Author: IntaCapital Swiss

The UK is at Risk of Inflation and Energy Spikes Due to the Iran Conflict 

Written by IntaCapital Swiss on . Posted in Iran, News & Reports. Leave a Comment

Rising Borrowing Costs and Market Volatility

The United Kingdom’s borrowing costs are going up with great rapidity as the country is exposed to a surge in inflation due to the current war in the Middle East between Iran, the United States and Israel. The potential inflation crisis has been reflected in the UK’s increased cost of borrowing as the benchmark 10-year Gilt* yield rose 10 basis points on Friday 6th March.

*10-year Gilt  (Government Bond) – Represents the yield/interest rate the government must pay to borrow money for ten years. It is referred to as the benchmark as it reflects investor sentiment on the health of the UK economy and future Bank of England policy decisions.

Energy Security and Domestic Policy Vulnerability

The UK’s Energy Secretary, Ed Miliband, said that after an extremely serious drop-off in tankers transiting the Strait of Hormuz, the country is now at the mercy of international energy markets.

The Iran crisis has exposed significant vulnerabilities in the Labour government’s energy strategy. By retreating from North Sea oil in favor of current green policies, the UK’s heavy reliance on imported fuel has been thrust into a harsh spotlight. Whilst the costs will not be seen by household bills immediately, the inevitability of upcoming increases will soon filter through leaving residents of the UK further out of pocket.  

Impact on Petrol and Diesel Prices 

At the pumps, diesel has surged to a 16-month high, rising by approximately 6p to 148p per litre, a level not seen since August 2024. Petrol prices followed suit, climbing by 4p to an average of 137p. For the average consumer, this translates to an additional £2.00 to fill a 55-litre petrol car, while diesel owners are facing an increase of roughly £3.30 per tank. 

Shifting Expectations for Bank of England Policy

Elsewhere, analysts report a significant shift in expectations for the Bank of England’s March 19th policy meeting. While markets were previously almost certain of a 25-basis point cut, the ongoing conflict has prompted a major reprice, with holding interest rates now seen as the most likely outcome. Experts advise that due to the surge in energy prices, inflation could return to 3.5% later in the year, and if Brent Crude continues to increase (up circa 27% last week), the cost of living for consumers will continue to increase. 

Is the Iran Conflict Affecting Financial Markets Views on Interest Rates

Written by IntaCapital Swiss on . Posted in Iran, News & Reports. Leave a Comment

Analysts advise that last week, the financial markets were very in agreement regarding the ECB (European Central Bank) not increasing interest rates this year, however with the Iran conflict potentially pushing inflation up in Europe, the consensus is now that the ECB could well hike interest rates this year. In fact, money market pricing currently indicates a 100% probability that the ECB will implement an interest rate hike, and this sentiment has led German Bunds (German Government Bonds) to close in on their worst week since 2023. If interest rates are hiked, this will affect the consumer in regard to mortgages, costs of living including electricity, food and gas, plus the cost of borrowings by consumers.

Experts advise that ECB policy makers are wary of a repeat of 2022, when energy prices soared due to the Russian invasion of Ukraine on 24th of February 2022. The resulting inflation spike lasted longer than anticipated, exposing the Eurozone’s vulnerability to energy shocks. As the region relies heavily on gas and oil imports from the Middle East and the U.S. to power its industry and heat homes, it remains highly exposed to global price volatility. However, some experts believe the markets are overreacting, as back in 2022, rates were close to zero and supply chains were severely disrupted. Today, inflation is close to the ECBs target of 2%, and the duration of the conflict is paramount before taking any interest rate decisions.

How The Iran Conflict is Affecting Global Travel as Airline Prices Rocket

Written by IntaCapital Swiss on . Posted in Iran, News & Reports. Leave a Comment

Disruption to Major Middle Eastern Hubs

The ongoing war has affected major airline hubs in the Middle East with major Gulf carriers such as Emirates, Qatar Airways and Etihad effectively being grounded. According to data released, this has reduced daily international flight capacity by over 10%. Analysts advise that since the conflict began, global flight cancellations to the Middle East are now in excess of 23,000, which has led to other airlines experiencing a surge in reservations. In some cases this has resulted in airfares increasing by up to 900%. 

Surging Fares and the Shift to Asian Carriers 

Experts advise that Singapore Airlines and Cathay Pacific Airways are two of the best positioned Asian carriers to face down the travel problems created by the current conflict, as passengers flock to Asian airlines to obtain seats between Asia and Europe. In fact, currently, a one-way economy ticket on Singapore Airlines from Heathrow to Singapore has been advertised at US$ 8,450, which experts advise is a 900% increase on fares later in the month. A similar ticket from Heathrow to Hong Kong,  which was advertised two weeks ago at HK$ 5,670 is today costing HK$ 26,737.

