BY ERIK NORLAND, SENIOR ECONOMIST & EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR CME GROUP
9 MARCH 2015
The Geopolitical and Economic
Consequences of Lower Oil Prices
All examples in this report are hypothetical interpretations of situations and are used for explanation
purposes only. The views in this report reflect solely those of the authors and not necessarily those
of CME Group or its affiliated institutions. This report and the information herein should not be
considered investment advice or the results of actual market experience.
Since June 30, 2014, crude oil prices have been nearly halved (Figure 1). Still, the direction of oil prices is uncertain and
there is a very real possibility that they may remain low for several years.
Despite advances in alternative fuels and efforts
at conservation, oil remains the life blood of the world economy and essentially the only meaningful transportation fuel. As
such, lower oil prices will have enormous economic and political consequences that will be felt globally in a variety of ways.
Figure 1: Crude Oil's Abrupt Collapse
Crude
Oil's Abrupt Collapse
140
120
100
80
60
Arab Spring and Aftermath Widens WTI-Brent Spread
40
20
Brent
0
2011
2012
WTI
2013
2014
2015
Source: Bloomberg Professional, EUCRBRDT and USCRWTIC
1
. 9 MARCH 2015
Modest Gain versus Acute Pain
For oil consumers, lower prices are akin to a tax
cut. This will allow them to do a combination of the
following: increase savings, pay down debt and increase
consumption. In most countries, consumers will gravitate
towards spending more. The biggest beneficiaries will be
the countries with no significant oil resources of their own,
such as the nations of Eastern Europe, and some Asian
economies, including India, South Korea and Japan.
For
the most part, the gains to be had from lower oil prices are
fairly modest and in the order of 0%-2% of GDP and never
higher than about 3% (Figure 2).
There are a number of countries whose domestic
production is just about equal to their consumption. In
these nations, which include Argentina, Brazil, Denmark,
Egypt and Peru, there will be little overall impact. Other
countries like Canada and Mexico will have a minor first
order hit to GDP of perhaps 1.0% and 1.5%, respectively,
which will be substantially mitigated by the depreciation in
their currencies.
Since oil production is heavily concentrated in only about
two dozen countries, some of these nations will feel the
pain of lower oil prices acutely, with the first order GDP
impact as large as -10% to -25% (Figure 2).
(When looking
at Figure 2, please bear in mind that the countries where
the drop in oil prices will have a negative first order impact
on GDP account for only 14% of world GDP, whereas the
beneficiaries make up the remaining 86% of world output).
Among oil producers, the impact will vary greatly from one
country to another, depending upon three factors:
1) The proportion of oil production that is exported versus
consumed domestically.
2) The size and diversity of the country’s economy.
3) The amount of foreign exchange and other reserves
available to meet the country’s needs.
Figure 2: First Order GDP Impact of Drops in Oil Prices
First Order GDP Impact of Drop in Oil Prices
5.0%
Modest Gain
0.0%
-5.0%
-10.0%
-15.0%
Acute Pain
-25.0%
Libya
Angola
Kuwait
Saudi Arabia
Iraq
Azerbaijan
Oman
Qatar
Algeria
UAE
Kazakhstan
Venezuela
Nigeria
Iran
Russia
Norway
Colombia
Yemen
Canada
Mexico
Bahrein
Denmark
Argentina
Peru
Brazil
UK
Switzerland
Australia
USA
Sweden
New Zealand
Eurozone Average
Romania
China
Indonesia
Turkey
Hungary
Czech Republic
Israel
Poland
Japan
South Africa
Chile
India
Korea
Bulgaria
-20.0%
Source: CIA World Factbook, Energy Information Administration and CME Group
2
. 9 MARCH 2015
Figure 4. Instability Influences Oil Supply and Prices,
Instability Influences Oil Supply and Prices,
Which in Turn Influences Stability
which in Turn Influences Stability
Some major oil producers such as China, the United
Kingdom and the United States will actually be net
beneficiaries of the decline in oil prices since they consume
more than they produce. Others will take a serious hit to
their GDP but the impact will be cushioned by their large
foreign exchange reserves and sovereign wealth funds
(SWFs). These nations include many of the Persian Gulf
states such as Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Qatar and the United
Arab Emirates, as well as Algeria and Norway (Figure 3).
