The best way to hedge against war with Iran

By Matthew Partridge Jan 30, 2012

Matthew Partridge

Share with
friends:

Comments (12) Print this article

Most investors think Europe is the biggest threat to their money right now.

But they’re wrong. The threat posed by Iran’s race for nuclear weapons is greater.

Yes, the situation in Iran is nothing new. Iran has wanted nuclear weapons for a long time. And the rest of the world doesn’t want that to happen.

But it looks like we’re approaching a crunch point. And that’s why you need to act to protect your wealth now.

The threat posed by Iran

Iran’s nuclear programme has been a niggling worry for the rest of the world for years now. The country says it just wants to be able to use nuclear power as an energy source. But given its massive oil reserves, no one believes that.

The trouble is that some scientists believe that Iran may now be little more than one month away from getting enough uranium for a nuclear warhead.

Israel in particular, as an obvious target, is very worried about this prospect. Few countries in the world would be viewed as potentially unhinged enough to actually make use of a nuclear weapon, but there are just enough doubts about Iran’s leadership to keep the world on its toes if they were to acquire one.

While both the US and the European Union have announced wide-ranging energy and financial sanctions, China continues to buy large amounts of oil from Iran and invest in its energy industry.

As a result, the pressure on Tel Aviv and Washington DC to take more direct action will only increase. And although we’ve heard this sort of sabre-rattling before, the killing of an Iranian nuclear scientist earlier this month is a sign that Israel’s patience is at breaking point.

So how can you hedge your portfolio?


Claim your FREE report now: Back to basics: investing
for beginners

  • Everything you need to know about buying shares

  • Three savvy ways to help you pick a fund

  • Expert tips on how to save for your retirement

Claim your free copy right here


Geopolitical tension? Buy oil

An obvious option is to buy oil. Not only is Iran the fifth-largest global producer, accounting for 5% of world oil production; it also has estimated reserves of 151 billion barrels, the third largest amount in the world.

The biggest concern is that a war in Iran might shut down the Strait of Hormuz, something the country has certainly threatened to do on several occasions. As noted in the current issue of MoneyWeek magazine (if you're not already a subscriber, get your first three copies free here), 40% of the barrels of oil shipped around the world have to travel through the strait.

How might that affect the price of oil? Similar disruption in October 1973, during the Arab oil embargo, saw prices triple in a matter of weeks. The Iranian revolution in 1979 and the Iran-Iraq war a year later also led to the doubling of crude prices. Such a surge in the oil price would result in stagflation – a toxic combination of surging prices and tumbling growth.

Don’t always go for the obvious option

That makes oil sound like a raging buy. But it might not be the best bet: there’s a reason why wise heads in the market say 'buy the rumour and sell the fact'.

Those who bought oil at $34 a barrel at the start of the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait in 1990 had to wait over a decade for prices to reach their former levels. And the fact that the oil price has stayed high in recent months, despite a fairly gloomy demand picture, suggests that the market is already at least partially pricing in the possibility of war in the Middle East.

So while we’d happily stick with gold, which should also benefit if the situation deteriorates, we’d be more wary of oil. Yes, the price would rise if war broke out, but if diplomacy or sabotage can somehow settle things in Iran, and the market starts paying closer attention to the fundamentals for oil, it could fall hard.

A far better strategy would be to invest in defence companies. Planned cuts in military budgets on both sides of the Atlantic mean that the sector is looking particularly cheap just now, with higher dividend yields than the market average.

However, if action ends up being taken in the Middle East, this would surely lead to cuts being either cancelled or reversed. In any case, there is also likely to be increased investment in anti-missile systems and advanced fighter aircraft by Israel and other countries that feel threatened by Tehran.

BAE (LSE:BA), which we tipped last year, is especially well placed, since it is negotiating the sale of fighter jets to both Oman and Saudi Arabia.

Northrop Grumman (NYSE:NOC) is also another longstanding recommendation. As well as a missile division, its strengths in drone technology fit in with the US military’s shift away from operations involving large numbers of ground troops.

Comments (12)

Share with
friends:

Comments

  • 1. Leo

    (30 January 2012, 08:34PM)  Complain about this comment

    How about don't move your money into defense companies? Cash lubricates this death machine. If you're profiting off war, that's not "protecting your wealth" -- that's blood on your hands.

  • 2. Dilip

    (31 January 2012, 10:48AM)  Complain about this comment

    An excellent comment made above by Leo I totally concur.... I think that it is ok to give recommendations on share prices but more balanced opinions on sensitive matters would be appreciated by Moneyweek

  • 3. fluffy

    (31 January 2012, 11:16AM)  Complain about this comment

    war is a fact of life,it is no different to tabacco companies whom also trade in death and destruction

  • 4. Derek

    (31 January 2012, 11:39AM)  Complain about this comment

    Quite right Fluffy. Which means not investing in tobacco companies either.

