#Oil Brent CrudeOil Macro Inflation Crypto Bitcoin TradingBooms
Be careful as the oil balance is shifting
The PGSA/list signal increases transport risk by +1 Bullish → 🟢 Bullish 60 / 🔴 Bearish 40.
As for traffic, the publicly available AIS snapshot at 01:05 UTC on 2/10 shows only 1 commercial crossing in the most recent 24 hours, outbound; 0 crossings since the start of the UTC day. But this is only AIS-visible, and the tracker also warns that dark ships may be missed.
Regarding benchmark pricing, the Reuters quote with the clearest timestamp I was able to verify is 03:50 GMT on 2/10 = 10:50 Vietnam time: NYMEX WTI front-month Nov-26 $92.68/bbl, -$0.19 (-0.20%) versus settlement $92.87; ICE Brent front-month Dec-26 $102.28/bbl, -$0.03 (-0.03%) versus settlement $102.31. This quote is about 4 hours 18 minutes old relative to the update time; I haven’t found a newer CME/Reuters tick with a clean timestamp, so I haven’t replaced it with a CFD feed. Reuters market update 2/10
Macro isn’t enough to change the score: DXY is around 102.08—near the highest level in 17 months; US10Y around 5.247–5.249%, having fallen from yesterday’s peak of 5.344%. This is mainly continuation, not a fresh surprise; the market is waiting for the US payrolls, so there’s 0 points in this round. OPEC+ also hasn’t made any new decision before the 4/10 meeting, and I haven’t seen any new catalyst strong enough from EIA/API, Yanbu/East-West, Bab el-Mandeb, Russia–Ukraine, or another fresh Truth Social post by Trump related to oil/Hormuz since the previous one.
Current balance: 🟢60 / 🔴40. The most important point to further verify is whether the vessels on the PGSA non-compliance list continue to be targeted with an unusually high probability. If that pattern is confirmed further by UKMTO/JMIC or cargo-level data, the risk of Hormuz would deserve a higher score; for now, +1 is the most reasonable level.
Be careful as the oil balance is shifting
The PGSA/list signal increases transport risk by +1 Bullish → 🟢 Bullish 60 / 🔴 Bearish 40.
As for traffic, the publicly available AIS snapshot at 01:05 UTC on 2/10 shows only 1 commercial crossing in the most recent 24 hours, outbound; 0 crossings since the start of the UTC day. But this is only AIS-visible, and the tracker also warns that dark ships may be missed.
Regarding benchmark pricing, the Reuters quote with the clearest timestamp I was able to verify is 03:50 GMT on 2/10 = 10:50 Vietnam time: NYMEX WTI front-month Nov-26 $92.68/bbl, -$0.19 (-0.20%) versus settlement $92.87; ICE Brent front-month Dec-26 $102.28/bbl, -$0.03 (-0.03%) versus settlement $102.31. This quote is about 4 hours 18 minutes old relative to the update time; I haven’t found a newer CME/Reuters tick with a clean timestamp, so I haven’t replaced it with a CFD feed. Reuters market update 2/10
Macro isn’t enough to change the score: DXY is around 102.08—near the highest level in 17 months; US10Y around 5.247–5.249%, having fallen from yesterday’s peak of 5.344%. This is mainly continuation, not a fresh surprise; the market is waiting for the US payrolls, so there’s 0 points in this round. OPEC+ also hasn’t made any new decision before the 4/10 meeting, and I haven’t seen any new catalyst strong enough from EIA/API, Yanbu/East-West, Bab el-Mandeb, Russia–Ukraine, or another fresh Truth Social post by Trump related to oil/Hormuz since the previous one.
Current balance: 🟢60 / 🔴40. The most important point to further verify is whether the vessels on the PGSA non-compliance list continue to be targeted with an unusually high probability. If that pattern is confirmed further by UKMTO/JMIC or cargo-level data, the risk of Hormuz would deserve a higher score; for now, +1 is the most reasonable level.