Energy Security and Global Market Volatility

China has instructed major refiners to halt exports of gasoline and diesel, and Indian refiner MRPL has advised customers they are halting the export of oil products as these countries along with others seek to protect domestic consumption. With regard to stocks and shares, the Kospi Index in Seoul, which is seen as one the world’s hottest stock markets, took a major beating with a 12% drop yesterday, preceded by 7.2% the day before, being the worst sell-off since 2024 due to Iran war risks. European stocks are slightly higher today, but traders’ attention is focused on the Middle East conflict and the effect a prolonged war will have on shares.

Impact on Global Food Supplies and Supermarket Prices

Supermarket bills are also set to increase as the closure of the Strait of Hormuz has halted 1/3 of global fertiliser supplies, with such exports from Iran of walnuts, almonds, pistachios ,dates and saffron all expected to increase if the conflict does not stop soon. However, on the beef and poultry front, Brazil’s exports could be rerouted from the Middle East to Europe with analysts suggesting this could lead to lower prices for consumers within the EU and the United Kingdom.

How the Iran Conflict Could Affect a Business in the Transport Industry

Written by IntaCapital Swiss on . Posted in Iran, News & Reports. Leave a Comment

The ongoing conflict involving Iran and regional powers has rapidly shifted from a geopolitical flashpoint to a global economic stress test — with profound implications for businesses in the transport industry. From disrupted trade lanes to spiking fuel costs and shifting demand patterns, transport companies must adjust to current market volatility and structural shifts in how goods and people move internationally.

Recent events — including military strikes on Iranian territory and Iran’s closing of the Strait of Hormuz — have combined to create both immediate disruptions and longer-term risks for transport operators, logistics planners, and global supply chains. This article examines those impacts in depth, focusing on maritime shipping, air cargo, land transport supply chains, insurance markets, and strategic responses for transport businesses.

Strategic Chokepoints and Route Disruption: The Strait of Hormuz

One of the most direct ways the Iran conflict affects transport industries is through disruption of critical maritime routes.

The Strait of Hormuz — a narrow waterway at the entrance to the Persian Gulf — is a linchpin of global energy and freight flows. Traditionally, about 20% to 30% of the world’s total daily petroleum liquids (oil, condensate and products) and circa 20% of  global LNG (liquified Natural Gas) pass through this channel, and it also underpins a significant portion of container and bulk ship traffic. Data shows that just oil flow alone accounts for circa 20% of global oil (often exceeding 20 Million bpd) is shipped through the strait. 

With Iran effectively blocking or threatening to block passage through the strait in response to escalating military hostilities, vessel traffic has been severely curtailed. Recent reports confirm that shipping traffic has “halted or been diverted” as insurers drop war-risk cover and carriers avoid the region. However, President Trump has announced that the US Forces stationed in the area may provide an escort to tankers passing through the strait.

For transport companies, especially those that operate container ships, bulk carriers, and tankers, this means:

  • Longer routes: Ships are rerouting around Africa via the Cape of Good Hope rather than traversing the shorter Suez Canal ↔ Hormuz route. This adds days or even weeks to voyages.  
  • Increased fuel consumption: Longer sailings mean higher bunkering costs, reducing margins.
  • Scheduling chaos: Regular service loops and timetables are disrupted, affecting feeder services and inland distribution.

Even if traffic eventually resumes, the uncertainty and risk premium attached to Gulf passage will linger, discouraging carriers until the geopolitical landscape stabilises.

Rising Fuel and Freight Costs

Fuel is among the largest operating costs for transport businesses — especially shipping, aviation, and road freight. The Iran conflict, by escalating risk around oil supplies and increasing premiums for war-risk cover, has pushed prices higher across the board.

Key consequences include:

  • Spiking bunker fuel prices: As oil markets react to Middle East instability, bunker fuel costs surge, squeezing profit margins for shipping lines and logistics firms.  
  • Freight rate inflation: Both ocean and air freight indexes have ticked up sharply as capacity shrinks and carriers pass costs on.  
  • Higher ancillary charges: Some carriers are introducing conflict-related surcharges, particularly on routes that cross the Gulf or Red Sea.

For many transport businesses, these rising costs could force pricing adjustments, change in service offerings, or even strategic withdrawal from riskier routes.

Air Transport Disruption and Rising Insurance Costs

The conflict has not only affected maritime transport. Air cargo networks flying over or near the Middle East have been disrupted as airlines re-route to avoid dangerous airspace.

