On May 13, 2026, an Iranian military spokesperson issued a threatening statement in Tehran that had a strong sense of "reckoning": once Iran truly controls the passage through the Strait of Hormuz, the economic benefits obtained will be equivalent to twice the current oil revenue. On the same day, flight schedules far away in East Asia were also closely monitored by the market—U.S. Treasury Secretary Mnuchin, after participating in Sino-U.S. economic and trade consultations in South Korea, flew ahead to Beijing, while U.S. President Trump planned to arrive by private jet on the same day. This was seen as the opening of a new round of high-level game between China and the U.S. on trade, technology, and even energy issues. One side controls the key throat of approximately 20% of global oil transport, while the other is the world's largest oil importer and major issuer of the dollar engaging in high-level dialogue. These two originally parallel news threads suddenly converge into a core variable at the same time: energy risk premium. Any degree of "commodification" of Hormuz will be amplified by futures oil prices and inflation expectations, and then transmitted through interest rate paths and the strength of the dollar to the global risk asset pricing; while coordination or confrontation between China and the U.S. on energy, trade, and exchange rates will determine whether this premium is suppressed or magnified. For the crypto market, the question is no longer the clichéd "geopolitical risk sentiment favors BTC," but rather: when energy and geopolitical variables simultaneously raise or lower macro risk premiums, will assets like BTC and ETH transition from being "high beta tech stock substitutes" to "macro hedging tools," or will they be forced to bear higher volatility discounts? This round of energy premium re-evaluation will reshape the risk preferences and funding paths for BTC and ETH, which is the main thread tracked in this article.

Hormuz Strait Pricing: Oil Route Risk Premium Rises

The statement from the Iranian military spokesperson that "controlling the Strait of Hormuz can yield benefits equivalent to twice the current oil revenue" essentially assigns a price to this strait: it is not only an oil export route but also a financial asset that can "collect tolls." Approximately 20% of global oil transport must pass through here, viewing this throat as a potential economic tool, which implicitly signals to the market that Hormuz is no longer just a defense chip but a risk source that can be monetized. For energy traders, this is not an abstract threat, but a clear profit-risk function: as long as Iran intends to transform the passage rights into charging rights, the probability of oil route interruption must be rewritten into models.

The key macro variable that gets rewritten is the "subjective probability of oil route interruption" and the benchmark level of "energy risk premium." Even if physical passage remains smooth, the futures curve will react first: the near-month contracts will see a premium rise over far-month contracts, reflecting concerns over short-term supply disruptions; shipping companies and insurance firms will raise freight and insurance costs for routes passing through Hormuz, incorporating the costs of potential blockades, inspections, and delays into the price of each barrel of oil. Historically, whenever tensions in Hormuz heat up, oil prices tend to be priced with a geopolitical premium in advance, and risk assets will respond with increased volatility and expanded risk discounts. Now this "pricing" signal has once again transformed the energy risk premium from a static background into a dynamic variable, becoming the starting point for subsequent impacts on inflation expectations, interest rate paths, and ultimately transmitted to the risk preferences of assets like BTC and ETH.

BTC and ETH in the Pinch of Inflation and Growth

After the energy risk premium rises, two opposing paths immediately emerge on the macro level: one pushes up CPI through production and transportation costs, elevating inflation expectations; the other squeezes corporate profits, suppressing consumption and investment, lowering global growth expectations. Central banks stand at the intersection of these two curves, worried about inflation spiraling out of control, forcing them to maintain or even strengthen tightening stances, while also facing recession risks from slowing growth and overly tight financial conditions. In the face of shocks like those from Hormuz, the market is not merely trading oil prices themselves, but rather the path choice of "which side will the central bank prioritize protecting."

