraine war and its impact on refining capacity. Ukrainian attacks on Russian refineries have reduced parts of Russia’s refining capability, while Russia continues to target Ukrainian energy infrastructure. Although Russian crude exports have largely continued, reduced refining capacity can affect global markets for refined products such as diesel and gasoline. At the same time, oil inventories have become an increasingly important factor. US crude inventories are currently at historically low levels, making the market more vulnerable to new disruptions. Low inventories do not mean the world is running out of oil, but they reduce the buffer available when unexpected supply problems occur. Strategic oil reserves have also been used in recent years to limit price shocks, leaving less emergency capacity available if a larger crisis develops. For BGF World Energy A2, a tighter oil market and elevated geopolitical risk could provide support through higher commodity prices and stronger cash flows for energy companies. However, the fund is not a direct investment in the oil price itself. Returns depend on the companies held in the portfolio, their production levels, costs, balance sheets, dividend policies and how investors value the energy sector. The main risk for energy investors is that a diplomatic breakthrough in the Middle East, increased production from major producers or weaker global demand could quickly reduce the geopolitical premium currently supporting oil prices. The key question heading into the end of the year is whether global energy markets will move back toward normalisation, or whether multiple simultaneous conflicts will continue to keep oil prices elevated. Sources: https://e24.no/energi-og-klima/i/oE17VK/historisk-lave-oljelagre-i-usa-har-falt-dramatisk https://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/hist/LeafHandler.ashx?n=PET&s=WCSSTUS1&f=W https://e24.no/internasjonal-oekonomi/i/e7GeGK/imf-slaar-alarm-om-enorm-energikrise https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/oil-prices-rebound-by-more-than-2-barrel-prospect-tightening-us-crude-supplies-2026-07-29/ https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/ships-transiting-via-bab-el-mandeb-strait-highest-week-data-shows-2026-07-29/ https://kyivindependent.com/russias-largest-oil-refinery-in-flames-as-ukraine-strikes-omsk-2-500-km-away-from-border/ https://carnegieendowment.org/russia-eurasia/politika/2026/06/russia-new-refinery-strike
Yllä olevat kommentit ovat peräisin Nordnetin sosiaalisen verkoston Nordnet Socialin käyttäjiltä, eikä niitä ole muokattu eikä Nordnet ole tarkastanut niitä etukäteen. Ne eivät tarkoita, että Nordnet tarjoaisi sijoitusneuvoja tai sijoitussuosituksia. Nordnet ei ota vastuuta kommenteista.
Uutiset
Ei uutisia tällä hetkellä
Tämän sivun uutiset ja/tai sijoitussuositukset tai otteet niistä sekä niihin liittyvät linkit ovat mainitun tahon tuottamia ja toimittamia. Nordnet ei ole osallistunut materiaalin laatimiseen, eikä ole tarkistanut sen sisältöä tai tehnyt sisältöön muutoksia. Lue lisää sijoitussuosituksista.
Tunnusluvut
Riskitaso
Keskimääräinen: 5 / 7
Huomioi, että vaikka osakerahastoihin säästäminen on pitkällä aikavälillä tuottanut hyvin, tulevasta tuotosta ei ole takeita. On olemassa riski, että et saa sijoittamiasi varoja takaisin.
Tunnusluvut
Juoksevat kulut
2,06%Omaisuusluokka
OsakeKategoria
Sektori energia osakkeetPerusvaluutta
USDLainoitusaste
80%Avaintietoasiakirja
Tietoa rahastosta
MST World Energy-rahasto pyrkii US-dollarimääräiseen arvonnousuun sijoittamalla maailmanlaajuisesti listattuihin yrityksiin, joiden liikevaihdosta merkittävä osuus koostuu energian tutkimuksesta, kehittämisestä, tuotannosta tai jakelusta. Rahasto sijoittaa myös yrityksiin, jotka pyrkivät kehittämään uusia teknologioita energian tuottamisessa tai etsimään vaihtoehtoisia energiamuotoja.
Vastaavan tyyppisiä rahastoja
Uutiset
Ei uutisia tällä hetkellä
Tämän sivun uutiset ja/tai sijoitussuositukset tai otteet niistä sekä niihin liittyvät linkit ovat mainitun tahon tuottamia ja toimittamia. Nordnet ei ole osallistunut materiaalin laatimiseen, eikä ole tarkistanut sen sisältöä tai tehnyt sisältöön muutoksia. Lue lisää sijoitussuosituksista.
