Last Friday, Secretary of War Pete Hegseth said that it was “just the beginning.” Yesterday, President Donald Trump said it was “very complete, pretty much.”
So what is the Iran conflict right now? Based on a remarkable power hour to end Monday, it looks like the market has decided it’s over.
Running with the Trump “complete” headline, traders quickly started to price in a cessation of the conflict. U.S. stock indexes rose and oil prices fell. The trend continued on a bouncy Tuesday for stocks.
But what happened to “trust, but verify?” As the U.S. seems to have found a convenient offramp, it also introduces new asterisks about its ongoing engagement in the region. Further, the missiles and drones are still flying; in some cases, critical infrastructure is even in the crosshairs.
So what gives? Are investors getting their hopes up for nothing?
What did Trump mean?
That is the priceless question we’re still working out, but as part of his remarks, Trump insinuated that the conflict with Iran would end soon on the basis that they, “have no navy, no communications, they’ve got no Air Force.”
But despite that, Trump goes on to contradict his earlier comments about the completion of his week-long military operation, adding that he had “someone in mind to replace Khamenei” and was “thinking about taking” over the Strait of Hormuz.
Both comments could stand to contradict Trump’s earlier comments about the completeness of the contradiction, because while Iran might be hammered, it still appears to pack a punch.
Iran chooses chaos
Once Iran heard all this, they had a government spokesperson lined up to respond. In our Stock Market Today liveblog yesterday, we covered comments made by a spokesperson for Iran’s Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), who called Trump’s various comments “nonsense” and doubled down on their retaliation.
Ominously enough, the IRGC threatened that security in the region was “for everyone or for no one,” a point it continues to echo. And while the IRGC clearly has an incentive to talk its book, it would be generous to assume that they can’t cause trouble.
Just an example: per the University of Albany’s Christopher Clary, Iran has demonstrated a much higher hit rate on the neighboring United Arab Emirates (UAE) today. The 25.7% hit rate on Mar. 10 is an “all-time high since the onset of hostilities.”
The hit vs. intercept rate for ballistic missiles and drone attacks since Feb. 28 for the UAE through today. Today is not like prior days. https://t.co/QBsUbuysLK pic.twitter.com/my52fmztdX
— Christopher Clary (@clary_co) March 10, 2026
Today, even after a week of attacks from two of the greatest military powers on the planet, Iran continues to keep the all-important Strait of Hormuz under lock and key. CBS even reports that U.S. intelligence are worried the country is looking to deploy “mines” in the critical shipping port.
So if the conflict is “complete”, how come there’s still fighting?
Back at square one
Crucially, the longer that the Strait remains shut for even another week, the longer trade in the entire Middle East is disrupted. That threatens price shocks worldwide, which financial markets might be being cavalier about.
That’s increasingly not that surprising; financial products offer smart people access, but abstraction from reality. Even with insurance and escorts, if shipping through the canal doesn’t make it for one reason or another, you will still have energy problems and possible food insecurity (among a litany of other supply shocks).
That’s all to say, short of some diplomatic miracle or a ceasefire, it seems like the conflict at hand is far from “complete”, especially as critical shipping corridors like the Strait of Hormuz remain so tenuous.
Sure, for now, we have great miracles like Strategic Petroleum Reserves (SPRs) to arrest the price of oil. People forget, we’re looking at a nearly 20 million barrel per day (bpd) supply shock. And despite that, oil is falling right now as if the conflict is over.
But what about industrial chemicals important in semiconductor fabrication? What about fertilizer to grow crops? What if the conflict doesn’t completely cease this week, or the next one, or the next one?
It’s a question worth asking, especially given how quickly investors have fallen into line on the new narrative.
Getting your hopes up (for nothing?)
Investors could be forgiven for being fooled once, but twice, thrice, and many more times? Maybe it’s the algorithmic trading machine, “buy the dip” retail traders, or easily-deceived institutions, but there has come a remarkable tendency to trust this administration on all things, even while ignoring almost everything that it says.
Analysts have been shocked when this admin imposed tariffs (but he said he would do that during his campaign). They were shocked again when he carried out a hardline immigration agenda (which he committed to during his campaign). And now, they are blindsided by Iran (and supposedly, we are now pulling out).
The President is unique in his ability to convince people of things, or maybe it just goes to show how smart people are struggling to digest the evolving media environment where lines between reality and talking points end up blurred.
But to that end, investors have an opportunity to take Trump at his word. In recent days, he has said that the conflict could be over in 4 to 5 weeks or go “far longer.”
Yes, the intent might be to put an end to this conflict sooner rather than later, but at what cost? Are investors putting too much faith in those estimates, especially given the state of affairs right now? After all, one can go on social media and, as the highly online say, “monitor the situation” for themselves. (It’s not looking very “complete”).
I guess we’ll see in three weeks.
