The US has entered the Israel-Iran war. However, despite an initial 4 per cent surge on the open, oil has settled where it has been since the conflict began in early June — around US$72 to US$75 a barrel.Trump claims the attacks from the US on Iranian nuclear facilities over the weekend are a very short, very tactical, one-off. This is something his base can get behind — some really big conservative players do not want a long-contracted war that sucks the US into external disputes.Whether this will be the case or not is up for debate, but there is a precedent from Trump's first presidency that we can look to. Iran had attacked several American bases in 2019, as well as attacking Saudi Arabia's most important oil refinery with Iranian drones. There wasn't a huge amount of damage; it was more a symbolic movement and display of capabilities by Iran.Initially, Trump didn't react — it took pressure from Gulf allies like the UAE and Israel for him to respond, which saw him order the assassination of the head of the Iranian Defence Force, Qasem Soleimani. This led to an Iranian response of ‘lots of noise’ and ‘cage rattling’, but minimal real action events, just a few drone attacks. Trump is betting on the same reaction now.If Iran follows the same patterns from the previous engagement, the geopolitical side of this is already at its peak.As of now, Iran is not going after or destroying major Gulf energy capabilities. Nor have there been any disruptions to the shipping traffic through the Strait of Hormuz. In fact, apart from a posturing vote to block the Strait, Iran has not made any indication that it is going to disrupt oil in any way that would lead to price surges.Additionally, despite the U.S. military equipment buildup in the region being its highest since the Iraq war, critical Iranian energy infrastructure is running largely unscathed.This all suggests that the geopolitics and the physical and futures oil markets remain disconnected. Oil will spike on news rumours, but the actual impacts in the physical realm to this point remain low. Of course, this could change in future. But, for now, the risk of seeing oil move to US$100 a barrel is still a minority case rather than the majority.
Key trends affecting assets
-
Vehicle deliveries and inventory drawdown: Tesla’s 480,126 Q2 deliveries allowed the company to reduce inventory by roughly 28,000 units, reversing the build-up recorded in Q1. The key question is whether that volume came at the expense of margins. Automotive gross margin, excluding regulatory credits, remains a closely watched measure, with 17% viewed as an important reference level.
Watch: Automotive gross margin, excluding regulatory credits, compared with the 17% reference level -
Megapack battery deployments: Tesla deployed 13.5 GWh in Q2, representing 40% growth year on year (YoY). This was slightly below the high end of the 13.8 GWh analyst estimate. However, the energy storage business has generated stronger margins than automotive and may partly offset pressure on vehicle margins.
Signal: Energy storage gross margin and contribution to profit and loss -
Autonomy narrative and full self-driving monetisation: Tesla’s valuation reflects expectations for its AI and autonomy platform, rather than vehicle unit economics alone. Software subscription growth, full self-driving (FSD) take-up rates and clearer timelines for the Cybercab and Optimus programs are likely to be closely watched.
Monitor: FSD take-up rates and progress on software licensing -
Capital expenditure escalation: Capital expenditure (capex) guidance has risen above US$25 billion for AI training clusters and factory capacity. Free cash flow is projected to remain negative through year-end. Higher capex may increase the pressure on software monetisation to support future earnings.
Target: Free cash flow outlook and capex efficiency
EPS above US$0.45 | Energy margins improve and FSD adoption rises
Investment banking recovery tracks ahead of expectations. Capital buffers absorb GSIB surcharges, supporting dividend flexibility and reinforcing confidence in advisory momentum.
Possible reaction: The result could support the share price if improved margins and clearer autonomy milestones strengthen market confidence.EPS between US$0.38 and US$0.44 | Margins remain steady and the autonomy timeline is unchanged
Adjusted earnings align with the US$0.42 consensus estimate. Automotive gross margin holds near 17% and Megapack deployments remain steady. Attention may remain on the longer-term autonomy narrative rather than near-term financial performance.
Possible reaction: Trading may remain range-bound, with the market’s attention shifting to guidance and autonomy timelines.EPS below US$0.35 | Gross margin compresses and FSD timelines are delayed
Automotive gross margin falls below 16% amid vehicle discounting. Higher AI capex raises concerns about cash burn without a credible offset from software monetisation. Management provides limited detail on timelines for key autonomy programs.
Possible reaction: Selling pressure could increase if the result weakens confidence in margins, free cash flow or autonomy execution.







