Skip to content
You can now search across every topic, entity and event.What's new
Iran Conflict 2026
19JUL

Brent at $92 as premiums idle tankers

3 min read
14:05UTC

Brent reached $92.09 on Wednesday morning, a fourth straight daily gain, while war-risk premiums of 3% to 10% of hull value keep legal cargo sitting where it is.

ConflictDeveloping
Key takeaway

Gulf cargo stays put because of what it costs to insure, not because of what blocks it.

Brent crude traded at $92.09 at 01:30 GMT on Wednesday 22 July, up 1.2% and its highest since 11 June, a fourth consecutive daily gain 1.

War-risk premiums for a Strait of Hormuz transit now run at 3% to 10% of a vessel's hull value, against 0.25% before the war 2. On a $100 million tanker that is $3m to $10m a voyage where it used to be about $250,000. The largest vessels are quoted $10m to $14m, and the charge falls on the charterer rather than the owner.

Whoever books the ship pays that premium up front and adds it to the delivered cost of the barrels. A buyer with any alternative supplier declines the cargo, and the charter is never fixed. So a legal, licensed, fully insurable parcel of crude sits where it is, because nobody at either end of the voyage will carry a $10 million charge the barrels cannot recover. The Lloyd's Market Association is explicit that cover remains available: what suppresses transits is price and crew willingness, not capacity 3. Underwriting resets slowly, and crews have longer memories than markets.

CENTCOM (US Central Command) frames the same water differently. Its 21 July statement says US forces have facilitated the transit of roughly 900 commercial vessels and 450 million barrels of crude "since early May", redirected eight vessels and disabled one 4. No date window is attached to the 900-vessel figure, so it cannot be set against the 66% weekly fall in transits recorded on 21 July . The two counts cover different things over different periods.

In a note dated 20 July, Daan Struyven of Goldman Sachs set out an upside case of Brent above $120 by the fourth quarter, conditional on Hormuz disruption persisting and Persian Gulf flows staying below roughly 45% of pre-war levels 5. Goldman's base case is $80 in the fourth quarter and about $75 in 2027 6. The higher number describes what happens if nothing changes, not what the bank expects.

Deep Analysis

In plain English

Brent crude, the main international oil price benchmark, rose to $92.09 a barrel, its highest level since 11 June and the fourth straight daily rise. Oil often gets more expensive when investors worry that war could disrupt supply, even before that disruption actually happens. A lot of this price rise comes down to insurance, not ships actually being stopped. Sailing through the Gulf now costs shipping companies far more in war-risk insurance than before the war, and that extra cost is passed on. Insurers say enough cover is technically available, it has simply become expensive enough that some owners choose not to sail. Goldman Sachs, a major investment bank, has said oil could go above $120 a barrel later this year, but only if the situation gets significantly worse. Its actual expectation for now is closer to $80.

Deep Analysis
Root Causes

War-risk premiums of 3-10% of hull value, not a shortage of naval capacity or insurance cover, are what is keeping tankers from sailing the Gulf, according to the Lloyd's Market Association. For the largest vessels, insurers are seeking $10-14 million per Hormuz voyage, a cost charged to the charterer rather than the shipowner.

Because that liability sits with charterers and crews rather than a fixed physical bottleneck, the decision to sail is a commercial one made voyage by voyage, which is why price continues climbing even as CENTCOM reports it is still moving substantial volumes through the strait.

What could happen next?
  • Consequence

    If Gulf flows fall and stay below roughly 45% of pre-war levels through Q4, Goldman's contingent $120+ scenario becomes the operative case rather than its $80 base case.

  • Opportunity

    Because the Lloyd's Market Association says insurance capacity remains available, a de-escalation could unwind the price premium quickly, as happened after the 1990 Gulf War spike.

First Reported In

Update #159 · A second strait closes by radio alone

CENTCOM· 22 Jul 2026
Read original
Different Perspectives
China's foreign ministry
China's foreign ministry
Spokesman Lin Jian rejected Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent's 25 August warning that Iranian oil buyers face an "economic D-Day", saying sanctions do not help and that Beijing would safeguard its own rights and interests. China's Iranian crude imports had already halved for unrelated reasons.
Iraq's government and Erbil authorities
Iraq's government and Erbil authorities
Erbil authorities said 10 explosive-laden drones were shot down over the city on 1-2 September with no casualties. Iraq's government condemned the attacks without naming Iran as their source, and neither Washington nor Baghdad confirmed the IRGC's claim to have hit US bases there.
Bahrain Defence Force
Bahrain Defence Force
The General Command said air defences intercepted several Iranian missiles and drones on 1-2 September and called the use of such weapons against civilians and private property a flagrant violation of international humanitarian law.
Kuwait's Fire Force and foreign ministry
Kuwait's Fire Force and foreign ministry
KUNA reported a hostile Iranian drone struck a residential complex in Kuwait City on 2 September; Fire Force spokesman Brigadier General Mohammad Al-Gharib said losses were confined to property. Kuwait's foreign ministry called the attack a clear breach of its sovereignty.
Jordan's Armed Forces
Jordan's Armed Forces
Petra carried a statement that air defences intercepted eight missiles violating Jordanian airspace early on 31 August and 10 of 13 fired on 1 September. The statement named no target and did not address the IRGC's claim to have struck Camp Titin and killed US personnel.
CENTCOM
CENTCOM
CENTCOM's 1 September target list named IRGC air defence, radar, maritime and mine-laying sites in Iran but no tanker, after Axios reported anonymous officials describing a Trump-approved "tanker for tanker" drone policy. A CENTCOM spokesman declined to confirm the policy and referred questions to policymakers.