For BTC and ETH, the combination of "high inflation + weak growth" means that both the discount rate and safe-haven demand may be rewritten. When inflation expectations rise and central banks are forced to maintain a tight stance, the probability of real interest rates and a strong dollar increases, raising the discount rate for non-yielding and high-duration risk assets. Traditional experience shows that both gold and BTC are under pressure together, and assets like ETH, which are more sensitive to macro liquidity, often experience deeper declines; this is also why global markets first show a "sell everything" liquidity contraction pattern whenever there is a geopolitical surprise, causing the crypto market to plunge alongside stock indices and commodities. Only when growth data continues to weaken, and the market begins to bet on real interest rates peaking and falling, will the narrative of falling discount rates and "hedging fiat currency" regain dominance, pulling BTC's "digital gold" label out of the risk asset basket, beginning to resonate with commodities as a medium-term inflation hedge. ETH, on the other hand, resembles a hybrid between tech stocks and on-chain liquidity assets, benefiting from falling real interest rates but experiencing greater volatility in the squeeze of "strong dollar, weak growth." In the current environment layered with the interplay of Hormuz and Sino-U.S. competition, what the crypto market really needs to track is not just the daily fluctuations of oil prices, but the re-pricing rhythm of real interest rate peaks and dollar directions in this tug-of-war between inflation and growth.

Energy Bargaining Chips at the Beijing Venue

On the same day, Iran's pricing of the Strait of Hormuz and the flight routes over Beijing form two ends of the same game curve. On May 13, 2026, U.S. Treasury Secretary Mnuchin flew ahead to Beijing after participating in Sino-U.S. economic and trade consultations in South Korea, paving the way for Trump, who planned to arrive in Beijing on the same day. On the surface, the agenda remains trade and technology, but in a context where China is one of the world's largest oil importers and the U.S. is both a major oil-producing nation and a dollar issuer, issues related to Hormuz and energy security are almost bound to be woven into the Beijing venue as "invisible topics." For China, oil prices and exchange rates are two bells on the same rope: rising import costs mean imported inflation and pressure on the currency; for the U.S., energy priced in dollars and managed through financial sanctions in oil-producing areas is part of the source of its global financial system's revenue. By openly viewing Hormuz as a bargaining chip capable of producing twice the oil revenue, Iran pushes the variable of energy risk premium to the negotiating table just as China and the U.S. are about to sit down to talk.

If China and the U.S. choose some degree of coordination on energy and Middle Eastern issues—even if only an implicit agreement not to further escalate risks in the Middle Eastern shipping lanes—the market's tail concerns over supply interruptions from Hormuz will be lowered, oil price fluctuations will narrow, and energy risk premiums will decrease, thus alleviating inflation expectations and weakening the upward pressure on real interest rates. In this scenario, the pressure on Asian currency depreciation will lessen, the pace of capital outflows will slow down, and risk asset sentiment will warm up. The risk premiums for BTC, ETH, and on-chain dollars will also be re-compressed, becoming more akin to "liquidity trades" rather than "safe-haven trades." Conversely, if the signals released from the Beijing venue indicate a further division in positions between China and the U.S. on energy and Middle Eastern issues, then Hormuz-related shocks will be treated by the market as a permanent factor written into the oil price curve, amplifying oil price fluctuations, while inflation and growth expectations will be simultaneously torn apart, and the tension between the dollar and Asian currencies will rise. In this pathway, funds in Asian and offshore crypto markets will frequently switch risk preferences in an environment of "strong dollar + volatile oil prices": on the one hand, some funds use BTC and ETH as hedging tools against geopolitical shocks; on the other hand, overall valuations must be continuously re-priced in the context of higher real interest rates and faster cross-border capital flows. Therefore, what traders are really focusing on is whether the Beijing venue can set an upper limit on energy risk and, as a result, determine the volatility range and funding direction for BTC and ETH.

From Gulf Crude Oil to On-Chain Dollar Channels

When the Iranian military spokesperson publicly links "controlling the strait" with the doubling of oil revenue, the market reads not only an oil price premium but also a threat of tightening around the dollar settlement system. Iran has long been under the U.S. sanctions system, hindering traditional banking channels and dollar settlements. Once the situation around Hormuz escalates to the level of financial sanctions or settlement layers, the related funds in the Gulf face a practical problem: oil can still be transported, but how to collect and store money? Behind Hormuz connects a massive amount of dollar-denominated oil trade contracts; once frictions occur in the settlement or clearing system, regional participants will naturally diversify risks away from the dollar or the banking system. Historical experience shows that sanctioned economies, under similar pressures, have attempted to partially bypass traditional financial channels through BTC, on-chain dollar assets, and Bitcoin mining. This practice has reinforced BTC and on-chain dollars' "backup value" in cross-border settlement and value storage under the current circumstances.

