By any historical yardstick, the near-closure of the Strait of Hormuz — which has removed roughly 15 million barrels per day from global oil and liquids flows — should have triggered a full-scale panic across oil and financial markets. And while a highly volatile benchmark Brent has risen by nearly 50% to around $100 per barrel since the pivotal chokepoint was closed to most non-Iranian flows on Feb. 28, the spike has been somewhat muted compared to past disruptions. The question is: Why aren't prices higher as the oil market endures its largest disruption in history? The answer begins with preparation, both physical and psychological. Entering the crisis, the oil market was structurally well supplied, with inventories elevated and expectations of a 2026 surplus anchored in rising Atlantic Basin production as well as relatively subdued demand growth expectations from most forecasters. That cushion has proven decisive so far during this crisis. Strategic stock releases across the US, Europe and Asia, combined with commercial inventories and preconflict tanker flows, have acted as a powerful shock absorber. TotalEnergies CEO Patrick Pouyanne said last week that inventories have already been drawn by 500 million bbl; he thinks the figure will ultimately reach more than 1 billion bbl, even in a scenario in which the strait opens quickly. Veteran oil analyst Phil Verleger, who has studied past oil shocks extensively, says price increases from this shock have been moderate relative to the past 22 disruption events and that Brent should now trade around $200/bbl based on historical data. He reckons the key disparities this time are the substantial amount of sanctioned Russian and Iranian stocks stored at sea and the extremely high price sensitivity of consumers, especially in China.