Omistukset
Päivitetty 31.8.2026
Jakauma
- Osakkeet99%
- Lyhyt korko1%
Asiakkaat katsoivat myös
Foorumi
Liity keskusteluun Nordnet Socialissa
Kirjaudu
- 6.9.Oil has become a supply story, and that changes the case for energy equities Brent is trading around $95 after its strongest weekly gain since mid-July, and the obvious question is whether oil has simply become too expensive. I think that is the wrong question. What has changed this year is not that the world suddenly wants dramatically more oil, but that fewer barrels are reliably reaching the market. The evidence is consistent across three fronts. Reuters reported on 4 September that only four commercial vessels transited the Strait of Hormuz on Thursday, against a ten-day average of roughly 15 and around 125 per day before the conflict began on 28 February. On 1 September Reuters reported that, for the first time on record, Iran had gone about seven weeks without shipping meaningful crude through Hormuz, with no cargoes reaching China since the blockade was reinstated on 14 July. Tehran is still loading 220,000 to 255,000 barrels per day and drawing on floating storage, so this is not a complete stop, but it is a long way from March levels of roughly 2 million barrels per day. Meanwhile, Ukrainian strikes have taken Lukoil's NORSI refinery and the Novatek complex at Ust-Luga offline, which matters less for global crude supply than for refined products and regional balances. Against that, OPEC+ left October output policy unchanged on 6 September, and Jorge León at Rystad Energy said plainly that the group currently has very limited power over the physical oil market. That is the heart of it. What increasingly sets the price is which barrels can physically reach a buyer, not what spare capacity exists on paper. The IEA puts the global deficit at around 1.8 million barrels per day this quarter, and the analyst estimates Reuters compiled on 31 August range from 1.65 million to 3.5 million. If that persists, the deliverable barrel keeps repricing higher. This is where my position in BGF World Energy comes in. The fund is not a leveraged bet on Brent. BlackRock's mandate is to hold at least 70 per cent of assets in companies whose predominant activity is the exploration, development, production and distribution of energy, and as of 31 July the largest positions were Shell, Chevron, TotalEnergies, ExxonMobil and Valero. That spread matters, because a prolonged supply shock does not hit just one link in the chain. Higher crude prices can lift upstream cash flow, tight product markets can support refiners, and constrained infrastructure can benefit selected midstream names. The integrated majors have exposure across several parts of the value chain. So the variable I care about is not whether Brent prints $120. It is whether the market stays tight long enough for higher prices to convert into free cash flow, dividends and buybacks. The bear case is serious and I want it stated properly. Goldman Sachs' March analysis put the impact of a full one-month closure of Hormuz at roughly $15 per barrel absent offsets, which is far below the more dramatic numbers being thrown around. Reuters' own analyst poll on 31 August produced a 2026 Brent average of about $85, below spot. The IEA cut its 2026 demand forecast on 12 August precisely because of Hormuz, so demand destruction at these levels is live. And on 6 September Reuters reported that Iran's leverage is eroding while mediators discuss a formula around shipping fees. We have already seen how fast this can unwind: in mid-June, as a framework agreement approached signing in Geneva, Brent fell roughly 5 per cent on two consecutive days to $78.24, its lowest since 3 March. So the biggest risk to the thesis is not weak demand. It is de-escalation. If Hormuz normalises and Iranian barrels return quickly, Brent could fall sharply and energy equities could hand back the geopolitical premium. If the disruption persists, the opposite gets more interesting. At $95, the real question is whether the market is underestimating the value of the barrels that can actually be delivered. That is the part of the oil story that makes me constructive on BGF World Energy. Disclosure: I hold a position in BGF World Energy. Not investment advice. These are my own views. Research, source verification and drafting were assisted by AI. Sources: Reuters, 6 September 2026: OPEC+ keeps oil output policy unchanged for October https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/opec-set-keep-oil-output-policy-unchanged-sunday-sources-say-2026-09-06/ Reuters, 6 September 2026: Iran's Hormuz leverage wanes as US economic squeeze bites https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/irans-hormuz-leverage-wanes-us-economic-squeeze-bites-2026-09-06/ Reuters, 4 September 2026: Gulf shipping traffic via Hormuz keeps below 10-day average https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/gulf-shipping-traffic-via-hormuz-keeps-below-10-day-average-data-shows-2026-09-04/ Reuters, 1 September 2026: Blockade succeeds where sanctions failed as Iran oil exports stall https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/blockade-suWell-written! I have a large part of my PPM here, but I'm thinking of saving a bit on Nordnet too, but I don't know if one dares to go in now....