Constrained Oil Supply
Leads to Higher Oil Prices
and/or Wider
Brent-WTI Spread
Instability Constrains
Oil Supply
By contrast, net oil exporters who are the most vulnerable
from protracted low prices include Angola, Azerbaijan,
Colombia, Iran, Iraq, Kazakhstan, Libya, Nigeria, Oman,
Russia, Venezuela and Yemen.
Their foreign exchange
reserves and SWF assets are fairly small relative to both
their economic output (less than 50% of GDP) and the
negative impact of lower oil prices (Figure 3). As such,
these nations have the greatest potential for instability.
In some cases, instability in those nations could lead to a
reduction of oil production (Figure 4), which in turn could
push crude oil prices higher or cause the spread between
Brent and WTI to widen, as was the case when the Gaddafi
regime collapsed in 2011, throwing Libya into chaos.
Higher Oil Prices Stoke
Supply and Destroy Demand
Lower Oil Prices Lead to
Instability in Oil Producing
Nations
Here is our summary of the key benefits of lower oil prices
and how they are likely to play out in each region/country:
1) Central Europe: Aside from Romania, Central
Europe produces almost none of its own oil. Moreover,
since these countries are on the lower end of Europe’s
income scale, they spend a higher percentage of GDP on
imported oil than their Western European peers.
Bulgaria
may be the biggest beneficiary with a gain of as much as
3% of GDP but the Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland and
Romania could get a 1.0-1.5% GDP boost.
The economic impact will be very different in countries
such as Colombia and Russia, which have free floating
currencies, rather than in nations with less flexible
exchange rate regimes. Countries with a floating exchange
rate have a choice between imposing very high interest
rates to keep their currencies stable or letting their
currencies fall and suffer through higher inflation rather
than necessarily a deeper hit to the economy.
2) Eurozone Europe: The countries that share a common
currency produce barely a drop of their own crude oil.
As such, they are likely to benefit from the drop in oil
prices. As a first order GDP impact, Italy will gain 0.9%,
France and Germany about 1.0%, and Spain as much
Figure 3.
of Lower Oil of Lower Oil Reserves
Figure 3: GDP ImpactGDP Impact Prices vs Net Prices vs Net Reserves
FOREX & SWF Reserves as a % of GDP
350.0%
Kuwait
300.0%
250.0%
UAE
Saudi Arabia
200.0%
Norway
Qatar
Libya
150.0%
Algeria
100.0%
Oman
Kazakhstan
Iraq
Angola
-25.0%
Azerbaijan
-20.0%
-15.0%
Bahrain
Iran
Venezuela
-10.0%
Russia
Nigeria
-5.0%
50.0%
Yemen
Colombia
0.0%
0.0%
Source: CIA World Fact Book, Energy Information Administration, IMF and CME Group
3
. 9 MARCH 2015
as 1.5%. Greece may be the biggest winner (whether it
stays in the Eurozone or not) with a gain of 2.2% of GDP.
The actual GDP impact, however, could be much smaller.
If Europeans come to expect deflation, they may choose
to save the money that they technically no longer have
to spend on petrol rather than on other items. Moreover,
since petrol is heavily taxed in most of Western Europe,
the impact on consumers will be more modest than it
might otherwise be. The impact of these high taxes is
evident in the relatively low level of per person petrol
consumption, which is about half that of US levels.
3) South Korea and Japan: Like Eurozone nations, South
Korea and Japan produce essentially none of their own
petroleum.
Japan may benefit from lower oil prices to
the tune of 1.5% of GDP as a first order effect, while
South Korea may get a boost of 2.8%. In Japan, it should
be noted however, that lower oil prices may translate
into higher saving rates rather than greater consumer
spending if the Bank of Japan’s quantitative easing
program fails to send inflation expectations higher. On
another note, since Japan shut down most of its nuclear
facilities in the aftermath of the Fukushima incident,
lower oil prices will also reduce the country’s trade deficit
through cheaper energy imports.
4) India: Should get a boost of about 2.2% of GDP from
lower oil prices.
There will be little in any consumer
benefits, however, as cheaper oil simply means that the
government will spend less in fuel subsidies. Thus, the
main benefit of lower oil prices will be a smaller fiscal
deficit. This may allow Narendra Modi’s government some
wiggle room in implementing potentially controversial
reforms that have been delayed since he took office last
spring.
Already his government is proposing to increase
transfers to India’s regional governments to pave the way
for acceptance of reforms that the central government
advocates.