This has led to:

  • Longer air routes and greater fuel burn.
  • Reduced cargo capacity because fewer flights or aircraft are willing to traverse high-risk corridors — a trend that pushes freight rates higher.  
  • Increased insurance premiums: Aviation insurers have also adjusted risk pricing for operations in proximity to conflict zones.

For smaller express and parcel carriers relying on global hubs in the Gulf, Middle East instability could reduce service frequency and reliability — impacting both delivery promises and customer trust.

Logistics Cascades: Delays, Capacity Shifts, and Supply Chain Spillovers

Transport businesses don’t operate in isolation. Disruption in one link of a supply chain — like ocean transit times — can cascade throughout the network.

Recent industry warnings indicate:

  • Delays at ports and inland hubs as goods stack up and carriers adjust bookings.  
  • Modal shifts: Some shippers are shifting from sea to air freight to maintain delivery schedules, but air capacity constraints and high rates may soon push them back or force hybrid strategies.  
  • Equipment shortages in key regions as containers and chassis get stuck far from origin markets.

These kinds of disruptions are especially taxing for just-in-time logistics systems, which lack inventory buffers and depend on predictable transit windows.

Insurance Markets: War Risk Cover Withdrawal

A direct consequence of elevated geopolitical risk is the withdrawal of war-risk insurance cover in affected waters. Major maritime insurers — including big European mutuals and UK firms — have ceased providing cover for tankers and cargo vessels operating in the Persian Gulf.

What this means for transport businesses:

  • Higher risk premiums: Operators now have to find alternative coverage at significantly increased cost or self-insure if they have the balance sheet.  
  • Exclusion zones: Some insurers may exclude operations within specified nautical miles of conflict zones.
  • Risk pricing impacts: War risk pricing feeds into total freight cost — potentially eroding competitiveness.

In effect, the transport industry is being forced to internalise risks it previously externalised via insurance markets.

Business Travel and Passenger Transport

Tourism, business travel, and passenger logistics are also impacted. Rising oil costs translate into higher jet fuel costs (a large portion of airline expenses), which hit both ticket pricing and passenger volumes. 

China, the Gulf states, and Europe all depend on Middle Eastern hubs for transit and business connections. Instability may reduce travel demand in and through these nodes, directly affecting:

  • Airlines and airports reliant on transit traffic.
  • Tour operators and booking agents servicing intercontinental routes.
  • Taxi, coach, and rail networks that feed into unstable international gateway cities.

Passenger transport isn’t as directly hit as freight, but sustained regional instability could remodel global travel flows over the long run.

Strategic and Long-Term Risks

Beyond immediate cost and operational disruptions, longer-term strategic risks for transport businesses include:

  • Shifts in global trade patterns: Companies may seek alternatives to conflict-affected routes, potentially boosting Eurasian rail corridors or bypass corridors through Africa.
  • Investment reallocation: Firms might prioritise infrastructure and assets in lower-risk geographies.
  • Technological acceleration: Investment in digital logistics, route optimisation, and predictive analytics to hedge risk and improve resilience.
  • Regulatory fragmentation: Sanctions or trade restrictions tied to the conflict could further restrict transport flows or require compliance changes.

In short, transport companies must think not just about today’s route but tomorrow’s geography of commerce.

What Transport Businesses Can Do

While the outlook is challenging, proactive firms are already adapting:

1.    Risk-aware routing: Using real-time conflict intelligence to avoid hotspots and adjust schedules dynamically.

2.    Diversified port and hub use: Reducing exposure to any one chokepoint by expanding node flexibility.

3.    Fuel hedging strategies: Locking in fuel costs through hedges to manage volatility.

4.    Insurance risk pooling: Exploring group coverage or self-insurance strategies to control rising premiums.

These strategic moves won’t eliminate risk, but they can blunt the economic impact and position companies to thrive in an uncertain landscape.

The Iran conflict has swiftly evolved from a regional geopolitical issue into a global economic event with wide-ranging consequences for the transport industry. With strategic chokepoints disrupted, fuel and freight costs rising, insurance markets recalibrating, and supply chain cascades unfolding, transport businesses face both immediate pressures and enduring strategic challenges.

Ultimately, the companies that adapt — by rethinking routes, rebalancing risk, and embracing flexibility — will be best positioned to navigate this period of disruption. The Iran conflict is a stark reminder that geopolitical instability can quickly transform the logistical landscape, and resilience must be central to any transport business strategy.  

European Shares’ Winning Streak Keeps on Rolling Upwards 

Written by IntaCapital Swiss on . Posted in News & Reports. Leave a Comment

Record-Breaking Market Performance

Despite concerns regarding AI disruptions and White House tariffs, recent data released shows that European shares have enjoyed an eight-month streak of gains, and it is confirmed to be the longest monthly streak since 2013. The Stoxx Europe 600 index* is up 4% this month, with data released from EPFR Global** showing US$10 billion being received by European stock mutual funds and ETFs over the last two weeks, and it is also the fourth straight week of inflows. 