- 5.9.Pickaxe Mountain, Brent and my energy fund: the risk is the response, not the strike Trump has repeatedly named Kuh-e Kolang Gaz La, or Pickaxe Mountain, as the next target in Iran. The tunnel complex sits south of Natanz, roughly 100 metres underground, never inspected by the IAEA, and Israeli intelligence has reportedly told Washington that centrifuges have been moved inside. The doctrine is stable across administrations: the US will not accept an Iranian nuclear weapon. The constraint is physical, not political. Experts believe the tunnels sit deeper than even the GBU-57 can reach, which is why the mountain is still standing after months of threats. For energy exposure, the strike itself is not the trade. A nuclear site is not a terminal, so nothing hits the supply balance directly. The entire transmission runs through Iran's response, and Tehran has already told CNN it would be devastating. Most of the war premium is already priced. Brent traded above $96 Thursday at six week highs, and Hormuz throughput has collapsed from 21.6 to 4.9 million b/d, down 77 percent. The EIA sees Brent averaging $87 in 2026 with no return toward pre-war supply until early 2027. The tail is violent in both directions: dated Brent cleared $140 in March with Hormuz effectively shut, then fell to $69 on July 2 on the US-Iran memorandum before rebounding to $105 by July 23. I hold this through BGF World Energy A2 rather than a single name, and in this regime that structure matters more than usual. The fund runs at least 70 percent in global energy equities, with Shell, Exxon, Chevron and TotalEnergies each near 10 percent as of the end of March. That is diversified integrated exposure across jurisdictions, so no single asset seizure, sanction or missile changes the thesis. The integrated model also cuts both ways in a supply shock: upstream captures the crude uplift, while downstream margins have been supported by damaged refining capacity across the Middle East and Russia with insufficient replacement elsewhere. The trade-off is that a basket of majors gives up some of the torque a pure upstream name delivers on a headline spike. Two things to keep honest about. NAV stood at USD 35.15 on July 31 against a 52 week range of 25.10 to 36.39, so I am buying near the top of the range, not into weakness. And the share class is USD denominated, meaning a Norwegian holder is running an unhedged currency leg on top of the oil beta. My read is that the skew is still to the upside near term, but the edge is not in guessing whether the mountain gets hit. It is in owning diversified production outside the conflict zone and sitting through the noise. The real risk is adding on a headline top and holding into a deal that takes Brent back to the seventies in weeks. Question for the forum: is the current war premium too thin given Hormuz is running at a fifth of capacity, or is the market already pricing a reopening that is not coming? Disclosure: I hold BGF World Energy A2, plus a position in AuAg Silver Bullet. Not investment advice. This post was researched and drafted with the help of AI, and all sources are linked below for verification. Sources: https://www.vg.no/nyheter/i/m0WJMl/trump-sier-usa-kan-snart-angripe-iransk-atomanlegg https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/5983210-trump-threatens-pickaxe-mountain-strike/ https://www.pbs.org/newshour/world/what-to-know-about-irans-pickaxe-mountain-home-to-an-underground-nuclear-site-threatened-by-trump https://www.cnbc.com/2026/09/03/oil-price-today-iran-war-strait-hormuz.html https://www.eia.gov/outlooks/steo/report/global_oil.php https://www.blackrock.com/no/individual/products/229918/blackrock-world-energy-a2-usd-fund https://citywire.com/funds-insider/fund/blackrock-global-funds-world-energy-fund/c63882
- 4.9. · MuokattuCold Winter, Continued Hormuz Disruption: Gas Is the Trade, Crude Is the Backdrop Cold winter plus continued Gulf disruption is a clean bull case for European gas. For crude, it is mostly backdrop. TTF is above €70/MWh, the highest since early 2023, with Gulf LNG, including Qatar, constrained by the Hormuz disruption. Europe entered autumn with relatively low storage, and inventories typically bottom at winter's end. A cold December through February can drain storage faster, leaving February and March most exposed, precisely when refilling for the following winter becomes urgent. Goldman flags December TTF potentially above €100 if Middle East supply normalises only gradually; Morningstar sees €90 to €120 in a cold-winter scenario. Brent is global. The Hormuz premium outweighs European weather, and the EIA sees Brent around $85 in Q3 before easing toward $69 in 2027 as supply normalises. Cold weather is a second-order factor for crude itself. The trade also only works if the disruption holds: a durable ceasefire and reopening of Hormuz could drain the premium quickly, and equities may only partially capitalise a premium viewed as temporary. For positioning, the distinction is clear. Equinor is the sharp instrument: gas-weighted, with Norwegian pipeline gas becoming more valuable precisely when Gulf LNG is constrained, offset by Norway's petroleum tax and potential NOK strength. BGF World Energy is the blunt one, more oil-weighted, so a TTF spike reaches the portfolio in diluted form. Shell and TotalEnergies bring meaningful LNG exposure, while Valero and Marathon Petroleum are primarily crack-spread plays rather than direct bets on the crude price. The key question: is late winter 2027 underpriced as an energy catalyst, or is it already embedded in the forward curve? Written with assistance of AI. Sources: https://www.euronews.com/business/2026/08/31/european-natural-gas-price-tops-70-for-first-time-since-january-2023 https://www.cnbc.com/2026/08/27/europe-gas-storage-prices-winter-lng.html https://www.eia.gov/outlooks/steo/ https://www.iea.org/reports/oil-market-report-august-2026 https://tradingeconomics.com/commodity/eu-natural-gas/news/523929
- 29.7.The War Has Reached Egypt: The Energy Conflict Widens The war has now reached Egypt. A drone attack on a US owned floating LNG storage facility off Damietta on Egypt's Mediterranean coast shows that the conflict in the Middle East continues to expand geographically. According to Reuters and maritime security firm Ambrey, the floating storage vessel Energos Winter was struck by at least one drone during cargo discharge operations, with the resulting fire spreading to a second vessel, Gaslog Salem. The crew was evacuated and the fire brought under control, and the vessels were moved outside the port area. No group has claimed responsibility, and Egyptian authorities have so far stopped short of formally describing the incident as an attack while the investigation continues. This comes as the United States and Saudi Arabia have carried out joint strikes against Iran backed groups in Iraq, while tension around the Strait of Hormuz and the Red Sea remains elevated. For energy markets this matters. Egypt is a central hub for LNG exports to Europe, with the Idku and Damietta terminals both feeding European supply. As energy infrastructure is hit across an increasing number of countries, the risk of new disruptions to oil and gas supply grows. That can help keep the geopolitical risk premium in the energy market elevated for longer. The conflict now touches or affects energy infrastructure in Iran, Israel, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Yemen and now Egypt. It illustrates how quickly a regional conflict can spread across several of the