Satellite view of the Strait of Hormuz, a strategic waterway between Iran and Oman that connects the Persian Gulf and the Arabian Sea.
Gallo Images | Getty Images
As global oil traders analyze satellite images and official statements for clues about the fate of the Strait of Hormuz, one research firm appears to have taken a different approach, claiming it has sent analysts directly to the conflict zone.
Citorini Research, which issued a market-shaking bearish note on artificial intelligence earlier this year, said it had sent an analyst to Oman’s Musandam peninsula, who traveled by boat to observe shipping activity firsthand amid rising tensions between Iran and the United States. What analysts say they have discovered calls into question the dominant view that dominates global markets that a vital oil artery is effectively shut down.
Instead, analysts, who declined to be named due to the sensitivity of the activity, found that ships were still passing through the strait, with traffic increasing in recent days to about 15 ships per day, according to a company report posted on Substack. Although well below normal levels, this trend suggests that the disruption is partial and evolving rather than absolute.
“Four to five tankers a day are passing through, but it’s black on AIS. The volume is higher than the data suggests, and the volume has been accelerating in recent days through the Qeshm Strait,” Sitrini’s post said.
AIS is a vessel tracking system that broadcasts a vessel’s location, speed, identity, and route. Citrini argues that the actual volume transported is higher than the reported data because many ships have their transponders turned off and do not appear on official tracking systems.
Citrini did not immediately respond to CNBC’s request for comment.
Analyst interviews with fishermen, smugglers and regional officials, based on Substack posts, point to a system in which Iran selectively allows vessel passage. In his post, Sitrini said tankers would need permission before transiting waters near Iranian territory, creating what the company called a “functional checkpoint” rather than a blockade.
“This should drive home the nuanced nature of our view of the conflict. It does not fit neatly into an ‘open channel oil crash’ or a ‘closed channel oil parabola,'” the company said.
Admittedly, this finding is based on a single field survey and anecdotal evidence, which is difficult to independently verify, especially given the limited transparency in the region.
The company expects the disruption to be more prolonged and a permanent risk premium built into the oil market. This view supports a preference for long-term oil exposure, with the company prioritizing the December 2026 WTI contract over the previous month.
“While we believe the disruption will be prolonged and the new normal comes with a permanent risk premium, pre-conflict traffic is likely to reach 50% within the next four to six weeks,” Citrini said.