5) China, the UK and the USA: These countries meet
some of their domestic petroleum needs from their own
production. The UK will be smallest beneficiary with a
first order GDP gain of 0.3%, followed by 0.7% for the
US and 1.1% for China. In the UK, gains to consumers
will be blunted by a very high domestic fuel tax and
by potential declines in North Sea oil investment and
maintenance.
Likewise, while US consumers will benefit
4
from lower prices, US oil producers are already cutting
back considerably on exploration and investment. Lower
oil prices will be bad for states like Alaska, North Dakota,
Oklahoma, and Texas but good for almost everyone else.
6) Other beneficiaries: Most countries aren’t oil
producers. As such, nations as diverse as Australia, Chile,
Israel, New Zealand, Turkey and most emerging countries
of Asia and Africa will also be net beneficiaries of lower oil
prices, with GDP impacts in the 0.5%-3.0% range, with
the poorer nations benefitting disproportionately.
So now onto who gets hurt, how badly and the potential
consequences:
Algeria: Lower oil prices could cut nearly one eighth
(12.2% by our calculation) off Algeria’s GDP if they don’t
rebound.
Algeria has been remarkably stable in recent
years. After a civil war from 1991 to 2002 that claimed
over 60,000 lives, Algeria managed to avoid the tumult
of the Arab Spring that swept away governments in
neighboring Libya and Tunisia. The good news is that the
country used the boom times in the petroleum industry to
amass considerable currency reserves of $192 billion as
well as stash an additional $77 billion in a SWF called the
Revenue Regulation Fund.
These funds total almost 130%
of annual GDP and should provide the Algerian economy
and government some cushion against the impact of lower
oil prices. Even so, given the instability on Algeria’s eastern
border with Libya, the potential for increased security
problems cannot be ignored.
Angola: The boom in oil briefly made Angola’s capital
Luanda one of the most expensive cities in the world,
but also brought economic growth and prosperity to
at least parts of a country that spent most of its postindependence period mired in civil war and poverty.
As such, it can’t be welcome news that the decline in
oil prices shaved an estimated 23% from the country’s
GDP, the second hardest hit in the world. Moreover,
Angola hasn’t built up currency reserves or SWF funds
that compare to those of the Gulf states, leaving it in a
comparatively vulnerable position in the face of reduced
oil revenues.
This may diminish the ability of the Angolan
government and Sonangol, the Angolan oil company which
is deeply intertwined with the state, to fund infrastructure
improvements, offshore oil investments and to keep a
potentially restive population appeased.
. 9 MARCH 2015
Azerbaijan: Russia isn’t the only former Soviet Republic
to suffer when oil prices decline. Azerbaijan appears
likely to take a far bigger hit than its northern neighbor,
with lower oil prices shaving off as much as 18% of
GDP. Unfortunately for the Azeri’s, they aren’t buffered
by a SWF and their currency reserves amount to only
about 18% of GDP, providing very little cushion. For the
moment, it’s not clear how the collapse in oil prices will
impact Azerbaijan in its relationship with Armenia, with
whom it fought over the breakaway Nagorno-Karabakh
region in the early 1990s, or with Russia, which is a
close ally of Armenia.
Russia’s position in the region has
been weakened by it loss of influence over Ukraine’s
government in 2014 as well as by the collapse in oil prices
that also hampers Azerbaijan’s ability to profit from
Russia’s geopolitical distractions. Moreover, there is a
heightened risk of instability in Azerbaijan and, more
generally, in the region from the slump in oil.
Colombia: Most people associate Venezuela as being
a petroleum state, but its neighbor Colombia depends
on oil as well, though to a much lesser extent. As a first
order impact, we estimate that the decline in oil prices will
cost Colombia 3%-4% of GDP in 2015 but the good news
is that, unlike most oil producers, Colombia has a free
floating exchange rate.
The Colombian Peso has already
fallen by about 25% versus US Dollar since it peaked in
July 2014. This decline will help buffer Colombia’s highly
diverse economy from the impact of lower oil prices.
(Please see our Latin American Economic Outlook Article
for more details).
Iran: Although treated with suspicion by the West and
under sanctions from many potential trading partners,
Iran has a more diverse and less oil-reliant economy than
most people might think. The decline in oil prices will
shave about 6% off GDP in 2015 as a first order impact.
Given Iran’s long-term economic decline, which began with
the revolution in 1979 and was exacerbated by the war
with Iraq (1980-1988), any further injury to the economy
is unwelcome, but the country’s threshold for pain is quite
high.