world's most important energy producing and transit regions. How do you see this affecting European gas supply and pricing going into autumn, and is the market still underpricing this risk? Sources: Reuters: https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/us-saudis-attack-iran-backed-groups-iraq-threatening-intensify-conflict-2026-07-29/ VG: https://www.vg.no/nyheter/i/M79p4E/droneangrep-mot-amerikansk-gasslager-utenfor-egyptisk-havn29.7.Why Is LNG Infrastructure Being Targeted? Possible Motives and Market Implications The drone attack on a US-owned floating LNG facility near Damietta, Egypt, introduces a new layer of geopolitical risk for global energy markets. The identity of the attackers remains unconfirmed, and there is currently no evidence that the primary objective was to halt LNG exports to Europe. However, the incident raises important questions about the strategic motives behind attacks on critical energy infrastructure. Potential motives could include increasing economic pressure on European countries supporting the US or Israel, driving higher energy prices by creating additional uncertainty in global supply chains, weakening Western energy security by targeting critical export facilities and transport routes, and demonstrating that the conflict can impact global energy flows far beyond the immediate battlefield. Although the intentions behind this specific attack remain unclear, the market consequences are significant. Any threat to LNG terminals, export infrastructure, or major shipping routes increases uncertainty around future energy supplies. This typically results in a higher geopolitical risk premium being priced into both natural gas and crude oil markets. The attack comes as tensions continue to escalate across the Middle East, with energy infrastructure and strategic transport corridors already affected or threatened in Iran, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Qatar, and now Egypt. For energy investors, the key takeaway is that geopolitical risk remains a major driver of oil and gas prices. Even without a direct disruption of supply, repeated attacks on critical infrastructure can tighten risk perceptions, increase volatility, and support higher energy market premiums. Sources: Reuters: https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/drone-hits-gas-storage-tanker-egypts-mediterranean-port-2026-07-29/ Reuters: https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/us-saudis-attack-iran-backed-groups-iraq-threatening-intensify-conflict-2026-07-29/ VG: https://www.vg.no/nyheter/i/M79p4E/droneangrep-mot-amerikansk-gasslager-utenfor-egyptisk-havn
- 29.7.Multiple wars are increasing pressure on global oil markets: Emergency reserves are being drained while BGF World Energy A2 benefits from geopolitical risk The oil market is now pricing in more than just the tensions surrounding the Strait of Hormuz. Several overlapping conflicts are affecting global energy security, and the combination of geopolitical instability, low inventories and the risk of supply disruptions is keeping a significant risk premium embedded in oil prices. For investors in the energy sector, including BGF World Energy A2, the key question is how long this risk premium can remain elevated and whether higher oil and gas prices will translate into stronger profitability for the companies held by the fund. The most important factor remains the confrontation involving Iran, the United States and their allies. The Strait of Hormuz is one of the world’s most critical energy chokepoints, with a significant share of global oil supplies normally passing through the area. A prolonged disruption would create a major supply shock. Although the market has not experienced a complete and sustained shutdown of the strait, investors continue to price in the possibility of further escalation. A second risk comes from attacks and threats against energy infrastructure in the Middle East. Saudi Arabia remains the world’s largest oil exporter, meaning any disruption to Saudi production capacity can have an outsized impact on global markets. Previous attacks on Saudi oil facilities have demonstrated how quickly supply expectations can change when critical infrastructure is targeted. Continued instability in the region therefore supports a higher geopolitical premium in oil prices. A third risk factor is the situation around the Red Sea and the Bab el-Mandeb strait. This route is strategically important for global energy transportation, and increased military activity involving the Houthi movement in Yemen has forced shipping companies to reassess risks and security measures. When both Hormuz and alternative transportation routes face uncertainty, concerns about global supply chains increase. The fourth major factor is the Russia-Ukraine war and its impact on refining capacity. Ukrainian attacks on Russian refineries have reduced parts of Russia’s refining capability, while Russia continues to target Ukrainian energy infrastructure. Although Russian crude exports have largely continued, reduced refining capacity can affect global markets for refined products such as diesel and gasoline. At the same time, oil inventories have become an increasingly important factor. US crude inventories are currently at historically low levels, making the market more vulnerable to new disruptions. Low inventories do not mean the world is running out of oil, but they reduce the buffer available when unexpected supply problems occur. Strategic oil reserves have also been used in recent years to limit price shocks, leaving less emergency capacity available if a larger crisis develops. For BGF World Energy A2, a tighter oil market and elevated geopolitical risk could provide support through higher commodity prices and stronger cash flows for energy companies. However, the fund is not a direct investment in the oil price itself. Returns depend on the companies held in the portfolio, their production levels, costs, balance sheets, dividend policies and how investors value the energy sector. The main risk for energy investors is that a diplomatic breakthrough in the Middle East, increased production from major producers or weaker global demand could quickly reduce the geopolitical premium currently supporting oil prices. The key question heading into the end of the year is whether global energy markets will move back toward normalisation, or whether multiple simultaneous conflicts will continue to keep oil prices elevated. Sources: https://e24.no/energi-og-klima/i/oE17VK/historisk-lave-oljelagre-i-usa-har-falt-dramatisk https://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/hist/LeafHandler.ashx?n=PET&s=WCSSTUS1&f=W https://e24.no/internasjonal-oekonomi/i/e7GeGK/imf-slaar-alarm-om-enorm-energikrise https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/oil-prices-rebound-by-more-than-2-barrel-prospect-tightening-us-crude-supplies-2026-07-29/ https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/ships-transiting-via-bab-el-mandeb-strait-highest-week-data-shows-2026-07-29/ https://kyivindependent.com/russias-largest-oil-refinery-in-flames-as-ukraine-strikes-omsk-2-500-km-away-from-border/ https://carnegieendowment.org/russia-eurasia/politika/2026/06/russia-new-refinery-strike
Yllä olevat kommentit ovat peräisin Nordnetin sosiaalisen verkoston Nordnet Socialin käyttäjiltä, eikä niitä ole muokattu eikä Nordnet ole tarkastanut niitä etukäteen. Ne eivät tarkoita, että Nordnet tarjoaisi sijoitusneuvoja tai sijoitussuosituksia. Nordnet ei ota vastuuta kommenteista.
