It was the weekend at the start of March when the news broke: the United States and Israel had launched strikes on Iran. Reports surfaced that the Supreme Leader had been killed. Headlines speculated about escalation. The conflict appeared to be widening by the hour. 1
I already knew what Monday would look like (or so I thought).
Oil would spike — and it did, surging more than 8% at the open, with Brent crude hitting a fresh 52-week high. 2 Gold climbed around 2% as investors rushed into safe-haven assets. 2 Energy surged. Tanker stocks jumped. Exxon, Chevron, ConocoPhillips — all sharply higher. 3 And somewhere else, investors were hitting sell.
I watched Monday's session expecting carnage. What I got was something far more instructive.
As I write this, nobody knows how long this lasts. It is anyone's guess.
But here is what struck me most, sitting with this across those two days — not panic, not a desire to act, but a deeper question.
That question sounds simple. It is not. And the answer to it tells you more about how markets actually work — and what kind of investor you want to be — than any geopolitical headline ever will.
Markets do not fall because there are only sellers.
They fall because sellers are urgent and buyers are selective.
When retail investors sell in fear, it creates a real and visible signal: prices drop. Volume spikes. The market looks like it is collapsing under the weight of sellers. But markets are mechanically bilateral. Every sell order is matched with a buy order. For a trade to clear, someone has to want those shares.
What changes during panic is not the presence of buyers — it is the urgency of sellers relative to the patience of buyers.
Urgent sellers accept worse prices to exit fast. Patient buyers set price thresholds and wait. That asymmetry — urgency versus patience — is what creates the price drop. Not an absence of demand.
Markets price urgency. They do not price fundamentals — at least not in the short run.
Price movement during a geopolitical shock is not the market passing judgement on long-term business value. It is the market clearing the imbalance between panicked sellers and selective buyers. Monday's intraday recovery was a live demonstration of this mechanic. Investors — certain kinds of investors — bought the dip. Nvidia gained nearly 3%. Microsoft rose more than 1%. 3 Someone was on the other side of every fearful sell order.
So who could they possibly be?
There are four structural categories worth understanding — and none of them were deciding what to do in the moment. The moment simply triggered a decision already made.
Pension funds, endowments, and sovereign wealth funds manage capital across decades, not news cycles. Their mandates require fixed allocations to equities — typically structured around a target mix such as 60% equities and 40% bonds. 7
When markets fall sharply, equity allocations drift below target. These institutions rebalance — not because they feel confident about the geopolitical situation, but because their mandate demands it. 8 Research confirms that pension funds respond asymmetrically to market shocks: rebalancing activity is meaningfully stronger following negative equity returns than positive ones. 9 J.P. Morgan estimated that a comparable drawdown environment could prompt $250 billion in institutional equity rebalancing flows. 8
They act primarily out of obligation. But in doing so, they often end up looking very brave.
These are capital allocators who define intrinsic value before they define a buy price. When a company they have studied trades below their threshold, they buy. Simple as that.
Volatility is not a risk for this category. It is a precondition. Without price dislocation, they cannot deploy capital below intrinsic value. Panic, for them, is structural opportunity.
This is where preparation meets its moment.
When a company's own management believes shares are undervalued, buybacks accelerate. Many boards operate standing authorisations to repurchase stock, and volatile dips are exactly when those programmes activate. 10
Research by professors at Vanderbilt found that managers actively use market-based estimates of future volatility to inform buyback decisions — when volatility is expected to be higher, buyback intensity increases. 11 Companies in the top 20% of share repurchasers within the S&P 500 have historically outperformed their peers in the bottom 20% by more than 4.5% per year since 1985. 12 This is capital allocation in its most direct form.
Mean-reversion strategies, volatility-harvesting algorithms, and rules-based rebalancing programmes do not read the news. Their models generate buy signals when certain conditions are met — and sharp, rapid drawdowns frequently meet those conditions.
These buyers are the most counterintuitive of all. They buy not because the situation feels safe, but because their models say the statistical setup is favourable. On Monday's session, retail investors bought a record-setting amount of the Energy Select Sector SPDR ETF (XLE). 5 Systematic flows and dip-buyers absorbed supply that panicked sellers were offloading.
This is not the first time markets have stared down a geopolitical shock. The pattern, across 85 years of major conflicts, is consistent enough to be instructive.
| Event | Initial Market Reaction | What Followed |
|---|---|---|
| World War II (1939–45) | Sharp initial decline; markets closed for months at onset 13 | S&P 500 returned 16.9% over the full course of the war. Markets bottomed before it ended. 14 |
| Gulf War (1990–91) | S&P 500 dropped ~10% after Iraq invaded Kuwait 15 | Full recovery within months; S&P rose >20% over the following year. 15 |
| September 11, 2001 | Severe drop on market reopening 16 | Recovery cycle resumed within weeks. S&P gained >15% over the next year. 15 |
| Russia–Ukraine (Feb 2022) | Markets fell 5–13% in the short term 15 | S&P 500 has risen more than 60% since the start of that conflict. 17 |
Carson Group studied 40 major geopolitical and historical events across 85 years. On average, the S&P 500 lost 0.9% in the first month after — but rose 3.4% across the six months following. 18 A broader study of 20 major events found that stocks had fully recovered losses within an average of 47 trading days. 16 Across 73% of armed conflicts since WWII, equities generated positive returns one year after the initial act of aggression. 19
The pattern is not that war is good for markets. It is not. The pattern is that markets price probability — the shifting odds of various outcomes — not emotion. Once the range of outcomes narrows, price tends to follow.
That nuance is critical. A conflict layered on top of deteriorating earnings and tightening credit is a different animal from a conflict occurring within an otherwise healthy economic cycle. Context is never optional. The Iran conflict is unfolding against a backdrop of lingering tech weakness, elevated valuations, and uncertainty around trade — all factors the market was already contending with. 4 The war added pressure to an already watchful market.
But the structural behaviour of institutional buyers remains consistent regardless of the headline. They do not wait for certainty. Certainty arrives after the price has moved.
Every category of buyer above shares one structural trait: they defined their conditions before the crisis arrived.
Institutional rebalances had allocation policy. Value investors had intrinsic value estimates. Corporations had buyback authorizations. Quant funds had calibrated models.
None of them were deciding what to do in the moment. The moment simply triggered a decision already made.
Volatility exposes preparation.
Unprepared capital does the opposite. It seeks certainty after the fact — waiting for headlines to resolve, for sentiment to recover, for someone to declare that it is safe again. By the time that signal arrives, the price has already moved.
This is not about bravery. Brave investors and cautious investors both lose money when they are reacting. What determines the outcome is whether the investment thesis — the ownership condition — was established before the price moved.
Know what you own. Know what it is worth. Know the price at which you will act.
Markets do not reward bravery. They reward preparation.
Glavcot Insights is now live. Join the free tier to get new research, updates, and future analysis directly in your inbox. (Check your spam folder if you don't see the confirmation email)