While a GDP hit of 6% is fairly modest, Iran’s Achilles’
heel is likely to be its low level of currency reserves, which
amount to only 26% of GDP and might be difficult to
access given the international sanctions. One of Saudi
Arabia’s goals in keeping oil prices low might be to force
Iran to take more seriously negotiations with the West over
its nuclear ambitions. The decline in oil prices is unlikely to
create instability in Iran but it will likely constrain Tehran’s
ability to influence outcomes in the region, to the delight of
the Saudis and their allies.
Iraq: Nowhere is the threat of instability caused by lower
oil prices more apparent than in Iraq.
The government
relies on oil revenues for about 95% of its budget and has,
at best, tenuous control of the areas outside of Baghdad
and the South. Moreover, Iraq hasn’t had time to build
up enormous currency reserves or a SWF to cushion the
blow. Thus, the collapse of oil prices will vastly complicate
the task of Haider al-Abadi’s government to fight ISIS and
other militant groups that prevent it from taking control of
parts of Northern and Western Iraq.
The only silver lining
here is that the collapse in oil prices will also deprive ISIS
of a source of revenue. Instability in Iraq has the potential
to create significant upside risk to oil prices, generally, and
the Brent-WTI spread, in particular.
Kazakhstan: The drop in oil prices is likely to shave about
10% off GDP in 2015 as a first order effect, but the actual
impact could be deeper. Many Kazakh émigrés in Russia
send back remittances.
As such, the fall in oil prices and the
related collapse in the Russian Ruble might also diminish
this source of income and create tensions between Almaty
and Moscow. The good news is that Kazakhstan has
developed two SWFs with about $155 billion in combined
assets, in addition to the nation’s $29 billion in currency
reserves. This isn’t a huge cushion but should be enough to
maintain stability for at least a few years before the impact
of lower prices become fully apparent.
One wild card:
Kazakh President Nursultan Nazarbayev has called for
early elections on April 26 and he has not yet declared his
candidacy, although he is widely expected to do so.
Kuwait: Lower oil prices could shave as much as 22.5% off
Kuwait’s GDP as a first order impact but the good news is
that the country has amassed among the largest currency
and SWF reserves on the planet (as a percentage of GDP)
and appears well positioned to weather the storm of lower oil
prices for many years (perhaps as long as a decade), if need
be. That doesn’t mean the pinch won’t be felt at all, just not
to the point of causing near-term domestic instability.
Copyright © 2014 CME Group. All rights reserved.
5
.
9 MARCH 2015
Libya: With oil prices likely to take off more than 25% from
Libyan GDP, it would be tempting to say that the collapse
in oil might foment instability. The problem is that Libya is
already so unstable that it’s hard to imagine the situation
getting materially worse. If anything, lower oil prices might
paradoxically make the country more stable by reducing
the intensity of the fighting over Libya’s oil assets. That
said, Libya’s crude production could potentially decline,
and if that occurs it risks re-inflating the Brent-WTI spread.
Nigeria: Africa’s most populous nation is likely to see a
first order GDP decline by about 7% as a result of the drop
in oil prices.
While some of the impact will be absorbed
by a weaker currency and higher inflation, the hit to GDP
is coming at an inopportune time. President Goodluck
Jonathan has delayed Nigeria’s closely contested
Presidential election until late March due to security
concerns related to the Boko Haram militant group.
Moreover, there has been long running instability in the
oil producing delta region. Lower oil prices combined
with Nigeria’s meager currency reserves could heighten
the risk of instability that could curtail oil output and
potentially boost the global price of oil as well as the BrentWTI spread.
Norway: The world’s wealthiest nation per capita will
hardly notice the -5% first order GDP impact of lower
oil prices because it will translate mainly to a smaller
government surplus.
Norway has almost no public debt
and has massive currency reserves and a SWF with
enough money to fund the entire GDP for over a year. If
any country deserves a AAA rating, it’s Norway - oil price
decline or not. Additionally, the Norwegian Krone has
weakened modestly versus the Euro and more noticeably
against the US Dollar, which will further insulate Norway
from any negative impact from lower oil prices.
Oman: This quiet neighbor of Saudi Arabia, the UAE and
Yemen gets little attention but will take a huge hit to GDP
(-16% first order impact) from the decline in oil prices.
Moreover, unlike its Gulf neighbors, it has not amassed
particularly large currency reserves nor does it have a big
SWF to bail it out.