Tunnusluvut
Riskitaso
Keskimääräinen: 5 / 7
Huomioi, että vaikka osakerahastoihin säästäminen on pitkällä aikavälillä tuottanut hyvin, tulevasta tuotosta ei ole takeita. On olemassa riski, että et saa sijoittamiasi varoja takaisin.
Tunnusluvut
Juoksevat kulut
2,06%Omaisuusluokka
OsakeKategoria
Sektori energia osakkeetPerusvaluutta
USDLainoitusaste
80%Avaintietoasiakirja
Tietoa rahastosta
MST World Energy-rahasto pyrkii US-dollarimääräiseen arvonnousuun sijoittamalla maailmanlaajuisesti listattuihin yrityksiin, joiden liikevaihdosta merkittävä osuus koostuu energian tutkimuksesta, kehittämisestä, tuotannosta tai jakelusta. Rahasto sijoittaa myös yrityksiin, jotka pyrkivät kehittämään uusia teknologioita energian tuottamisessa tai etsimään vaihtoehtoisia energiamuotoja.
Vastaavan tyyppisiä rahastoja
Uutiset
Ei uutisia tällä hetkellä
Tämän sivun uutiset ja/tai sijoitussuositukset tai otteet niistä sekä niihin liittyvät linkit ovat mainitun tahon tuottamia ja toimittamia. Nordnet ei ole osallistunut materiaalin laatimiseen, eikä ole tarkistanut sen sisältöä tai tehnyt sisältöön muutoksia. Lue lisää sijoitussuosituksista.
Foorumi
Liity keskusteluun Nordnet Socialissa
Kirjaudu
- 6.9.Oil has become a supply story, and that changes the case for energy equities Brent is trading around $95 after its strongest weekly gain since mid-July, and the obvious question is whether oil has simply become too expensive. I think that is the wrong question. What has changed this year is not that the world suddenly wants dramatically more oil, but that fewer barrels are reliably reaching the market. The evidence is consistent across three fronts. Reuters reported on 4 September that only four commercial vessels transited the Strait of Hormuz on Thursday, against a ten-day average of roughly 15 and around 125 per day before the conflict began on 28 February. On 1 September Reuters reported that, for the first time on record, Iran had gone about seven weeks without shipping meaningful crude through Hormuz, with no cargoes reaching China since the blockade was reinstated on 14 July. Tehran is still loading 220,000 to 255,000 barrels per day and drawing on floating storage, so this is not a complete stop, but it is a long way from March levels of roughly 2 million barrels per day. Meanwhile, Ukrainian strikes have taken Lukoil's NORSI refinery and the Novatek complex at Ust-Luga offline, which matters less for global crude supply than for refined products and regional balances. Against that, OPEC+ left October output policy unchanged on 6 September, and Jorge León at Rystad Energy said plainly that the group currently has very limited power over the physical oil market. That is the heart of it. What increasingly sets the price is which barrels can physically reach a buyer, not what spare capacity exists on paper. The IEA puts the global deficit at around 1.8 million barrels per day this quarter, and the analyst estimates Reuters compiled on 31 August range from 1.65 million to 3.5 million. If that persists, the deliverable barrel keeps repricing higher. This is where my position in BGF World Energy comes in. The fund is not a leveraged bet on Brent. BlackRock's mandate is to hold at least 70 per cent of assets in companies whose predominant activity is the exploration, development, production and distribution of energy, and as of 31 July the largest positions were Shell, Chevron, TotalEnergies, ExxonMobil and Valero. That spread matters, because a prolonged supply shock does not hit just one link in the chain. Higher crude prices can lift upstream cash flow, tight product markets can support refiners, and constrained infrastructure can benefit selected midstream names. The integrated majors have exposure across several parts of the value chain. So the variable I care about is not whether Brent prints $120. It is whether the market stays tight long enough for higher prices to convert into free cash flow, dividends and buybacks. The bear case is serious and I want it stated properly. Goldman Sachs' March analysis put the impact of a full one-month closure of Hormuz at roughly $15 per barrel absent offsets, which is far below the more dramatic numbers being thrown around. Reuters' own analyst poll on 31 August produced a 2026 Brent average of about $85, below spot. The IEA cut its 2026 demand forecast on 12 August precisely because of Hormuz, so demand destruction at these levels is live. And on 6 September Reuters reported that Iran's leverage is eroding while mediators discuss a formula around shipping fees. We have already seen how fast this can unwind: in mid-June, as a framework agreement approached signing in Geneva, Brent fell roughly 5 per cent on two consecutive days to $78.24, its lowest since 3 March. So the biggest risk to the thesis is not weak demand. It is de-escalation. If Hormuz normalises and Iranian barrels return quickly, Brent could fall sharply and energy equities could hand back the geopolitical premium. If the disruption persists, the opposite gets more interesting. At $95, the real question is whether the market is underestimating the value of the barrels that can actually be delivered. That is the part of the oil story that makes me constructive on BGF World Energy. Disclosure: I hold a position in BGF World Energy. Not investment advice. These are my own views. Research, source verification and drafting were assisted