US Stocks Rally After Trump Postpones Attacks
March 23, 20267 min readStandard
Fazen Markets Research
AI-Enhanced Analysis
US stocksS&P 500geopoliticsmarket volatilityFazen Capital
US equity markets exhibited a pronounced, headline-driven intraday reversal on March 23, 2026, finishing the session higher but well off the day's highs. The S&P 500 closed up 1.1%, the Nasdaq Composite gained 1.4%, the Dow Jones Industrial Average rose 1.4%, the Russell 2000 outperformed with a 2.3% advance, and the Toronto TSX Composite added 1.8% (investinglive.com, Mar 23, 2026). The move followed a social-media post by then-President Trump stating he had postponed attacks on energy infrastructure for five days while peace negotiations proceeded; Iran publicly denied that talks were underway, producing a stream of conflicting headlines that kept trading range-bound after the early surge (investinglive.com).
Intraday action was emblematic of a market that is trading geopolitical risk rather than fundamental earnings surprises: futures were deeply negative in pre-market trade before the post triggered a sharp rebound, and the remainder of the day consisted of headline after headline that alternately fueled optimism and skepticism. Market breadth improved on the close, with small caps leading large-cap benchmarks — the Russell 2000's 2.3% gain outpaced the S&P 500's 1.1% and the Nasdaq's 1.4% — suggesting risk-on positioning among domestic-growth-sensitive names. Trading desks reported elevated order flow in sectors tied to domestic economic activity and energy, reflecting the specific nature of the geopolitical signal (investinglive.com).
For institutional investors, the episode is a reminder that equity prices can be highly sensitive to brief windows of policy signaling, especially when those signals intersect with tangible risk vectors such as energy infrastructure and supply chains. The market's reaction on March 23 underscores how a temporary de-escalation—or even the prospect of one—can prompt rapid revaluation across cap structures and geographies. Investors should treat such headline-driven rallies with caution: the underlying information set remained ambiguous throughout the session, and the rally faded from intraday highs as credibility questions about negotiations surfaced.
The day's primary numeric takeaways were straightforward and concentrated in index returns: S&P 500 +1.1%, Nasdaq +1.4%, Russell 2000 +2.3%, Toronto TSX +1.8%, DJIA +1.4% (investinglive.com, Mar 23, 2026). These moves occurred against a backdrop of pre-market weakness and a mid-day re-pricing that compressed spreads and lifted cyclically exposed sectors. The Russell's outperformance relative to the S&P and Nasdaq signals that market participants were rotating into domestically oriented names, perhaps reflecting expectations that a temporary postponement of attacks would reduce near-term policy and supply-chain uncertainty for smaller companies.
Volume data and volatility metrics were mixed throughout the day: while headline rotation produced intraday spikes in implied volatility across specific stocks, aggregate market volatility retreated into the close as buyers regained control. The S&P's 1.1% advance is notable relative to recent average daily moves; while the market has posted larger swings in prior geopolitical shocks, this advance represented a decisive shift from pre-market negative sentiment to a positive close. That said, the ‘cautious optimism’ characterization is supported by the fact that indices finished well below session highs, signaling profit-taking or hedge rebuilding as conflicting information emerged.
Sector-level dispersion was evident. Energy-sensitive markets such as the Toronto TSX outperformed (+1.8%), consistent with the direct link between energy infrastructure risk and Canadian energy companies' valuations. Information technology and growth-oriented names on the Nasdaq (+1.4%) participated in the rally but lagged the small-cap Russell index, reinforcing a cross-sectional preference for domestically tied earnings profiles on the news. The intraday behavior also highlights the sensitivity of certain sectors—utilities, materials, and industrials—to geopolitical headlines tied to infrastructure and supply security.
Energy: The postponement of attacks on energy infrastructure (stated as a five-day window in the President's post) temporarily reduced the immediate tail risk to North American and global supply channels. Energy equities showed strength in the session, reflecting market relief, and the TSX's 1.8% rise corroborates the commodity-exposed tilt (investinglive.com). However, the denial of talks by Iran reintroduces medium-term uncertainty; if the market takes the five-day window at face value, this will likely compress near-term risk premia in energy, but the effect will be ephemeral unless corroborated by on-the-ground diplomatic progress.
Defense and industrials: Defense contractors and infrastructure-related industrials traded with pronounced sensitivity to intraday headlines. A pause in attack plans typically reduces the probability of near-term defense procurement surges or emergency stockpiles, which can depress short-term order expectations; conversely, even the prospect of negotiation can elevate equities tied to reconstruction and logistics in a more sustained peace scenario. Asset managers with active exposure to these sectors need to differentiate between headline-driven repricing and structural demand shifts when calibrating position sizes.
Financials and small caps: The Russell 2000's 2.3% outperformance suggests that domestic cyclicals and regional banks benefitted from a perceived reduction in systemic risk, at least temporarily. Regional banks often get bid when geopolitical risk recedes because funding stress and cross-border credit concerns are expected to ease. Portfolio managers should weigh this against the potential for renewed volatility—small-cap gains on headline relief can reverse rapidly if negotiations falter, making trailing stop or option-based hedges a prudent consideration.
