Goldman Sachs raises 2026 Q4 oil forecasts despite Middle East deadlock

Goldman Sachs announced on Monday that it is raising its forecast for Brent crude to around $90 a barrel in the fourth quarter of 2026, up from the $80 it had projected only a few weeks earlier, even as US‑Iran peace negotiations remain at an impasse and the broader Middle East conflict shows no sign of resolution, and the same report also lifted its estimate for U.S. crude to an average of $83 per barrel for October through December, a full eight dollars above the previous $75 projection, under the premise that Gulf oil exports will normalise only by the end of June rather than the mid‑May target originally assumed by the firm.

In outlining its forward‑looking scenarios, Goldman identified a benign case where Brent would average just under $80 if Gulf shipments recover by mid‑June and neither capacity reductions nor supply constraints materialise, a markedly adverse case projecting just over $100 per barrel should export normalisation be delayed until the end of July, and a severely adverse case approaching $120 per barrel predicated on a persistent 2.5 million‑barrel‑per‑day shortfall that would effectively mirror a situation in which Hormuz‑strait flows never exceed seventy percent of pre‑crisis levels, thereby exposing the firm’s heavy reliance on optimistic geopolitical assumptions.

The juxtaposition of these increasingly lofty price expectations with a geopolitical environment characterised by stalled diplomatic initiatives and a volatile supply landscape underscores a systemic tendency within major financial institutions to foreground best‑case narratives while marginalising the structural uncertainties that accompany conflict‑driven market disruptions, a practice that not only diminishes the credibility of their prognoses but also illustrates the broader institutional gap between analytical rigor and the inevitable need to satisfy market‑driven demand for bullish outlooks.

Consequently, investors and policymakers alike are left to interpret forecasts that appear to discount the very real risk of prolonged export scarring, suggesting that the prevailing analytical framework may be more reflective of entrenched industry optimism than of an impartial assessment of the evolving geopolitical reality.

Published: April 27, 2026