Oman has been a paragon of domestic
stability compared to neighboring Yemen but there is
some risk that the problems in Yemen will spill across the
border. We would recommend watching Oman closely
during the next few years for any signs of trouble.
6
Qatar: As a first order impact, the price of oil is likely to
shave about 15% off Qatari GDP in 2015 but the actual
impact will be much smaller. Qatar, like its peers in the
Gulf, has amassed enormous currency and SWF reserves
which total about 150% of GDP.
This should allow Qatar to
endure lower oil prices for a considerable period of time
but it does bear mentioning that Qatar’s reserves are
smaller than those of the Emiratis, Kuwaitis and Saudis
relative to the size of its economy. While the Qataris can
deficit spend for a while to blunt the impact of lower oil
prices, the slowdown in petrol-related investment will at
best slow the rate of economic growth with some risk of a
near term recession.
Russia: Since oil prices began falling in earnest in late
2014, the Western press has focused intensely on the
impact that decline will have on Russia. We estimate a
fairly modest hit of about 6% to GDP, which is closely
in line with what Russia’s central bank and government
estimate.
Some of this will be offset by the Ruble’s decline
(Figure 5), which will insulate Russian domestic industries
from competitive imports and make Russian exports more
competitive. It will also, of course, have the unwelcome
effect of boosting Russia’s rate of inflation (Figure 6).
Figure 5: Rubles/US Dollar Exchange Rate
Rubles/US Dollar Exchange Rate
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
Jan-14
Mar-14
May-14
Source: Bloomberg Professional, RUB
Jul-14
Sep-14
Nov-14
Jan-15
. 9 MARCH 2015
Russia Over Year Inflation
Figure 6: Russia Year Year Over Year Inflation
Figure 7: Russian FOREX Reserves (USD Millions)
Russian FOREX Reserves (USD Millions)
14
700000
12
600000
10
500000
8
400000
6
300000
4
200000
2
0
Jan-10
100000
Jul-10
Jan-11
Jul-11
Jan-12
Jul-12
Jan-13
Jul-13
Jan-14
Jul-14
Jan-15
Source: Bloomberg Professional, RUWCWOW
That said, Russia has a high threshold for pain after many
years of crisis in the 1990s and, thus far, those hoping
that lower oil prices would force Putin to back down on
his support for Russian-speaking rebels in Ukraine have
mostly been disappointed. He has reportedly narrowed
his circle of advisors and focused on security hawks
to the exclusion of more pro-Western voices among
Russia’s billionaire class. Lower oil prices and the collapse
of the Ruble have not been without consequence,
however. Formerly staunch allies such as Belorussia and
Kazakhstan are distancing themselves from Moscow,
deepening Putin’s isolation.
If anything, the collapse of
oil prices may cause Putin and his inner circle to double
down on their support for rebels in Ukraine, increasing the
likelihood of conflict in the region.
Russia’s foreign exchange reserves and other funds are
relatively small compared to GDP, and its Forex reserves
have been diminishing rather rapidly (Figure 7). Moreover,
some of its private sector firms have debts denominated
in Dollars and Euros that have suddenly become costlier to
service with lower oil prices and the collapse on the Ruble.
The situation in Russia isn’t all negative. The country has
very little public sector debt (9% of GDP) and private
sector debt is also reasonably low.
Even so, with shortterm interest rates at 15%, any debt will be expensive to
service or to roll over.
7
0
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
Source: Bloomberg Professional, WIRARUSS
Saudi Arabia: In 1986, the Saudis and the United States
collaborated closely to lower oil prices to the detriment of
Iran and the Soviet Union. Once again, the Saudi’s appear
to be trying to kill many birds with one stone. We count at
least four: ISIS (the Islamic State earns some revenue by
siphoning off and selling oil); Iran (nuclear negotiations and
other geopolitical matters); Russia (long-term support for
pan-Arabists including Assad); and frackers in the United
States.
In fact, even more important than frackers in the
United States are potential frackers elsewhere in the world.
The Saudis can afford to refuse requests from other OPEC
countries to curtail production and boost prices and, they
appear willing to play the waiting game -- their currency
and SWF assets add up to around 200% of GDP, making
the -19.5% first order hit to GDP easily affordable for years
to come. Moreover, the Kingdom has little debt. While it
has been undergoing a delicate leadership transition, the
Saudi state appears to have the resources to maintain
stability for half a decade or more in the event that oil
prices stay low.