*The Stoxx Europe 600 Index – A broad measure of the European equity market, consisting of a fixed number of 600 components. It provides extensive and diversified coverage across 17 countries and 11 industries within Europe’s developed economies, and represents 90% of the underlying investible market. This index is a key indicator for European equities.

**EPFR Global – Formerly recognised as Emerging Portfolio Fund Research, it is a leading provider of global fund flow and asset allocation data for financial institutions. It tracks over $55 trillion in assets across more than 151,000 share classes globally. 

Experts and analysts agree that global investors have been looking at European stocks as a means of diversifying away from US markets, with concerns regarding the economy and the tech market, and additionally an AI bubble. Analysts also advise that US based investors are looking to diversify their portfolios by moving into European equities, which have less “tech” than their peers in the USA. 

Strength in the “Old-Economy” Sectors

Indeed, the composition of the markets in Europe has helped the boom in European shares. With fears of AI disruption in the US, the old-economy sector favourites such as utilities, telecommunications, basic resources and energy have outperformed market expectations, with some posting double-digit returns. Also, in 2025, analysts advised that Germany finally returned to growth for the first time since 2022, and with billions being spent on defence (announced March 2024), feeding through to various industries, German equities will once again become more attractive. 

A Positive Outlook for 2026

Experts advise that the outlook for European equities in 2026 is broadly positive, with total returns ranging between 6% – 13%. Analysts suggest that Europe is entering a “new era” underscored by robust fiscal expansion, especially in Germany, accelerating domestic growth, with investors realigning their portfolios away from expensive US mega-caps. 

Many global investors are looking for cheaper bargains, and according to recent data released, the Stoxx Europe 600 Index is trading at a price-to-earnings-ratio of 18.3, whilst the S&P in the United States is trading at 27.7. Experts suggest that European stocks are being driven by domestic stimulus delivery as well as rotation away from the tech sectors to the non-tech sectors.

What Will Be the Effect on Oil Prices If the USA and Iran Go Into Battle?

Written by IntaCapital Swiss on . Posted in Iran, News & Reports. Leave a Comment

Last week, on 26th February, negotiators from the United States and Iran met for the third time in Geneva in an attempt to reach agreement over the decades-long nuclear dispute between the two countries. However, by 28th February, in operations codenamed Operation Epic Fury (USA) and Operation Roaring Lion (Israel), the United States and Israel jointly conducted military airstrikes in Iran. The initial assault reportedly resulted in the death of Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, along with several other senior political and military figures.

Iran is currently subject to international sanctions, and approximately 90% of its crude oil exports are purchased by China. According to data released by Kpler Ltd, a global data and analytics company specialising in real-time intelligence for the energy, maritime and commodities markets, Iranian crude exports reached approximately 1.25 million barrels per day in January this year.

Much of this crude oil is transported via a network commonly known as the “Dark Fleet”*, a group of ageing oil tankers that employ deceptive practices to bypass international regulations, sanctions and safety standards.

*The Dark Fleet is a large clandestine network of ageing oil tankers, shell companies and maritime service providers operating outside international regulations to transport sanctioned oil, primarily from Iran, Russia and, until recently, Venezuela. Analysts estimate the fleet comprises approximately 1,470 tankers that use tactics such as disabling tracking systems, forging documentation and conducting ship-to-ship transfers in open waters to evade sanctions.

The so-called Shadow Fleet is critical to Iran’s economy. Analysts suggest it transports millions of barrels of oil daily to China, generating billions of dollars annually. The United States government claims that a significant proportion of these revenues supports Iran’s nuclear programme, with roughly half of the exports reportedly under the control of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC).

Even before the latest escalation, rising tensions had pushed crude oil prices to a six-month high. As of Monday 23rd February, Brent Crude Futures settled at $71.66 per barrel. Following the outbreak of war in the Middle East, prices have risen to approximately $79.37 per barrel, representing an increase of around 8.5%.

Gas prices have also surged. Data from the EU natural gas benchmark shows prices rising by approximately 40% since Friday, reportedly after Qatar suspended LNG production and associated operations in Mesaieed Industrial City and Ras Laffan Industrial City following Iranian drone strikes.

Elsewhere, airline shares have fallen amid the conflict. International Airlines Group (owner of British Airways) declined by 6.6%, while EasyJet fell by 3.9%. The FTSE 100 also slipped by 1.2%. As expected, traditional safe-haven assets such as gold surged to $5,390, with some analysts suggesting it could climb towards $6,500 amid war-related uncertainty and inflationary pressures in the United States.

