European stocks closed mixed. Asia-Pacific markets rose. Investors assessed renewed Middle East hostilities the same way they assess a Denny's menu at 3 a.m. Glanced at it. Made a choice that had nothing to do with what they read. Moved on.
The headline wants you to believe there's a connection here. Europe mixed because of U.S.-Iran tensions. Asia up despite U.S.-Iran tensions. Or maybe because of them. Nobody knows. Nobody ever knows. The journalists write "investors assess" because "investors ignore completely while algorithms execute pre-programmed trades" doesn't fit the narrative.
Here's what actually happened. Some stocks went up. Some went down. A war that's been simmering since before most retail traders discovered options continued simmering. CNBC needed a reason to explain why the DAX moved 0.3%. They picked geopolitics. Could've picked the weather. Could've blamed a butterfly in Jakarta. Same level of analytical rigor.
The beautiful part is the word "mixed." Europe didn't crash. Didn't moon. Finished mixed. That's code for "nothing happened but we wrote about it anyway." Asia rose, which sounds impressive until you check the actual numbers and realize the Nikkei went up half a percent. Groundbreaking stuff.
Retail traders read this headline and think they're supposed to do something. Hedge their Iran exposure. Rotate into defense stocks. Buy gold. Sell gold. Do literally anything that makes them feel like they're participating in the global financial theater. They're not assessing renewed hostilities. They're getting their faces ripped off by market makers who couldn't find Iran on a map if you spotted them the Middle East.
The U.S. and Iran have been at war, cold war, proxy war, or some other hyphenated war configuration for forty-five years. Markets have gone up. Markets have gone down. The correlation between the two events remains somewhere between nonexistent and completely f*cking imaginary.
Photo by Emin Huric on Unsplash
Leave a Comment