Headline reliability: The March 23 episode illustrates a core risk for investors: the market is highly reactive to unverified or ambiguous statements. The President's post specifying a five-day postponement was not accompanied by corroboration from counterparties, and Iran's subsequent denial of talks immediately undercut the narrative. Such asymmetric information events increase the probability of whipsaw moves and raise transaction costs for investors who attempt to trade the initial reaction.
Volatility and liquidity dynamics: Rapid intraday reversals can strain liquidity, widen spreads, and make execution more costly — particularly in mid-cap and small-cap segments. The fact that indices finished below intraday highs indicates that liquidity providers tightened and buyers became selective as conflicting headlines circulated. Institutional execution desks should be prepared for escalated market impact costs during these headline cycles and consider conditional orders or algorithmic strategies that price liquidity risk explicitly.
Policy and macro contagion: A temporary postponement of attacks reduces the immediate shock to energy supplies but does not eliminate the structural risk that underpinned the original market nervousness. If negotiations fail after the five-day window, we should expect a re-acceleration of risk premia in energy and defense sectors and a broader reassessment of equity valuations tied to growth and earnings stability. The market's quick rebound should not be interpreted as a de-risking by all participants; rather, it is a recalibration that can reverse as rapidly as it formed.
Fazen Capital views the March 23 price action as a tactical recalibration rather than a durable regime change. The explicit five-day postponement in the President's post (Mar 23, 2026) functioned as a time-limited signal that reduced the immediate probability of targeted strikes on energy infrastructure, but the lack of corroborative diplomatic confirmation and Iran's denial of talks mean that the underlying geopolitical risk remains unresolved (investinglive.com). For allocators, the correct posture is nuanced: recognize the relief rally's information content but avoid extrapolating transient headline reprieves into permanent shifts in risk premia.
Our contrarian reading is that headline-driven rallies offer selective opportunity for disciplined rebalancing rather than wholesale risk-on rotation. When small caps outpace large caps on a headline like this, the move often reflects a compression of premium rather than a structural improvement in earnings prospects. In practice, this suggests selectively trimming positions that had become overweight in crowded cyclical themes and redeploying capital toward assets with stronger conviction on fundamentals or more robust hedging characteristics. Internal analysis should stress scenario-based valuation adjustments: price in both the five-day postponement outcome and the re-escalation outcome with explicit probability weightings.
Additionally, risk management should assume that volatility will remain elevated until there is a verifiable diplomatic track record. Implementing flexible hedges, such as collar structures or dynamic option overlays, can provide asymmetric protection without wholesale derisking of growth exposures. We also recommend cross-asset monitoring—energy futures, regional FX rates, and credit spreads can provide earlier signals of regime shifts than headline sentiment alone. For more on our macro framework and geopolitics integration, see Fazen Capital's insights on macro outlook and geopolitical risk.
Near term (days to weeks): Expect continued headline-driven volatility. The market will treat the five-day postponement as a finite window and price event risk accordingly; failure to secure verifiable diplomatic progress will likely lead to renewed selling pressure in energy and defense-linked equities. Position sizing should reflect the elevated probability of whipsaw trading and the attendant liquidity costs.
Medium term (months): If the five-day window yields verifiable progress, risk premia in energy and defense could compress and sustain higher equity multiples, particularly for domestically oriented sectors. If the window closes without meaningful progress, markets may exhibit a more pronounced re-pricing that could extend into credit spreads and FX. Market participants should monitor cross-asset indicators and durable signals such as confirmed diplomatic statements, trade flows, and physical energy supply metrics rather than social-media posts alone.
Portfolio implications: Tactical increases in exposure to domestic cyclicals following the March 23 moves may be defendable if paired with hedges that cap downside in the event of renewed hostilities. Conversely, investors seeking to capitalize on the relief rally should maintain liquidity reserves and avoid overconcentration in sectors whose upside is contingent on diplomatic outcomes. For further sector-level analysis and trade execution considerations, reference our insights hub.
Q: How should institutional investors interpret a headline-driven 1.1% S&P 500 move versus fundamental drivers?
A: A 1.1% intraday S&P move driven by geopolitics is more likely to reflect changes in risk premia than durable fundamental improvements. Historically, headline-driven advances frequently reverse if not supported by corroborative policy actions or economic data. Institutions should therefore treat such moves as opportunities for rebalancing and hedge optimization rather than indications to materially alter strategic asset allocations.
Q: Are energy and defense equities likely to remain correlated following the March 23 reversal?
A: Energy and defense sectors will likely remain correlated while geopolitical uncertainty persists, because both are directly sensitive to infrastructure risk and conflict intensity. However, correlation may diverge if diplomatic progress leads to improving energy supply fundamentals while defense procurement cycles remain unchanged; therefore, active managers should monitor procurement announcements, commodity inventories, and confirmed diplomatic milestones.
The March 23, 2026 rally—S&P 500 +1.1%, Nasdaq +1.4%, Russell 2000 +2.3%—was a headline-driven repositioning after a five-day postponement post, not a confirmation of durable de-escalation (investinglive.com). Investors should treat the move as tactical information with elevated reversal risk unless corroborated by verified diplomatic progress.
Disclaimer: This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute investment advice.
Sponsored
Open a demo account in 30 seconds. No deposit required.
CFDs are complex instruments and come with a high risk of losing money rapidly due to leverage. You should consider whether you understand how CFDs work and whether you can afford to take the high risk of losing your money.