by AI. Sources: Reuters, 6 September 2026: OPEC+ keeps oil output policy unchanged for October https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/opec-set-keep-oil-output-policy-unchanged-sunday-sources-say-2026-09-06/ Reuters, 6 September 2026: Iran's Hormuz leverage wanes as US economic squeeze bites https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/irans-hormuz-leverage-wanes-us-economic-squeeze-bites-2026-09-06/ Reuters, 4 September 2026: Gulf shipping traffic via Hormuz keeps below 10-day average https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/gulf-shipping-traffic-via-hormuz-keeps-below-10-day-average-data-shows-2026-09-04/ Reuters, 1 September 2026: Blockade succeeds where sanctions failed as Iran oil exports stall https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/blockade-suWell-written! I have a large part of my PPM here, but I'm thinking of saving a bit on Nordnet too, but I don't know if one dares to go in now....
- 5.9.Pickaxe Mountain, Brent and my energy fund: the risk is the response, not the strike Trump has repeatedly named Kuh-e Kolang Gaz La, or Pickaxe Mountain, as the next target in Iran. The tunnel complex sits south of Natanz, roughly 100 metres underground, never inspected by the IAEA, and Israeli intelligence has reportedly told Washington that centrifuges have been moved inside. The doctrine is stable across administrations: the US will not accept an Iranian nuclear weapon. The constraint is physical, not political. Experts believe the tunnels sit deeper than even the GBU-57 can reach, which is why the mountain is still standing after months of threats. For energy exposure, the strike itself is not the trade. A nuclear site is not a terminal, so nothing hits the supply balance directly. The entire transmission runs through Iran's response, and Tehran has already told CNN it would be devastating. Most of the war premium is already priced. Brent traded above $96 Thursday at six week highs, and Hormuz throughput has collapsed from 21.6 to 4.9 million b/d, down 77 percent. The EIA sees Brent averaging $87 in 2026 with no return toward pre-war supply until early 2027. The tail is violent in both directions: dated Brent cleared $140 in March with Hormuz effectively shut, then fell to $69 on July 2 on the US-Iran memorandum before rebounding to $105 by July 23. I hold this through BGF World Energy A2 rather than a single name, and in this regime that structure matters more than usual. The fund runs at least 70 percent in global energy equities, with Shell, Exxon, Chevron and TotalEnergies each near 10 percent as of the end of March. That is diversified integrated exposure across jurisdictions, so no single asset seizure, sanction or missile changes the thesis. The integrated model also cuts both ways in a supply shock: upstream captures the crude uplift, while downstream margins have been supported by damaged refining capacity across the Middle East and Russia with insufficient replacement elsewhere. The trade-off is that a basket of majors gives up some of the torque a pure upstream name delivers on a headline spike. Two things to keep honest about. NAV stood at USD 35.15 on July 31 against a 52 week range of 25.10 to 36.39, so I am buying near the top of the range, not into weakness. And the share class is USD denominated, meaning a Norwegian holder is running an unhedged currency leg on top of the oil beta. My read is that the skew is still to the upside near term, but the edge is not in guessing whether the mountain gets hit. It is in owning diversified production outside the conflict zone and sitting through the noise. The real risk is adding on a headline top and holding into a deal that takes Brent back to the seventies in weeks. Question for the forum: is the current war premium too thin given Hormuz is running at a fifth of capacity, or is the market already pricing a reopening that is not coming? Disclosure: I hold BGF World Energy A2, plus a position in AuAg Silver Bullet. Not investment advice. This post was researched and drafted with the help of AI, and all sources are linked below for verification. Sources: https://www.vg.no/nyheter/i/m0WJMl/trump-sier-usa-kan-snart-angripe-iransk-atomanlegg https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/5983210-trump-threatens-pickaxe-mountain-strike/ https://www.pbs.org/newshour/world/what-to-know-about-irans-pickaxe-mountain-home-to-an-underground-nuclear-site-threatened-by-trump https://www.cnbc.com/2026/09/03/oil-price-today-iran-war-strait-hormuz.html https://www.eia.gov/outlooks/steo/report/global_oil.php https://www.blackrock.com/no/individual/products/229918/blackrock-world-energy-a2-usd-fund https://citywire.com/funds-insider/fund/blackrock-global-funds-world-energy-fund/c63882
