Key Takeaways
- The war in the Middle East and the resultant increase in energy prices has created a layer of uncertainty for the macro backdrop, but our base case still sees continued moderate growth and near-term elevated inflation risk.
- While the Fed is in a holding pattern as it awaits further data inputs, we feel the policymakers are near or at the end of this rate cut cycle.
- The Treasury 10-Year yield is expected to remain at an elevated, “normal” level with heightened headline and data dependency producing continued volatility.
- We believe the bond portfolio decision-making process could benefit from taking an active-passive barbell approach from a solution standpoint.
- The S&P 500 started rolling over a few sessions prior to the February 28 onset of the Iran war, but consensus earnings estimates have surprisingly grown in that time. This stocks down/earnings up phenomenon has greatly aided the broad market’s valuation calculus.
A “No Hire, No Fire” Economy Continues
The war in the Middle East has brought about an elevated uncertainty quotient when examining the U.S. macro backdrop. The resultant rise in energy prices is being looked at as both a potential ‘tax on the economy’ as well as a catalyst for a near-term elevation in inflation.
Against this backdrop, it is important to turn the calendar back to the late February, pre-war timeframe to try to garner some perspective on how the macro setting was performing at that time. The data that has been released as of this writing continued to show a somewhat mixed labor force backdrop, and a relatively solid consumer and investment landscape.
Looking ahead, the attention will be placed on not only any potential negative impact from higher energy prices, but also one needs to take into account the fiscal stimulus that should be provided by the One Big Beautiful Bill. In our estimation, these two forces may wind up essentially cancelling each other out, leaving us, once again, to focus on the state of the labor markets.
Although new job creation has slowed considerably, the unemployment rate still remains historically low and wages are growing above the rate of inflation. A continued positive development is the fact that the key leading economic indicator, weekly jobless claims, continues to reside at levels that are about 100,000 below where they were historically prior to a looming recession onset. So, for all intents and purposes, the “no-hire, no-fire” economy remains intact.
If the Middle East war moves into a more permanent de-escalation phase, or ends, we would expect energy prices to decline in measurable fashion. However, the scope of disruption has moved higher, and energy prices may not be able to completely reverse back to pre-war levels in the months immediately ahead. Nevertheless, the underpinnings of the U.S. economy came into 2026 on a relatively solid note and should help keep overall growth moderately positive.
Inflation: Looking Through Higher Energy Prices
The Middle East war has created an environment where one would think that any potential tariff-induced inflation fears were being outweighed by concerns of any pass-through from higher energy prices. However, investors were learning that even though some measure of inflation, such as core CPI was returning to a more disinflationary pattern in recent months, but it still remained above the Fed’s preference.
That brings us to the Fed’s preferred inflation gauge, the core PCE deflator. Unlike core CPI, this measure has actually been trending to the upside on a pre-war basis. Indeed, the year-over-year reading stands at +3.1% as of this writing. This figure is not only more than a full percentage point above the Fed’s target, but it is also at its highest reading in almost two years.
That brings us back to the energy component of the equation. As we mentioned earlier, even with a more permanent de-escalation or end to the Middle East war, energy prices should fall but may not get back to their pre-war readings in the months immediately ahead. Thus, the economy will be dealing with a higher energy and energy-related product (oil, gasoline, plastics, etc.) price backdrop than what was the case back in late February before the war began.
The potential challenge will be to see if the markets can look through any war-induced increases to inflation and focus instead on underlying demand pressures. In addition, as Fed Chair Powell has stated, another key factor to consider is whether any potential increase in prices will be short-lived or have more of a persistent impact.
Either way, the Fed’s 2% target continues to be elusive.
Fed Policy: Between a Rock and a Hard Place
For the second consecutive policy gathering, the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) decided to remain ‘on hold’, keeping the fed funds trading range at 3.50%-3.75%. For the most part, this result was largely expected by the markets. Unfortunately for the Fed, the policymakers are in a challenging position of juggling incoming economic/inflation data as well as the uncertainties emanating from the Middle East war.
Against this backdrop, both the Fed and the broader investment community are left wondering what could come next from a monetary policy perspective. One thing to address upfront is that despite the surge in energy prices, the Fed will not be entertaining any potential rate increases. Rather, the voting members remain in a data dependent mode that should continue to argue for a more patient approach to the decision-making process. This last point is underscored by the fact that the FOMC just cut the fed funds rate by 75bp from September through December of last year. In other words, it’s not as if the Fed is really ‘behind the curve’ at this point.
