Brent Retreats from $100 but Hormuz Closure Keeps Prices Near $91
ICE Brent front-month has pulled back sharply from late-July highs even as the Strait of Hormuz stays closed and Red Sea shipping threats keep supply routes fragile.
ICE Brent crude front-month ended Friday (2026-08-01) at $91.04 a barrel, down roughly 9% from the $100 it touched on July 23 as renewed US-Iran hostilities swept through the Gulf region. The decline marks a sharp reversal from prices that had surged on back-to-back rounds of US military strikes, but Brent remains far above the levels that prevailed before Iran closed the Strait of Hormuz earlier this year.7
The supply picture has not materially improved. Iran's Hormuz closure has severed the primary export corridor for Gulf crude, while sustained Houthi attacks on Red Sea shipping have impaired the secondary route. Before the Houthi campaign, Saudi Arabia was moving roughly 2.5 million barrels a day through Bab el-Mandeb, the southern gateway to the Red Sea, according to Jorge Leon, senior vice president and head of geopolitical analysis at Rystad Energy.7
Saudi and UAE combined crude exports through the Red Sea ran at around 6.8 million barrels per day, Rystad Energy data show — roughly half of the usual throughput through the Strait of Hormuz. With both corridors now disrupted, cargoes face longer reroutes around the Cape of Good Hope, adding days and cost to delivery schedules.7
The current Brent level reflects how far prices have fallen from their recent peak, but also how much support the market has found. Brent was trading at $86 a barrel in the week of July 14, itself a 5.02% weekly gain, InvestingCube reported, before climbing further as US strikes on Iran intensified. By Thursday (July 16), Brent had reached around $96 a barrel and WTI had pushed above $88, with FXEmpire noting additional US strike packages and Iran's repeated threat to keep Hormuz shut.3,6
Brent's run to $100 on July 23 represented a roughly one-third increase from the lows hit after a brief US-Iran truce reached in the week of June 15, Tempo.co reported. That truce had crushed the war bid: InvestingCube noted at the time that long-position liquidation was opening the possibility of sub-$70 Brent. The resumption of strikes rendered that scenario moot within weeks.7,2
The pullback since July 23 has brought Brent close to the level Rigzone reported it settling at around July 21 — approximately $91 a barrel after a 2% single-session gain — when traders were weighing maritime threats stretching from Hormuz and the Red Sea to a Kazakh export terminal on Russia's coast. The US had by then conducted ten consecutive days of strikes on Iran, Rigzone noted, with President Trump vowing Tehran "will pay" for killing American soldiers.5
Goldman Sachs has flagged a scenario in which Brent exceeds $120 a barrel in the fourth quarter if Hormuz disruptions persist, Bloomberg reported. The bank characterized risks to its base case as "tilted to the upside" given sustained shipping threats across both Hormuz and the Red Sea. Fitch Ratings had projected in early June that Brent would hold between $100 and $110 a barrel across June and July during the closure — a range that prices briefly entered before the latest pullback.4,1
The downstream chain has followed. RBOB gasoline ended Friday (2026-08-01) at $3.17 a gallon, up nearly 2% on the session, while heating oil settled at $4.19 a gallon. JKM Asian LNG stood at $21.45 per MMBtu, reflecting the broader squeeze on seaborne energy cargoes being diverted from Gulf routes to longer alternatives.
Any diplomatic signal between Washington and Tehran would likely hit Brent hard and fast, as the June truce demonstrated. But with US strikes entering a second week of daily tempo and Iran maintaining the Hormuz blockade, Goldman's $120 projection for the fourth quarter remains the live upside scenario if neither side moves toward a renewed ceasefire. The pace of Persian Gulf flows, which Bloomberg reported have already fallen below 45% of pre-war levels, is the number traders will track to gauge whether the supply shock is deepening or beginning to ease.4,2