- 4.9. · MuokattuCold Winter, Continued Hormuz Disruption: Gas Is the Trade, Crude Is the Backdrop Cold winter plus continued Gulf disruption is a clean bull case for European gas. For crude, it is mostly backdrop. TTF is above €70/MWh, the highest since early 2023, with Gulf LNG, including Qatar, constrained by the Hormuz disruption. Europe entered autumn with relatively low storage, and inventories typically bottom at winter's end. A cold December through February can drain storage faster, leaving February and March most exposed, precisely when refilling for the following winter becomes urgent. Goldman flags December TTF potentially above €100 if Middle East supply normalises only gradually; Morningstar sees €90 to €120 in a cold-winter scenario. Brent is global. The Hormuz premium outweighs European weather, and the EIA sees Brent around $85 in Q3 before easing toward $69 in 2027 as supply normalises. Cold weather is a second-order factor for crude itself. The trade also only works if the disruption holds: a durable ceasefire and reopening of Hormuz could drain the premium quickly, and equities may only partially capitalise a premium viewed as temporary. For positioning, the distinction is clear. Equinor is the sharp instrument: gas-weighted, with Norwegian pipeline gas becoming more valuable precisely when Gulf LNG is constrained, offset by Norway's petroleum tax and potential NOK strength. BGF World Energy is the blunt one, more oil-weighted, so a TTF spike reaches the portfolio in diluted form. Shell and TotalEnergies bring meaningful LNG exposure, while Valero and Marathon Petroleum are primarily crack-spread plays rather than direct bets on the crude price. The key question: is late winter 2027 underpriced as an energy catalyst, or is it already embedded in the forward curve? Written with assistance of AI. Sources: https://www.euronews.com/business/2026/08/31/european-natural-gas-price-tops-70-for-first-time-since-january-2023 https://www.cnbc.com/2026/08/27/europe-gas-storage-prices-winter-lng.html https://www.eia.gov/outlooks/steo/ https://www.iea.org/reports/oil-market-report-august-2026 https://tradingeconomics.com/commodity/eu-natural-gas/news/523929
- 29.7.The War Has Reached Egypt: The Energy Conflict Widens The war has now reached Egypt. A drone attack on a US owned floating LNG storage facility off Damietta on Egypt's Mediterranean coast shows that the conflict in the Middle East continues to expand geographically. According to Reuters and maritime security firm Ambrey, the floating storage vessel Energos Winter was struck by at least one drone during cargo discharge operations, with the resulting fire spreading to a second vessel, Gaslog Salem. The crew was evacuated and the fire brought under control, and the vessels were moved outside the port area. No group has claimed responsibility, and Egyptian authorities have so far stopped short of formally describing the incident as an attack while the investigation continues. This comes as the United States and Saudi Arabia have carried out joint strikes against Iran backed groups in Iraq, while tension around the Strait of Hormuz and the Red Sea remains elevated. For energy markets this matters. Egypt is a central hub for LNG exports to Europe, with the Idku and Damietta terminals both feeding European supply. As energy infrastructure is hit across an increasing number of countries, the risk of new disruptions to oil and gas supply grows. That can help keep the geopolitical risk premium in the energy market elevated for longer. The conflict now touches or affects energy infrastructure in Iran, Israel, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Yemen and now Egypt. It illustrates how quickly a regional conflict can spread across several of the world's most important energy producing and transit regions. How do you see this affecting European gas supply and pricing going into autumn, and is the market still underpricing this risk? Sources: Reuters: https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/us-saudis-attack-iran-backed-groups-iraq-threatening-intensify-conflict-2026-07-29/ VG: https://www.vg.no/nyheter/i/M79p4E/droneangrep-mot-amerikansk-gasslager-utenfor-egyptisk-havn29.7.Why Is LNG Infrastructure Being Targeted? Possible Motives and Market Implications The drone attack on a US-owned floating LNG facility near Damietta, Egypt, introduces a new layer of geopolitical risk for global energy markets. The identity of the attackers remains unconfirmed, and there is currently no evidence that the primary objective was to halt LNG exports to Europe. However, the incident raises important questions about the strategic motives behind attacks on critical energy infrastructure. Potential motives could include increasing economic pressure on European countries supporting the US or Israel, driving higher energy prices by creating additional uncertainty in global supply chains, weakening Western energy security by targeting critical export facilities and transport routes, and demonstrating that the conflict can impact global energy flows far beyond the immediate battlefield. Although the intentions behind this specific attack remain unclear, the market consequences are significant. Any threat to LNG terminals, export infrastructure, or major shipping routes increases uncertainty around future energy supplies. This typically results in a higher geopolitical risk premium being priced into both natural gas and crude oil markets. The attack comes as tensions continue to escalate across the Middle East, with energy infrastructure and strategic transport corridors already affected or threatened in Iran, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Qatar, and now Egypt. For energy investors, the key takeaway is that geopolitical risk remains a major driver of oil and gas prices. Even without a direct disruption of supply, repeated attacks on critical infrastructure can tighten risk perceptions, increase volatility, and support higher energy market premiums. Sources: Reuters: https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/drone-hits-gas-storage-tanker-egypts-mediterranean-port-2026-07-29/ Reuters: https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/us-saudis-attack-iran-backed-groups-iraq-threatening-intensify-conflict-2026-07-29/ VG: https://www.vg.no/nyheter/i/M79p4E/droneangrep-mot-amerikansk-gasslager-utenfor-egyptisk-havn