As previously warned by experts, if diplomatic talks failed the greatest risk lay in the potential closure or blockade of the Strait of Hormuz by Iran. The strait, only 21 miles wide at its narrowest point, links the Arabian Sea to the Persian Gulf and is widely regarded as the backbone of global oil supply. A significant proportion of crude oil exports from Iraq, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates pass through this route.

The strait is now effectively closed, placing shipments of crude oil, liquefied natural gas (LNG) and liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) at serious risk. More than USD 500 billion worth of oil and gas passes through the Strait of Hormuz annually, meaning any prolonged disruption could expose the global economy to severe instability.

In response, the United States has assembled its largest concentration of naval and air power in the region since the 2003 Iraq War. Approximately 14 warships are currently deployed, centred around two carrier strike groups. The USS Abraham Lincoln is operating in the Arabian Sea, while the USS Gerald R. Ford, the world’s largest aircraft carrier, has recently arrived at Souda Bay in Crete in the Eastern Mediterranean.

Supporting vessels reportedly include nine guided-missile destroyers and three littoral combat ships, positioned across the Arabian Sea off Oman, the Red Sea and the Mediterranean. This military build-up echoes President Trump’s warning last Monday that if Iran failed to reach a deal with Washington, it would be “a very bad day for that country and, very sadly, for its people”.

With the United States and Israel now engaged in open conflict with Iran, the consequences for crude oil prices could be severe. Millions of barrels of crude oil, refined products and feedstocks shipped through the Strait of Hormuz are now at risk. Analysts suggest prices could spike dramatically, potentially reaching $130 per barrel.

Shipping costs are also rising. In June 2025, when the United States previously launched strikes in Iran, supertanker rates surged to approximately $76,000 per day, an increase of around 12%, for vessels carrying two million barrels of crude from the Persian Gulf to China. Data from the Baltic Exchange in London showed this was the highest level since March 2023, adding as much as $1.40 per barrel to shipping costs.

However, analysts argue that a prolonged war would not serve the interests of either the United States or Iran. Oil exports are vital to the Iranian economy, while higher global oil prices would quickly translate into increased petrol prices at the pump in the United States. With mid-term elections approaching in November, sustained fuel price increases could carry significant political consequences for President Trump.

Nevertheless, with hostilities now underway, daily market data indicates that oil and gas prices continue to rise sharply, with potentially far-reaching implications for economies worldwide.

Will Sweden Lose the Krona and Adopt the Euro?

Written by IntaCapital Swiss on . Posted in News & Reports. Leave a Comment

Historical Context and the 2003 Referendum

On January 1st, 1995, Sweden, Finland, and Austria joined the EU (European Union) as part of the fourth enlargement, which expanded its membership to 15. In 1999, the single currency was launched, and although Sweden is legally committed to joining the currency (once certain economic criteria are met), it chose not to, citing concerns about sovereignty, as well as economic and political reasons. In 2003, the government of Goran Persson held a non-binding referendum on Euro adoption, but circa 56% of voters rejected the adoption and ever since, successive governments have respected the result.

Monetary Policy and the ERM II Opt-Out

For economic reasons, Sweden has gone down the path of retaining control over their monetary policy and is one of six member countries of the EU that still prefer to use their own currency, and Stockholm still maintains a floating exchange rate. Furthermore, Sweden has opted out of the Union’s ERM II*, which is a mechanism whereby the Euro’s exchange rate with other eurozone countries’ currencies is managed. It should be pointed out that if an EU member country wishes to adopt the Euro, membership of ERM II is mandatory.

*ERM II – The Exchange Rate Mechanism II (ERM II) was set up on 1st January 1999 as a successor to ERM for those EU member countries outside the Euro area who have their own currencies. This was to ensure that exchange rate fluctuations between the Euro and other EU currencies do not disrupt economic stability within the single market, and to help non-Euro area countries prepare themselves for participation in the Euro area.

Shifting Geopolitical and Economic Landscapes

However, in recent years, analysts suggest that support from the public has grown in favour of adopting the Euro, although experts within this arena say that it would probably take several years to bring adoption to fruition. Officials within the Swedish government have suggested there has been a significant shift in both the geo-economic and geopolitical landscapes since the 2003 non-binding referendum, which has boosted the case for closer ties with the EU.

Global Rivalries and the Case for Integration

Ministers have cited the Russian invasion of Ukraine, which, after many years of non-alignment militarily, prompted Sweden to join NATO and the increasing global influence of China as valid reasons for closer integration with the EU. Furthermore, President Trump’s ‘America First’ policies, marked by disruptive tariffs and threats to annex Greenland, underscore how modern great-power rivalries leave smaller economies increasingly exposed.

