Interview with Igor Isaev of Mind Money
Oil markets no longer respond to one signal at a time, making volatility harder to interpret and long-term pricing far less predictable.
Energy markets are being shaped by overlapping pressures that rarely move in the same direction. Geopolitical tensions, shifting trade routes, uncertain demand, and uneven progress in energy transition technologies are all influencing prices at once, often making traditional market signals harder to trust. In this interview, Igor Isaev explains why volatility today often reflects deeper structural shifts rather than isolated events. Drawing on more than two decades of work in commodity and financial market analysis, he discusses how energy security, oil pricing, and global supply adjustments are changing the way leaders in both finance and industry interpret risk.
You have spent more than two decades studying commodity and financial markets. What first drew you to understanding how markets behave when conditions become unpredictable?
In calmer periods, markets may look rational, guided by supply-demand balances and macro models. But once conditions become unstable, something more important happens.
The “unpredictable” now includes structural transitions. We still see discussion of expanding oil exploration into more complex regions, such as the Arctic. But in reality, the economics there are extremely challenging. The cost of exploration and production is so high that the alternative technologies path doesn’t look prohibitive.
I see attempts to accelerate the development of innovative sources. The States have been working to integrate fusion energy into the grid by 2030, though that timeline faces setbacks. That alone shows how difficult it is to predict which technological path will actually materialize and when.
The EU is targeting a 70% share of sustainable aviation fuel by 2050, but current production capacity is nowhere near that level. This means aviation will rely on conventional jet fuel for longer than expected, supporting oil demand even as the narrative points toward decarbonization.
Energy markets today are shaped by geopolitics, supply concerns, and changing demand patterns at the same time. What has become most difficult about reading market signals in this environment?
The most challenging part is sorting out short-term “noise” from long-term structural displacements. In the past, it was possible to analyze main input factors — conflicts, demand, and supply — each one separately. Today, they often send conflicting signals.
For example, diplomatic tensions and wars can cause a sharp spike in oil prices, while at the same time, the slowdown in the global economy is weighing on long-term demand.
The current oil price surge is not isolated. It feeds into transportation costs, fertilizers, and eventually food prices. So even if institutions like the World Bank expect some stabilization, there is a buildup of risks beneath the surface that is harder to quantify.
Energy security has returned to the center of economic debate. From the data you follow, what are the clearest signs that countries are changing how they think about energy risk?
There are three clear indicators:
Diversification of suppliers, not just energy sources, is a must. We see this in Europe, which is actively building LNG terminals to receive gas from the U.S. to reduce its dependence on Russia.
Temporary revival of air-polluting energy sources, such as coal and nuclear power, which seemed gone, is again being viewed as a tool of energy independence. Decisions to revive nuclear power plants in Japan and Germany, or to raise coal consumption in Asia, are clear reassessment signals.
Accumulating strategic reserves is our ultimate lifeline. Countries are actively stockpiling not only oil, but also diesel fuel and natural gas.
Oil prices often react quickly to headlines, but not every market move reflects a lasting shift. How do you tell when volatility points to something deeper?
I look at three main indicators:
The forward curve. If only the nearest contract reacts to the news while the more distant ones remain stable, it is most likely a panic. But if the entire curve shifts upward and enters backwardation, this signals a physical shortage, and traders’ readiness to pay premia for immediate delivery.
Spreads between oil grades. The reaction of spreads (for example, between Brent and WTI) shows exactly where the problem lies. If only Brent were rising, this could be a local issue in the North Sea. If, however, all key spreads are moving in sync, this indicates a disruption of the supply-demand balance.
Trading volumes and open interest. A spike in volatility on low volumes is often speculative. But if a sharp price movement is accompanied by a huge increase in trading volume and open interest, it means that real producers and consumers are hedging their risks.
Many firms now have access to large volumes of market data. In practice, what separates useful analysis from simply having more information?
What makes today’s energy markets particularly difficult is that many reference points no longer work. In past cycles, the relationship between prices, economic growth, and interest rates was stable. Now, traditional macro signals aren’t enough to explain everything.
Current political events are setting the price floor. Simultaneously, demand signals become less reliable, and inventory data often tells an incomplete story. Our models show that even when supply-demand balances look normal, prices can still move sharply because the market is reacting to perceived risk.
Useful analysis is the ability to synthesize, not just summarize. Instead of simply stating, “Inventories rose, and prices fell,” useful analysis explains why this happened. Perhaps inventories rose due to weak gasoline demand, which is a leading indicator of a recession.
What is one assumption about oil markets that people still repeat, even though it no longer reflects reality?
The most common misconception is the statement that “OPEC controls oil prices.” OPEC+ expansion has complicated decisions, while U.S. shale reacts to prices much faster, per se.
When uncertainty remains high for an extended period, what do you think leaders in energy and finance need to understand now that may become even more important in the years ahead?
The restructuring of global oil shipping routes and shifts in the types of oil are game changers. While in the past, certain petrochemicals were exclusively purchased by certain countries, now, due to globalization, they are purchased by others too. This leads to bottlenecks and delays. And this has affected everyone’s revenue and margins. But so far it looks as nothing more serious than just a delay. How long will this chaotic market transformation last? I think it won’t be more than five years. This applies to both automotive and aviation fuels. In other words, it’s simply a delay caused by this global restructuring of the energy market.
The past few years have shown that supply chains can be weaponized (sanctions, export controls, etc.). So, leaders must admit that this has become the new normal. Proactive strategies become more important for diversification and resilience. Reactive problem-solving becomes inefficient.
The traditional energy trilemma (meaning security, affordability, sustainability) is now more acute than ever. Current events directly impact security and costs. This makes sustainability goals less important. Leaders should realize how these forces interact and create trade-offs.
Finally, they must recognize that the transition itself is a source of volatility. New technologies, new supply chains for critical minerals, and emerging regulatory frameworks will all contribute to this.
Executive Profile
Igor Isaev, Head of Analytics Center, Mind Money. He is a financial markets analytics expert with more than 20 years; experience in the stock and commodity market analytics and trading strategies development. With a PhD in Technical Sciences, Isaev’s expertise extends to stock exchange analytics based on mathematical models and big data.
