Monitoring the developments in the Strait of Hormuz, I feel that what is happening now is not just a regional conflict but could become a turning point in global asset allocation. The recent hardline stance by Iran and the de facto closure of the strait are unprecedented in recent decades. More than 50 tankers pass through this waterway daily, which is now nearly at a standstill.

Looking back at history, the "Tanker War" during the Iran-Iraq War in the 1980s comes to mind. At that time, tanker crews called the strait a "death corridor." Crude oil prices jumped from $30 to over $45, and freight rates doubled. This time, Brent crude has already risen to $82 per barrel. Institutions like Goldman Sachs predict that if the blockade continues, prices could break through $100.

What’s intriguing is that this is not just an energy issue but could serve as an entry point into a scenario resembling a third world war. War risk premiums have soared to unbearable levels, and major shipping companies like Maersk have announced suspensions of operations on affected routes. Reports of GPS spoofing through electronic interference have also emerged, rendering coordinates meaningless.

In this environment, investors are struggling with how to protect their assets. J.P. Morgan has raised the probability of a global recession to over 35% and is recommending defensive positioning. Ray Dalio of Bridgewater Associates warned that we are approaching the brink of a "capital war."

Gold is a symbol of safe-haven assets, but what Dalio repeatedly emphasizes is that gold’s value should not be defined by daily price fluctuations. What matters most is its low correlation with other financial assets. Its resilience during economic downturns and widespread panic gives it true diversification value.

Meanwhile, the movements of cryptocurrencies, including Bitcoin, are more complex. In the early stages of conflict, Bitcoin often behaves more like high-volatility tech stocks than gold. If global risk appetite plummets, investors tend to sell the most volatile assets. Short-term drops could be triggered by leveraged long liquidations and panic withdrawals into stablecoins. Oxford Economics predicts that if the conflict persists for more than two months, global stock markets could undergo a significant correction of 15–20%.

However, if the clash escalates into a full-scale global war and parts of the traditional financial system break down, the very basis of asset valuation could change. In an environment of increased capital controls and restrictions on cross-border settlements, the ability to transfer value on-chain will be reevaluated. At that point, the question will shift from "bull or bear market" to "who can still settle freely and who can still convert assets freely."

Oil remains a core piece in this game. The Strait of Hormuz transports about one-fifth of the world’s daily crude oil trade. If supply gaps reach 20 million barrels per day, the rise in energy prices will be driven solely by physical realities, without emotional factors. This would signal a resurgence of global inflation, forcing central banks into a conflict between "inflation control" and "maintaining growth."

In a phase where real assets are prioritized, land, agricultural products, and industrial raw materials become key pieces. Because war first consumes resources and then capital. When supply chains are severed, the value of physical control surpasses book-based returns.

Warren Buffett once stated that in the event of a major war, the value of currency would decline. His warning that holding cash during wartime is the most to be avoided is now gaining renewed attention. Meanwhile, Goldman Sachs suggests focusing on commodity futures and inflation-linked bonds as hedges against inflation risk.

The technology sector also takes on different significance during wartime. Artificial intelligence and semiconductors are growth stories in peacetime, but in wartime, they become central to productivity. Computing power determines command efficiency, and chips determine weapon system performance. Assets like data centers, power infrastructure, and low-earth orbit satellite networks are rapidly integrated into national strategic frameworks.

If a scenario resembling a third world war materializes, the fundamental logic of asset allocation will shift radically. Traditional portfolio theory will no longer apply, and control over physical resources, access to energy, and independence of communication infrastructure will become more important than conventional financial indicators. The waters of the Strait of Hormuz are still turbulent, but the time for market participants to prepare is rapidly running out.