In our opinion, the Fed will attempt to ‘look through’ the recent surge in energy prices. Yes, this development has created a noteworthy shift in inflation fears, but the policymakers, at this point anyway, seem to be operating under the assumption that any elevation in price pressures from higher energy costs will not be a permanent development.
While the Fed appears to be in wait and see mode, the bottom-line takeaway is that the financial markets will be operating in a scenario where rate cuts are either near, or at the end, of this easing cycle.
Searching for GeoAlpha
There was Greenland. Then there was Venezuela. Now there is Iran. The first two were rather inconsequential for risk assets. Greenland led to the U.S. admonishing NATO relevance. That was nothing new. The Venezuela operation was over before most knew it started. These events were certainly gamechangers in their own ways. Venezuela is now a pseudo friendly petro state in South America. Greenland reinforced the need for Europe to continue to develop its own defense capabilities and technologies. But–to a significant extent–they were not radical changes to risk asset landscape. The U.S. had already been pressuring NATO. And Venezuela was sanctioned to the point of irrelevancy by the U.S. and Western allies.
Those two are fundamentally different from the conflict in the Gulf. War is not the same negotiation as Greenland, and Iran is not the same as Venezuela. This creates a different risk matrix going forward. Oil prices have spiked as crude exports have been limited, and Iran has attacked its neighbors. And–without the Strait of Hormuz fully open and traffic normalized–disruptions in the energy market will continue to ripple through the global economy. It is important to look at the most probable outcomes of the conflict, and what that means for allocations.
Those outcomes are rather convoluted. But there are some common denominators. One of the more important is the rise in a geopolitical risk premium across multiple asset classes. That is likely to be “sticky”. While oil and its derivatives have declined with the announcement of a two-week ceasefire, there will also be a lingering geopolitical premium (for better or worse) priced into markets. That should be kept in mind. But that will also lead to a further resilience of supply chains and energy production. If there was one thing companies and governments learned from past issues (COVID, Ukraine, and tariffs), it was the necessity of derisking their business models. The current geopolitical backdrop is only going to reinforce this shift and accelerate it.
Glossary
A message from Advisor Perspectives and VettaFi: Discover something new! Click here to register for our upcoming webcasts.
IMPORTANT INFORMATION
Investors should carefully consider the investment objectives, risks, charges and expenses of the Fund before investing. For a prospectus or, if available, the summary prospectus containing this and other important information about the Fund, call 866.909.9473 or visit WisdomTree.com/investments. Read the prospectus or, if available, the summary prospectus carefully before investing.
There are risks associated with investing, including the possible loss of principal.
Foreign investing involves currency, political and economic risk. Investments in emerging markets, real estate, currency, fixed income and alternative investments include additional risks. Fixed income investments are subject to interest rate risk; their value will normally decline as interest rates rise. In addition, when interest rates fall income may decline. Fixed income investments are also subject to credit risk, the risk that the issuer of a bond will fail to pay interest and principal in a timely manner, or that negative perceptions of the issuers ability to make such payments will cause the price of that bond to decline. Securities with floating rates can be less sensitive to interest rate changes than securities with fixed interest rates but may decline in value. Investing in mortgage- and asset-backed securities involves interest rate, credit, valuation, extension and liquidity risks and the risk that payments on the underlying assets are delayed, prepaid, subordinated, or defaulted on.
This material contains the opinions of the authors, which are subject to change, and should not be considered or interpreted as a recommendation to participate in any particular trading strategy, or deemed to be an offer or sale of any investment product, and it should not be relied on as such. There is no guarantee that any strategies discussed will work under all market conditions. This material represents an assessment of the market environment at a specific time and is not intended to be a forecast of future events or a guarantee of future results. This material should not be relied upon as research or investment advice regarding any security in particular. The user of this information assumes the entire risk of any use made of the information provided herein.
Kevin Flanagan, Rick Harper, Jeremy Schwartz, and Jeff Weniger are registered representatives of Foreside Fund Services, LLC.
WisdomTree Funds are distributed by Foreside Fund Services, LLC.
© 2026 WisdomTree, Inc. “WisdomTree” is a registered mark of WisdomTree, Inc.
© WisdomTree, Inc.
Read more commentaries by WisdomTree, Inc.