- 29.7.Multiple wars are increasing pressure on global oil markets: Emergency reserves are being drained while BGF World Energy A2 benefits from geopolitical risk The oil market is now pricing in more than just the tensions surrounding the Strait of Hormuz. Several overlapping conflicts are affecting global energy security, and the combination of geopolitical instability, low inventories and the risk of supply disruptions is keeping a significant risk premium embedded in oil prices. For investors in the energy sector, including BGF World Energy A2, the key question is how long this risk premium can remain elevated and whether higher oil and gas prices will translate into stronger profitability for the companies held by the fund. The most important factor remains the confrontation involving Iran, the United States and their allies. The Strait of Hormuz is one of the world’s most critical energy chokepoints, with a significant share of global oil supplies normally passing through the area. A prolonged disruption would create a major supply shock. Although the market has not experienced a complete and sustained shutdown of the strait, investors continue to price in the possibility of further escalation. A second risk comes from attacks and threats against energy infrastructure in the Middle East. Saudi Arabia remains the world’s largest oil exporter, meaning any disruption to Saudi production capacity can have an outsized impact on global markets. Previous attacks on Saudi oil facilities have demonstrated how quickly supply expectations can change when critical infrastructure is targeted. Continued instability in the region therefore supports a higher geopolitical premium in oil prices. A third risk factor is the situation around the Red Sea and the Bab el-Mandeb strait. This route is strategically important for global energy transportation, and increased military activity involving the Houthi movement in Yemen has forced shipping companies to reassess risks and security measures. When both Hormuz and alternative transportation routes face uncertainty, concerns about global supply chains increase. The fourth major factor is the Russia-Ukraine war and its impact on refining capacity. Ukrainian attacks on Russian refineries have reduced parts of Russia’s refining capability, while Russia continues to target Ukrainian energy infrastructure. Although Russian crude exports have largely continued, reduced refining capacity can affect global markets for refined products such as diesel and gasoline. At the same time, oil inventories have become an increasingly important factor. US crude inventories are currently at historically low levels, making the market more vulnerable to new disruptions. Low inventories do not mean the world is running out of oil, but they reduce the buffer available when unexpected supply problems occur. Strategic oil reserves have also been used in recent years to limit price shocks, leaving less emergency capacity available if a larger crisis develops. For BGF World Energy A2, a tighter oil market and elevated geopolitical risk could provide support through higher commodity prices and stronger cash flows for energy companies. However, the fund is not a direct investment in the oil price itself. Returns depend on the companies held in the portfolio, their production levels, costs, balance sheets, dividend policies and how investors value the energy sector. The main risk for energy investors is that a diplomatic breakthrough in the Middle East, increased production from major producers or weaker global demand could quickly reduce the geopolitical premium currently supporting oil prices. The key question heading into the end of the year is whether global energy markets will move back toward normalisation, or whether multiple simultaneous conflicts will continue to keep oil prices elevated. Sources: https://e24.no/energi-og-klima/i/oE17VK/historisk-lave-oljelagre-i-usa-har-falt-dramatisk https://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/hist/LeafHandler.ashx?n=PET&s=WCSSTUS1&f=W https://e24.no/internasjonal-oekonomi/i/e7GeGK/imf-slaar-alarm-om-enorm-energikrise https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/oil-prices-rebound-by-more-than-2-barrel-prospect-tightening-us-crude-supplies-2026-07-29/ https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/ships-transiting-via-bab-el-mandeb-strait-highest-week-data-shows-2026-07-29/ https://kyivindependent.com/russias-largest-oil-refinery-in-flames-as-ukraine-strikes-omsk-2-500-km-away-from-border/ https://carnegieendowment.org/russia-eurasia/politika/2026/06/russia-new-refinery-strike
Yllä olevat kommentit ovat peräisin Nordnetin sosiaalisen verkoston Nordnet Socialin käyttäjiltä, eikä niitä ole muokattu eikä Nordnet ole tarkastanut niitä etukäteen. Ne eivät tarkoita, että Nordnet tarjoaisi sijoitusneuvoja tai sijoitussuosituksia. Nordnet ei ota vastuuta kommenteista.
Omistukset
Päivitetty 31.8.2026
Jakauma
- Osakkeet99%
- Lyhyt korko1%