That said, if oil prices were to stay low
indefinitely, security risks to the Kingdom would increase.
These security risks include possible problems with the
Shiites on the Gulf coast as well as with Sunni extremists
and divisions within the increasingly large and complicated
royal family. Finally, the Saudi oil company ARAMCO is
already cutting costs, including a 25% cut to exploration
and is also squeezing suppliers. This will likely slow the
pace of growth of the Saudi economy and introduce some
near-term risk of a downturn.
.
9 MARCH 2015
United Arab Emirates: Like Kuwait and Saudi Arabia, the
UAE is also well insulated from the drop in crude oil prices.
With the regional banking, entertainment and travel hubs
of Abu Dhabi and Dubai, the UAE has a more diversified
and less petroleum-dependent economy than many of its
neighbors –at least at first glance. The first order impact
of lower oil prices will likely be about -11% of UAE GDP. This
is fairly small compared to the Emiratis massive currency
and SWF reserves, which total 233% of GDP. This should
permit the UAE to maintain stability for many years even
if low oil prices persist.
That said, if regional commerce
slows as a result of lower oil prices then it might take some
of the luster off Abu Dhabi and Dubai, which might grow at
a significantly slower pace than they are accustomed to or
even experience a recession.
Venezuela: The oil price collapse is this South American
nation’s biggest nightmare. Venezuela, which depends on
oil for 96% of export revenue, is running a massive budget
deficit of around 20% of GDP and has blown through most
of its currency reserves. Shortages of basic necessities
abound and even taking photos of long lines in shops is
now illegal.
President Nicolas Maduro has approval ratings
in the 20s and his party is facing legislative elections in
October. Paradoxically, Venezuela is one country where
the drop in crude oil prices might cause consumers to
have to pay more for gasoline if the government is forced
to curtail subsidies. 2015 will be a very difficult year for
Venezuela, where hyperinflation and a high chance for
instability have the potential to disrupt production at state
oil company PdVSA.
To prevent instability the government
has been taking increasing repressive measures including
arresting opposition figures such as Caracas Mayor
Antonio Ledezma.
Venezuela’s woes are shifting Latin American politics
in Washington’s direction. Already two recipients of
Venezuela’s largesse, Bolivia and Cuba, are busy thawing
relations with the United States in anticipation that they
won’t be getting much support from Caracas going
forward. Other beneficiaries of Venezuela’s efforts to
expand its influence in the region, including Argentina and
Ecuador, might also find themselves more dependent on
the United States for their future growth prospects.
Yemen: Here the GDP impact will be fairly minor (-1.4%)
and like Libya there is little risk that the country will
descend into chaos since it’s already there.
The real risk
is that the problems in Yemen will spread to neighboring
Oman and Saudi Arabia.
8
Consequences for Global Asset Markets
With oil prices in the dumps, petro dollars aren’t going to
stop flowing altogether but they will flow much more slowly
from oil producing countries to oil consuming countries
and in a few cases they might even flow in reverse. Money
from the Gulf States, in particular, has found its way into
almost every imaginable asset class from bonds to equities
to real estate (notably in London and Paris). These flows
risk slowing down considerably, possibly putting downward
pressure on the higher end of real estate markets as well
as depriving Western equity and bond markets of a (fairly
minor) pillar of support.
Given the benefits of lower oil
prices to the rest of the world, however, we expect that
equity markets (outside of the petroleum sector of course)
might remain fairly well bid. To the extent that lower oil
prices strengthen economic growth in the developed
world, government bonds might suffer, however, as yields
are already very low and the downward impact of lower oil
prices on inflation will prove short lived.
Currency markets have already been impacted by the
fall in oil prices, contributing to sell offs in the Canadian
Dollar, Brazilian Real, Colombia Peso, Mexican Peso,
Norwegian Krone and the Russian Ruble. If instability in
the oil producing nations emerges, it has the potential to
push crude oil prices and these currencies higher.
That
said, if oil prices remain low or go lower, we would expect
these currencies to continue to underperform those of the
non-oil producing nations.
Perhaps the more important financial consequence of
lower oil prices could be greater volatility. The potential for
geopolitical surprises is somewhat heightened by lower
oil prices and the negative consequences that they might
have for stability in key oil producing countries, notably
Angola, Iraq, Libya, Nigeria and Venezuela. Disruptions to oil
supply could ultimately create spikes in oil prices and strong
reactions from global bond, currency and equity markets.
.
.