JPMorgan Chase analysts have officially stopped publishing a base oil price forecast. The largest US bank admitted that economic models are inefficient for estimating the price per barrel because policymakers appear to have abandoned any “red lines.”

In a research note, the analysts complained about the unpredictability of the US–Iran conflict. Wall Street initially believed in the administration’s pain thresholds. It was assumed that Washington would be forced into a deal to reopen the Strait of Hormuz once oil broke $100 per barrel, gasoline would rise to $5 per gallon, inflation would hit 4%, or the 10‑year Treasury yield would exceed 5%. Six months on, all those thresholds have been crossed, but no exit strategy has emerged.

Market math has finally detached from reality. From a fundamental supply‑and‑demand viewpoint, a barrel should be worth about $90. Yet Brent futures trade around $106. The gap implies traders have already priced in the risk of a sudden disappearance of roughly 4 million barrels per day of supply.

Geopolitical risks are mounting. The Houthis threaten shipping in the Bab al‑Mandeb; the attack on Saudi Arabia’s East–West pipeline blocked an alternative export route; Ukraine is methodically striking Russian refineries. Against this backdrop, the US and Iran show no signs of readiness to tackle the issue, having failed the June truce. JPMorgan’s analysts ended their note with a chilling unanswered question: what will happen to the global economy if the temporary supply disruptions become permanent?