Commercial Advantages of the Common Currency

Analysts suggest that on the plus side for adopting the Euro, data released show that over 60% of Sweden’s goods trade is transacted with the EU and only circa 6.4% is with the United States. Therefore, some commentators are suggesting that with 60% of trade being transacted with the eurozone, joining the common currency would eliminate exchange rate fluctuations (which with the Krona can be volatile at times), also eliminating any uncertainty for both importers and exporters. Several senior voices across the economic strata of Sweden are advocating joining the Euro for these very reasons, plus they say that there will be greater commercial benefits across the board rather than clinging to the diminishing advantages of retaining independent monetary policies.

Arguments for Retaining Monetary Independence

However, some experts still oppose adopting the Euro, suggesting that giving up the independence of monetary policy would harm the Swedish economy as interest rates can be set in alignment with domestic conditions, rather than following decisions made by the ECB (European Central Bank). Experts have also voiced concerns that, according to data released, the debt within the euro area is currently 80% of GDP, whereas Sweden’s debt-to-GDP sits at circa 33%. One expert suggests that, given the borrowing trends within the euro area, a common currency collapse is not out of the question.

The Path Forward: Referendums and Elections

However, there will have to be another Euro adoption referendum in order to give any potential switch legitimacy, and whilst the public is warming to an adoption of the Euro, polls suggest that there are more voters against than for the adoption. This coming September, there is a general election and political commentators suggest that any significant movement on this issue will be shelved until a new or the same government is elected.

Global Market Jitters and Sell America

Written by IntaCapital Swiss on . Posted in News & Reports. Leave a Comment

The Shift in Global Sentiment

The US Dollar is viewed as the world’s reserve currency; US Treasuries are among the top safe-haven assets, and US financial markets are regarded as the most liquid and exceptionally deep. However, there is a sentiment running through many major financial centres that perhaps it is time for global markets/investors to sell America. This narrative has not taken place this year, as analysts look back to 2nd April 2025, when they feel it began when President Trump announced his Liberation Day tariffs and upended the global trading system as we knew it.

Geopolitical Tensions and Economic Implications

This feeling of sell America became more pronounced in January of this year when President Trump announced he wished to take over Greenland, which is part of Denmark and a NATO ally, which fired up more anti-American/Trump sentiment among Europe’s leaders. However, analysts advise that this sentiment has died down for the time being, but if there was a measured shift towards sell America, the implications for the US economy could well be severe. For many decades, the United States has enjoyed unparalleled faith in their currency and the treasury market from overseas investors who have ploughed funds into the US economy.

If sentiment moves away from US assets, as they are now considered not to be the safest of havens, experts advise that if overseas investors begin to sell, the US Dollar would weaken, and the availability of capital to both companies and the government would shrink considerably. Indeed, some experts fear that if US consumers face increasing costs as imports become more expensive, whilst at the same time borrowing costs go up, it could become an ongoing cycle where recession rears its ugly head as the federal deficit becomes less sustainable.

Eroding the Foundations of US Investment 

Experts argue that since the early 1960s (if not earlier), overseas investors have been attracted to the United States due to several factors such as a stable US Dollar, a commitment to free trade, extremely deep capital markets, superior bond ratings, legal protections and an independent monetary policy ( independent Federal Reserve). If any of the above start being stripped away, analysts advise that financial markets would probably react negatively towards US assets and the greenback. An example of this is the debasement trade* where markets and investors sell currencies they feel are being devalued due to the incumbent government policies.

The Rise of the Debasement Trade

*Debasement Trade – A financial strategy where investors invest in assets such as Bitcoin and gold as a hedge against the devaluation of fiat currencies is known as a debasement trade, with key takeaways being rising sovereign or government debt, geopolitical instability, and inflation. Experts advise that investors have been selling major currencies and running to alternative assets such as gold (both physical and ETF), silver, Bitcoin, and even some collectables such as Pokémon cards, which in mid 2025 reached an all-time high.

Pressure on the Federal Reserve

President Trump’s continued attack on the current Federal Reserve, Chairman Jerome Powell, for not lowering interest rates and his rhetoric regarding the reduction of their independence has continued to spook financial markets. This was reflected in April 2025 when the stock markets (S&P 500, Dow, Nasdaq) fell by more than 2%, and the US Dollar plunged to a three-year low. The above was described by experts as a significant event and occurred after President Trump described Fed Chairman Jerome Powell as a ‘major loser’ as he increased his attacks on the central bank.

