The shift marks a departure from earlier market resilience, with traders now pricing in longer-term disruptions to energy supply chains and global trade flows. Analysts said the reassessment reflects growing concern that the conflict could inflict sustained economic damage rather than remain a short-lived shock.

Global equities extended losses, with the S&P 500 falling 1.5% on Friday as major technology firms led declines, while futures dropped a further 0.6% in Asian trading. Japan’s Nikkei 225 slid 3.5%, and China’s CSI 300 Index was on track for its steepest losses since tariff-driven market turmoil last year.

MSCI’s global equities gauge, the MSCI World Index, hit a four-month low on Monday after breaking below its 200-day moving average, a key technical level closely watched by investors.

Market participants said the selloff reflected waning confidence in valuations following a rally that had been underpinned by expectations of limited geopolitical fallout.

Investors are increasing cash holdings and reducing leveraged positions across major markets, according to fund managers. The reallocation reflects a broader move to hedge against prolonged instability, with energy stocks emerging as relative beneficiaries amid expectations of tighter supply.

Aaron Costello, head of Asia at Cambridge Associates, said markets had previously been conditioned to expect rapid reversals in geopolitical tensions but were now adjusting to the likelihood of escalation. Speaking at a Milken Institute event in Hong Kong, he said investors were beginning to factor in the depletion of reserves and stockpiles if the conflict persists.

Karen Jorritsma, head of Australian equities at RBC Capital Markets, said the speed of the selloff pointed to weak conviction behind earlier gains, with investors exiting positions quickly as risks mount.

Damage to critical energy infrastructure and supply routes is reinforcing expectations of lasting economic impact. Investors are closely monitoring developments around the Strait of Hormuz, a key artery for global oil shipments, as tensions raise the risk of prolonged supply constraints.

Recent disruptions have already affected liquefied natural gas flows, with nearly a fifth of Qatar’s export capacity reportedly knocked out by Iranian attacks, according to statements cited by Reuters last week. Market participants said such disruptions could have multi-year implications for contracts and pricing if sustained.

The prospect of continued supply shocks has led investors to reassess the effectiveness of potential policy responses, including interest rate cuts or diplomatic shifts, in offsetting the broader economic fallout.

Speaking at the National Press Club in Canberra, Birol said the agency would assess market conditions before deciding on further action, after member countries agreed on March 11 to release a record 400 million barrels from strategic reserves to ease surging crude prices.

“If it is necessary, of course, we will do it,” Birol said, adding there was no fixed price threshold that would automatically trigger another coordinated release. He cautioned that stock drawdowns could help stabilise markets but would not resolve underlying supply constraints.

Birol said the Asia-Pacific region was at the forefront of the crisis due to its reliance on energy and critical commodities shipped through the Strait of Hormuz, a key maritime corridor affected by the conflict.

He described the current situation in the Middle East as “very severe,” saying its impact exceeded that of the 1970s oil shocks and the gas market fallout from the Russia-Ukraine war combined.

According to Birol, the conflict has removed around 11 million barrels per day from global oil supply, intensifying pressure on economies dependent on imports.“The single most important solution to this problem is opening the Hormuz Strait,” he said.

Birol said stock releases represented only one element of the agency’s response, pointing to demand-side measures such as reduced speed limits and increased remote working to curb fuel consumption.

He noted similar steps had helped lower energy use in Europe in 2022, though implementation would depend on national policy decisions.

“The depth of the problem was not well appreciated by decision makers around the world,” Birol said, explaining his decision to speak publicly weeks into the conflict.

During his visit, Birol met Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese and reviewed the country’s fuel preparedness. While noting that Australia’s overall liquid fuel reserves remain below IEA requirements, he said recent efforts had improved resilience.

He described Australia’s diesel reserves, currently at around 30 days, as “a solid number” in the current environment.

Birol is scheduled to travel to Japan later this week ahead of a Group of Seven meeting, where energy security and coordinated responses to the supply shock are expected to be discussed.