  • 5. Nick, Warrington

    (31 January 2012, 12:00PM)  Complain about this comment

    Very naive comments from Leo above - because with the integrated nature of industry now, a significant percentage of companies are either directly or indirectly involved in the defence sector. Presumably, Leo will not invest in BAE - but will he invest in, for example, the clothing company contracted to make the boots for the Army? Or the outsourced caterers contracted to feed the troops? Not so straightforward is it?

    MW has an obligation to its readers to point out the facts as they see them - whether the individual then acts on that advice is another matter. As a subscriber, I don't appreciate 'bleeding hearts' trolling on here with their agendas.

    For the record, I have no connection with the defence sector nor have investments in them. BTW, good article, Matthew.

  • 6. cape

    (31 January 2012, 12:21PM)  Complain about this comment

    Agree withe sentiment of the above comments, but they are conpletely out of pkace in this journal which is dedicated to money matters. You csn make your own minds up and can seek moral guidance or fgive leadership in moral matters elsewhere... not here551126

  • 7. Mike Jonas

    (31 January 2012, 10:03PM)  Complain about this comment

    Matthew Partridge says "if .. the market starts paying closer attention to the fundamentals for oil".
    The fundamentals are that well over half of global oil production, and possibly as much as 75%, appears to be in decline, including Saudi Arabia (Saudi production has declined since 2005 in spite of assertions that they would produce more). The IEA heroically predict that oil production will continue to increase, but there will be "more oil from fewer producers" (a sign of stress), and well over half of all oil production by 2035 will supposedly be from fields as yet undeveloped or undiscovered.
    I think it's highly possible that the oil situation is not as rosy as it is still being painted.

  • 8. JAMES LESLIE

    (02 February 2012, 12:08PM)  Complain about this comment

    gold is not ethical in the slightest but surely its a better devil than buying companies that kill people , direct . iran selling oil for gold , history say the paper mafia wont be happy . It looks the bottom in houses may be blood on the streets as rothschild and his friends plan . im following gold until we can only buy 3 ounces of gold for the price of the dow . it was 800 ounces for average uk house what late 05 early 06 , its 145 this morning , in 80 it was 50 oz for average house and in silver 840 in 80 , 50,000 in 05 and 06 , its 7500ish this morning . i think when we give up on the house price crash thats when its gonna come .

  • 9. P.F.Darlington

    (04 February 2012, 07:55PM)  Complain about this comment

    You have to invest with positions that you personally are comfortable with. I might invest in BAE but NOT Northrop as I worry more about the US defence establishment actually CAUSING a war, rather than RESPONDING to a threat. Although it is VERY debatable whether an 'ostensibly British' AE is isolated from US influence. Not withstanding that, Iran is not going to forget its great sense of history, and a clash of some kind IS inevitable. A difficult ball for the west to play. I just hope Tony Blair does'nt have any hand in it. He considered history bunk (if he learned any). Afghanistan was the result.
    I believe no investing is squeeky clean or can be in these days. I even worry about what the lesbian donkey sanctuary I have a 50% share in gets up to in its 'spare time'.

  • 10. JohnP

    (08 February 2012, 10:17PM)  Complain about this comment

    No one can repay what I lost during the Vietnam war, but I'll be damned if I'm going to let conscience let me miss the opportunity to gain during this and the endless coming oil/water/jihad wars!

  • 11. Jim C

    (17 February 2012, 10:52AM)  Complain about this comment

    Matthew, there is absolutely no hard evidence that Iran is even slowly trying to manufacture nuclear weapons, let alone 'race' to acquire them. Read around a little more deeply than just swallowing the soundbites that neo-con mouthpieces like Fox News, Sarah Palin, Michelle Bachmann and Newt Gingrich spout, and you'll see we're being prepared for yet another war on false pretenses.

    And you are quite right, that in the event of a war with Iran then BAE and NOC will be good investments; maybe this is why they, and the rest of the defence establishment, are lobbying so hard for it.

  • 12. Jim C

    (17 February 2012, 10:59AM)  Complain about this comment

    Also - much as I loathe the military-industrial complex, I don't see how parking money in shares of these companies is immoral.

    Unless you can show that by doing so it somehow increases the likelihood that our overlords will go to war? You could argue the opposite - by pushing up the share price via purchasing, its managers are in less need to urge the politicians to go to war so they can meet their share-price targets.

    Just think - if the majority of shareholders of BAE comprised peaceniks then they could insist its managers stop their defence-related lobbyings entirely!

Leave a comment

This will be the name displayed with your comment.

This helps us verify comments are genuine. It will not be displayed anywhere on the site and is stored confidentially.

Please keep your comment within 1,000 characters and relevant to the main topic. We encourage healthy debate, but we don't allow insults or bad language. Anything off topic or unpleasant, we'll remove. Enjoy the conversation! Thank you.

captcha To prevent spam-related comments please enter the characters shown in the 'Captcha' box to the left.

By leaving a comment you accept our terms and conditions.


FREE - MoneyWeek's daily investment emailJohn Stepek

Our free daily email, Money Morning, is an informative and enjoyable analysis of what's going on in the markets. Written by our Editor, John Stepek, and guest contributors.
Sign up FREE to Money Morning here.

>