2026-09-28

Trump Rejects Iran's Hormuz Reopening Offer - Brent Oil Spikes Toward $106, S&P 500 and Nasdaq Futures Slip, Energy Stocks vs. Airlines Diverge

Written & reviewed by the TradeSmrt editorial team · 2026-09-28

In this article

What Happened
Why Energy Stocks and Airlines Moved in Opposite Directions
Why This Rejection Is a Meaningful Signal, Not Just Noise
What to Take Away From This
FAQ
Sources

What Happened

Oil prices jumped and U.S. stock futures slipped as Asian trading opened on Monday, September 28, after President Trump confirmed he had rejected Iran's proposal to reopen the Strait of Hormuz. Trump told reporters plainly: "They made a proposal but I rejected it." Brent crude climbed as high as $106.31 a barrel, up 1.8% on the day, while U.S. crude futures for November delivery rose 1.3% to $93.62. As trading moved into the European session, the gains extended further - some snapshots showed Brent up nearly 3% and WTI up more than 2%. S&P 500 and Nasdaq 100 futures each fell about 0.3% in early Asian trade in response.

The rejected offer came from Iran's foreign minister, Abbas Araghchi, who on Friday, September 25, floated a conditional proposal through Qatari mediators: Iran would reopen the strait within seven days and resume nuclear talks with Washington, but only if the U.S. ended what Tehran calls "acts of aggression," lifted its naval blockade and economic sanctions, and released frozen Iranian assets. Trump turned it down. He told reporters Iran wants an immediate reopening "because they're losing so badly" and "because they get their money from the Hormuz Strait" - and he reportedly told aides he expects U.S. strikes on Iran to resume after November's midterm elections.

This isn't a minor diplomatic footnote. The Strait of Hormuz has been effectively shut since the U.S.-Israel-Iran conflict escalated back in February, and independent trackers now put the closure at well over 200 days running. IMF PortWatch data shows daily tanker transits through the strait have collapsed from a pre-crisis baseline of roughly 85 per day to about one per day - roughly 1-2% of normal traffic. What little crude does get out moves through rerouted paths and intermediaries, with charter rates reportedly topping $500,000 a day and an effective premium of $30-40 or more per barrel over normal shipping costs. In other words, Monday's news isn't a fresh crisis appearing out of nowhere - it's a half-year-old crisis that briefly looked like it might ease, snapping back to where it started.

Why Energy Stocks and Airlines Moved in Opposite Directions

The most telling detail in Monday's reaction is how sharply the response split by sector. In premarket trading, Southwest and United Airlines each fell about 1%, while Delta and American Airlines slipped roughly 0.8%. That's a direct mechanical response: jet fuel is one of the largest line items on an airline's income statement, so any spike in crude flows almost immediately into worries about margins. What makes this particular spike worse for airlines is that it's driven by geopolitical risk rather than ordinary demand growth - geopolitical premiums are notoriously hard to price, since nobody can say with confidence when (or if) they'll unwind.

For Exxon Mobil and Chevron, the calculus runs the other way. A prolonged Hormuz standoff keeps the geopolitical risk premium embedded in crude prices, and that premium flows straight into revenue and earnings for companies that produce and sell oil and gas rather than burn it as an input cost. Earlier this year, when U.S. strikes on Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps targets were first reported, both Exxon and Chevron rallied 2-3% intraday on similar logic. There's a political wrinkle worth flagging, though: back in August, Trump himself complained publicly that Exxon and Chevron "made too much money" off Iran-driven high oil prices, saying "I don't like it" - a reminder that windfall gains for energy majors can also draw political scrutiny, including from the same administration whose foreign policy is generating those gains.

The broader lesson here is that a single macro headline rarely moves "the market" as one thing. Asking whether a given index went up or down misses the more useful question: which sectors have this cost or revenue item baked into their business model, and in which direction? Oil is the textbook example - a tailwind for producers and a headwind for anyone who has to buy the stuff to run their business.