However, this "backup" attribute itself carries nuances. On one hand, geopolitical tensions and expectations of sanctions objectively elevate the basic demand for on-chain dollars and BTC: energy exporters, trading intermediaries, and even regional private wealth will see them as a backdoor to prevent account freezes and capital being intercepted. In a rising risk phase, this liquidity will preferentially flow to offshore platforms and on-chain accounts with lower thresholds. On the other hand, the U.S. and its allies have continuously strengthened the enforcement of sanctions related to cryptocurrencies in recent years, including designating sanctioned addresses, raising KYC/AML requirements for exchanges, and imposing compliance pressures, which directly raise the compliance costs and tracking risks of transferring funds through these channels. The result is that the roles of on-chain dollars and BTC in the energy and sanctions game are continually being tugged: gray demand provides them with underlying payment and storage scenarios, while regulatory pressure attempts to push these demands back into controllable ranges. The future intensity of this tug will determine how much of the Hormuz and Iran risk premium will be passed onto the long-term valuation and trading structures of BTC and on-chain dollars.

Cryptocurrency Position Choices Under Geopolitical Pressure

Focusing on the moment of May 13, 2026: on one side, Iran emphatically states that "controlling the Strait of Hormuz can yield profits equivalent to twice the current oil revenue," bringing this route, which accounts for about 20% of global oil transport, back into the spotlight; on the other side, the U.S. Treasury Secretary arrives in Beijing, with the President's private jet about to land. Beijing and Hormuz intersect on the same day, forcing the global pricing system to simultaneously recalculate energy risk premiums, inflation and growth expectations, as well as the uncertain ranges of the dollar and interest rate paths. For BTC and ETH, this recalculation manifests in the short term more as the threat of "liquidity contraction—risk asset resonance decline": if the oil price premium raises inflation expectations, forcing major central banks to maintain higher real interest rates or delay easing, historical experience tells us that non-yielding and highly volatile assets are usually sold off first when treasury yields and the dollar strengthen; however, looking at a longer timeframe, once energy shocks ultimately result in rising expectations of currency depreciation and falling real interest rates, the re-pricing of fiat currency credit and store of value assets will once again open space for BTC and ETH as "anti-inflation narratives." At this time, position choices more resemble betting on two timelines: one paying attention to whether Iran moves from verbal price setting to actual intervention in shipping, and whether Sino-U.S. talks provide easing signals on energy and Middle Eastern issues, deciding whether oil price and exchange rate fluctuations are suppressed or escalated; the other closely monitoring oil price curve and major currency volatility, as well as whether funds from Gulf and Asian market addresses in on-chain dollars, BTC, and ETH show directional shifts. Because it is these macro variables and early on-chain signals that will jointly determine whether the crypto market experiences another round of passive deleveraging or welcomes a new round of risk premium re-pricing amid monetary credit disputes.

Join our community to discuss and become stronger together!
Official Telegram community: https://t.me/aicoincn
AiCoin Chinese Twitter: https://x.com/AiCoinzh
OKX Rewards Group: https://aicoin.com/link/chat?cid=l61eM4owQ
Binance Rewards Group: https://aicoin.com/link/chat?cid=ynr7d1P6Z

免责声明：本文章仅代表作者个人观点，不代表本平台的立场和观点。本文章仅供信息分享，不构成对任何人的任何投资建议。用户与作者之间的任何争议，与本平台无关。如网页中刊载的文章或图片涉及侵权，请提供相关的权利证明和身份证明发送邮件到support@aicoin.com，本平台相关工作人员将会进行核查。