这次能源冲击与2022年不同，更不用说20世纪70年代了

Henry AllenMacro Strategist+44-20-754-11149 The strong market rebound of recent weeks has led to comparisons with the firstmonth or so after Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in 2022. Back then, there was asimilar recovery, but it was followed by even bigger declines as the scale of thestagflationary shock became clear. That’s understandably led to questions about a repeat. But those comparisons areunfair on several grounds: nFirst, to state the obvious, oil and gas prices are lower today than back then.That applies to both front-end prices and expectations. For instance, evenif you compare a similar point one month into the Ukraine conflict, Brentfutures were pointing to an extended oil shock, with 6-month futures above$100/bbl, whereas today they’re currently beneath $80/bbl. In other words,investors aren’t pricing in an extended stagflationary shock. nSecond, the oil price comparison is even more favourable today if youadjust for inflation and lower energy intensity. That’s because we’ve hadcumulative inflation of around 10% since 2022, and energy intensity hascontinued to decline. So, even if oil did get to $100/bbl again, the impact issmaller today than it was then. nThird, inflation is starting from a lower base today, meaning that centralbanks aren’t being forced into the aggressively hawkish responses we sawafter the 2022 shock. nFourth, the macro data has been resilient. That differs from the moreserious oil shocks of the past, when there were immediate data downturnsas soon as the shock occurred, e.g. the first oil crisis of 1973, or the Gulf Warin 1990. By contrast today, the inflation impact is clear, but the data hasremained expansionary on both sides of the Atlantic. For markets, the key point is today's shock isn't hitting the severity thresholds ofpast oil shocks, on a whole range of metrics. The reason 2022 saw even biggermarket downturns after the first month,was because it was accompanied by amuch more severe energy shock (particularly on the gas side), along with highinflation that led to the most aggressive rate hiking cycle in a generation, andgenuine fears of a recession. Today, we are not meeting those severity thresholds.Therefore, the resilience we've seen across multiple asset classes makes moresense than it might first appear, and isn't just a sign of complacency. Why today's energy shock is a milder version of pastepisodes The rapid recovery in risk assets has caught many off guard. In fact, it’s just the thirdtime since WWII that the S&P 500 has seen 3 consecutive weekly gains above 3%.That’s extended to other asset classes, with HY credit spreads in the US and Europenow tighter than when the conflict began. In response, some have made comparisons with 2022, when there was also aninitial recovery in risk assets, only to be followed by even deeper declines. Sobearish voices today have suggested that we’re not out of the woods yet and, if amore sustained stagflation shock is realised, then the playbook is for deeper lossesahead. Figure 1: Change in US HY spreads in 2022 and 2026 (bps)- an initial recovery in 2022 was followed by even morewidening However, we think those comparisons are overplayed. In fact, from an economicstandpoint, there are several points for optimism today relative to 2022, let alonesome of the bigger oil shocks of the past that led to outright recessions. 1. Oil and gas prices are at a lower level now than in 2022, both at the front end andin expectation. nIt almost seems too obvious to state but, with energy prices at a lower levelthan 2022, it makes sense that markets aren’t going to have as severe areaction. nCritically, expectations on the futures curve are also sharply lower. Even ifyou go back to the same point in the Ukraine conflict, just over a month in,investors got to a point where they expected Brent crude would be above$100/bbl in six months’ time. That hasn’t happened today.nOf course, there’s pushback on the basis that expectations are simplyexpectations. But in markets, expectations affect reality. For example, a keydriver of the 2022 bear market was the belief that central bank rate hikesformed part of a classic boom-bust cycle that would end in recession.Similarly in 2025, expectations of a global trade war, and even a potentialUS recession, led to huge financial turmoil after 'Liberation Day', evenbefore the tariffs had taken effect. We cannot isolate expectations frommarket performance. 20 April 2026Thematic Research Figure 4: The 6-month Brent future ($/bbl) are lower aswell, showing that investors aren't pricing a sustained oilshock like they were back then Figure 6: 6-month European natural gas futures (EUR/MWh) are also substantially lower 2.The energy price comparison becomes even more favourable today if youadjust for inflation and lower energy intensity. nWhen we think about the impact of an energy price shock, we clearly needto account for inflation. Back in 2022, Brent crude oil spent around fivemonths when it was