Market Volatility and the Greenland Conflict

Another example of global market jitters came on 20th January this year, following President Trump’s social media postings which threatened 10% – 15% tariffs on countries (including Denmark, France, Germany and the UK) if his European allies tried to block his takeover of Greenland. This triggered a sharp sell-off where the Dow Jones fell 1.8%, the S&P 500 fell over 2%, wiping off $1.2 Trillion in value, and the Nasdaq Composite fell by 2.4% with tech stocks leading the way. Investors fled to safe havens, helping to push gold beyond a new record of $4,000po. However, the markets bounced back the following day, as in Davos at the World Economic Forum, President Trump announced a de-escalation, stating he would not use force over Greenland and promised a future framework of a deal with NATO, plus he withdrew the imminent threat of tariffs.

Resilient Corporate Growth and Hedging Strategies

However, several experts advise that it might be difficult to “Sell America” where corporate earnings growth has seriously outpaced their peers in any other regions across the globe, and despite the current risks, the pull of the USA is hard to dismiss. In the Eurozone, for example, the governments would find it difficult to weaponise US assets such as bonds, stocks and shares as most of the ownership is held by the private sector. Another scenario being offered by some analysts is that investors may be choosing to hedge their bets in the United States. This is where investors continue to purchase bonds, stocks, etc., but at the same time hedge their investments by purchasing derivatives, which will protect them against future declines in the US Dollar. This can take the form of selling U.S. dollars forward in the F/EX markets, which can put downward pressure on the greenback despite funds still flowing into the country.

Positive Indicators and Global Dominance

Despite the calls for “Sell America” and de-dollarisation, the outlook on the United States remains somewhat positive. Earnings growth projected by analysts is 14% – 16% EPS  (earnings per share) for the S&P for this year, driven by corporate tax benefits and AI efficiency. US treasuries currently represent 68% of all global sovereign issuance and are still seen as a haven in times of financial markets and geopolitical stress, albeit slightly tarnished at the moment.

Future Outlook for the Reserve Currency

Analysts point out that emerging markets in Asia and Latin America are experiencing heavier inflows of capital as global investors seek to spread risk away from the United States. However, data released shows that the US Dollar accounts for circa 50% of trade invoices for global trade and remains the dominant currency in international transactions. Furthermore, the greenback accounts for circa 88% of all foreign exchange transactions and represents 58% of global foreign exchange reserves, so any thoughts of the USD losing its status as the world’s reserve currency can be put on hold for now. However, analysts have warned that “Sell or Hedge America” will still be uppermost in the minds of overseas investors in the United States.

Demand for the Swiss Franc Reaching Extraordinary Levels

Written by IntaCapital Swiss on . Posted in News & Reports. Leave a Comment

The current demand for the Swiss Franc has pushed the currency 2.00% higher against the Euro and 3.50% higher against the US Dollar, the highest the Franc has been against both currencies for over a decade. Investors have piled into the currency, with some experts suggesting they are treating the CHF as the safest haven in the market, as Switzerland has only a modest debt, predictable policies and a stable economy.

However, the SNB (Swiss National Bank) may pose a risk to investors, as to curb deflationary pressures, they may intervene in the currency markets. Another option open to the SNB, is to move interest rates into negative territory (currently 0.00%); however, the President of the SNB, Martin Schlegel, said in the past that such a move faces some serious headwinds but would do so if necessary. However, the SNB has a delicate line to tread as negative interest rates will upset savers, individuals, insurance companies and pension funds, whilst currency intervention may risk a rebuke from the United States.

Analysts suggest that the recent surge may also be partly due to a Swiss Franc Bond issued by Alphabet, the parent company of Google. Analysts advise that a five-part bond sale raised CHF3.055 Billion spanning maturities of 3 – 25 years. This bond sale was part of a $31.50 Billion global bond raise with Alphabet selling a rare 100-year bond, which raised £1 billion with a coupon of 6.125%, and further sales of sterling bonds in a five-part offering raised £5.5 billion.

Financial markets suggest that the EUR/CHF rate is projected to remain under pressure, possibly trending towards 1.04 -1.06, indicating continued CHF appreciation. The Swiss Franc has previously shown and is currently showing high resistance to other major currencies, including the US Dollar, as the currency continues to be supported by safe haven demand, particularly in times of geo-economic and geopolitical turbulence.

Bitcoin and Volatility

Written by IntaCapital Swiss on . Posted in News & Reports. Leave a Comment

Recent Market Movements and Sentiment

As of this week, Bitcoin has rebounded to circa $70,899, then dropped 2% to circa $69,037. This comes after a significant decline from a market high of $122,200 in October 2025, including a fall several days ago to a 16-month low of $60,074.20. In just under four months, Bitcoin has declined nearly 50% and once again reignited debate over the cryptocurrency’s stability. Cryptocurrency experts suggest that sentiment towards Bitcoin is not overly bearish and advise that the coin could go higher to $73,000 – $75,000, where they expect initial resistance to occur. However, analysts report that traders remain on edge, uncertain as to whether or not the worst is over, but suggest that $60,000 is the main support on the downside.