Why This Rejection Is a Meaningful Signal, Not Just Noise

Just days earlier, the market was leaning the opposite way. On Thursday, September 24, Reuters reported that U.S. and Iranian negotiators were discussing a phased reopening of the strait, and that report knocked oil back from its intraday highs - helping the S&P 500 and Nasdaq close roughly flat that day even as the 30-year Treasury yield hit a 22-year high and hammered rate-sensitive sectors. Oil-driven relief effectively offset a bond-market scare. Two days later, Trump publicly rejected the very proposal that relief had been built on, and the market's rationale for calm evaporated just as quickly as it had appeared.

This "hope, then reversal" pattern isn't new - it's been the dominant rhythm of the Hormuz story for months. Back in August, similar negotiation hopes briefly pushed oil lower, only for reports of Houthi missile strikes on Saudi Arabia or fresh Iranian attacks on U.S. Navy vessels to send it right back up within days. For investors, chasing each individual headline is a losing game; understanding the structural reasons this conflict resists easy resolution - Iran's dependence on Hormuz-linked revenue, the U.S. political calendar (with midterms in November), and the fact that either side accepting the other's terms risks looking weak domestically - is far more useful than reacting to any single data point.

There's also a bond-market thread worth pulling on. The 10-year Treasury yield touched 5.23% intraday this week, its highest level since June 2007, and oil-driven inflation anxiety is part of what's keeping upward pressure on yields. Higher crude prices feed directly into headline consumer and producer inflation readings, which in turn keeps markets on edge about further Fed tightening. CME FedWatch odds of an additional quarter-point hike at the October FOMC meeting jumped from roughly 53% to the 70% range within just four days this week - and a renewed leg up in oil prices only reinforces that shift.

What to Take Away From This

Geopolitical risk tends to move in cycles of "de-escalation, then reversal." A single report of negotiation progress can send oil lower for a day or two, only for a rejection or a fresh attack to reverse it within the week. Understanding the structural drivers behind a conflict is more useful than reacting to any one headline.
The same oil move can help and hurt in equal measure, depending on the sector. Energy producers benefit from higher crude; airlines and other fuel-dependent industries get squeezed. A single macro event rarely tells you the direction for "the market" as a whole.
Oil, bond yields, and Fed rate expectations are tightly linked. A geopolitical oil spike isn't contained to energy and travel stocks - it feeds into inflation expectations and the market's read on future Fed policy, so it's worth checking Treasury yields and rate-hike odds whenever a big oil headline breaks.
Windfall profits for energy companies carry their own political risk. When a crisis pushes oil producers' earnings sharply higher, it can also invite political pushback - excess-profits tax proposals or price-control talk - that's worth factoring in alongside the headline earnings boost.

FAQ

What exactly did Iran propose, and why did Trump reject it?

Iran's foreign minister offered, through Qatari mediators, to reopen the Strait of Hormuz within seven days and resume nuclear talks - conditional on the U.S. ending what Tehran calls "acts of aggression," lifting its naval blockade and sanctions, and releasing frozen Iranian assets. Trump rejected the offer outright, saying Iran wants an immediate reopening because it's losing the broader conflict and depends on Hormuz-linked revenue.

How much did oil prices move on this news?

In Asian trading on September 28, Brent crude climbed toward $106 a barrel and WTI moved into the $93-97 range, with the exact percentage move varying by snapshot time - gains widened further as trading moved into the European session.

Why did airline stocks fall while energy stocks were expected to gain?

Oil is a major cost for airlines (jet fuel) and a major revenue driver for oil producers (crude and gas sales). The same price increase squeezes one group's margins while boosting the other's, which is why the two sectors moved in opposite directions on identical news.

How serious is the Strait of Hormuz situation, and how long has it been going on?

The strait has been effectively closed since the U.S.-Israel-Iran conflict escalated in February, and trackers put the closure at well over 200 days. Daily tanker transits have fallen from a pre-crisis baseline of about 85 per day to roughly one per day - 1-2% of normal - with rerouted shipments carrying a premium of $30-40 or more per barrel.

Sources

This article is an original synthesis and analysis based on the reporting below, not a reproduction of the original articles. Please verify the latest figures and details directly with the source reporting.

⚠️ This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute investment advice. Market conditions change constantly - always verify the latest information before making investment decisions.