The Shift in Market Concentration and Volatility

The extended slide in Bitcoin began last October after the coin had hit its peak, having been pushed higher for most of 2025 by the pro-crypto agenda emanating from the White House. This week, the value of the cryptocurrency market is circa $2.5 Trillion, of which Bitcoin accounts for circa 60%. Also, on Thursday, 5th February, the Bitcoin Volmex Implied Volatility Index* surged from 57% to over 97%. One expert announced that volatility had doubled from the previous week, and data released showed that investors had pulled on the same day, $434 Million from US ETFs (Exchange Traded Funds) alone.

*Bitcoin Volmex Implied Volatility Index – is designed to measure the constant 30-day expected volatility of the Bitcoin options market derived from real-time crypto call and put options.

Historical and Political Catalysts for Market Whipsaws

The catalyst for whipsaw reactions in the Bitcoin market has been different, starting with the late 2022 collapse of FTX*, resulting in Bitcoin plummeting to its lowest price for two years. In October last year, the coin collapsed from its peak, wiping out in a single day billions of dollars of trading positions due to, say experts,  President Donald Trump issuing a boatload of tariff threats. Analysts suggest that due to the tariff threat and its negative impact on Bitcoin, investors in the currency now have a reduced appetite for buying digital tokens and coins in general, thus making it harder for the coin to recover lost ground over the longer term.

*FTX – The 2022 collapse of FTX, a cryptocurrency exchange, once valued at circa $32 Billion, triggered massive industry-wide losses, severe regulatory crackdowns and a $1 Billion multi-year bankruptcy process to repay creditors. Driven by a liquidity crisis, the fall-out revealed misuse of customer funds by Alameda Research, leading to criminal charges for founder Sam Bankman-Fried and widespread contagion in the crypto markets.

Geopolitical Tensions and Early 2026 Turbulence

This year has hardly begun, and we have already seen dramatic volatility in Bitcoin. The initial fall in January was, according to experts, due to inflamed geopolitical tensions, including President Trump’s threats to take over Greenland, a country belonging to Denmark and therefore a NATO ally. The geopolitical problems led to a sell-off in global stocks and commodities, including gold and silver, which experts suggest was part of the reason for the drastic fall in the price of the cryptocurrency.

The Impact of Federal Reserve Leadership and the Strong Dollar

The recent fall in Bitcoin has been attributed to the announcement by President Trump of his pick for the New Chairman of the Federal Reserve, Kevin Warsh, who is to replace the incumbent Jerome Powell. Financial markets and investors will, say technical analysts, see his reputation as a strong dollar and inflation hawk as a sign that any rapid rate cuts as advocated by President Trump will not happen. As a result, the dollar spiked, and Bitcoin moved sharply lower. As can be seen, there have been tentative rallies in Bitcoin that have attracted the dip buyers who, as soon as prices reverse, immediately sell, draining further liquidity from the market.

Declining Institutional Demand and the “Crypto Gold” Debate

Several crypto commentators have also said that institutional demand has fallen off, and further suggested that the coin, which has in the past been referred to as a type of crypto gold as a hedge against currencies and stocks falling, and other market stress, is no longer tenable. Experts suggest that the market continues to be somewhat fragile, and with US-listed Bitcoin ETFs continuing to experience persistent outflows, the expectation of further monetary easing taking a back seat, plus the strengthening of the US Dollar, institutional portfolios are treating crypto assets as less of a priority.

The Bull Case and Long-Term Outlook 

Whilst there is definitely a bearish outlook in the Bitcoin market, the Bulls still suggest that the price could go as high as $175,00 with some claiming as high as $250,000. Some experts suggest that the market’s interpretation is wrong, and point to Mr Warsh’s statement supporting lower rates. They also pointed out that perception rather than fundamentals drove much of the recent sell-off, and historically, after a spate of selling, Bitcoin goes on an extended bull run, plus the fact that Bitcoin’s hard cap of 21 million coins remains a crucial anchor for long-term value. However, whatever the pros and cons, Bitcoin will, for the time being, be subject to bouts of volatility.

Head office

IntaCapital Swiss SA,
Rue du Rhône 80 - 84,
CH - 1204 Genève,
Switzerland

Other facilities

Enquire

Legal

IntaCapital Switzerland | Copyright © 2025 | All Rights Reserved