TheChek News Flow

Shares are expected to start trading on July 30

China’s Zhongji Innolight 300308 -4.12%decrease; red down pointing triangle plans to raise more than US$7 billion in a Hong Kong public offering that would be the city’s largest listing so far this year.

The Shenzhen-listed optical transceiver maker plans to raise as much as 55.04 billion Hong Kong dollars, equivalent to US$7.02 billion, by issuing 54.5 million shares at a maximum offer price of HK$1,010 each. The shares are expected to start trading in Hong Kong on July 30.

That would top Apple supplier Luxshare Precision Industry’s US$3.07 billion listing earlier this month.

Optical transceivers play an increasingly important role in AI data centers, as they serve the interface between electrical signals and optical signals and enable data to travel over fiber-optic cables between servers with minimal latency amid surging computing demand.

Unlike AI accelerators, China’s optical and networking stack doesn’t face a tech bottleneck. Innolight is a key supplier to global customers such as Google and Nvidia, supported by their cost advantage and rapid product cycles. Innolight said it has been the world’s largest provider of optical interconnect solutions by revenue for five consecutive years since 2021, and held a 21% market share in 2025.

Innolight’s market capitalization passed the trillion yuan milestone this year, making it one of the most valuable companies listed in mainland China. Its Shenzhen-listed shares have gained 86% so far this year after a nearly fivefold increase last year.

More than two dozen cornerstone investors, including Singapore’s Temasek, BlackRock and the Abu Dhabi Investment Authority, have subscribed to almost half of Innolight’s shares. Securing such backers helps companies market their deals more effectively and is especially important in times of heightened market volatility.

The company plans to spend the majority of the offering’s proceeds on investment in research and development for optical interconnects and expanding its global production capacity.

Innolight’s revenue in the first three months of 2026 almost tripled to 19.50 billion yuan, equivalent to US$2.88 billion, while net profit jumped 274% to 6.32 billion yuan.

The listing joins a wave of offerings by Chinese companies in the AI supply chain that have made Hong Kong one of the world’s busiest places for fundraising this year.

According to data from the city’s bourse, 40 companies raised more than US$14 billion through listings in the first three months, marking the strongest first-quarter performance since 2021.

The deal could mean large profits for American companies but also is likely to raise concerns about nuclear proliferation in Middle East

President Trump has formally approved a landmark agreement with Saudi Arabia that will provide the country with a civilian nuclear program and potentially open the door to uranium enrichment in the kingdom’s territory, according to administration officials.

The new deal, which would last 30 years, is estimated to be worth tens of billions of dollars. It is designed to give American companies a central role in developing Saudi Arabia’s nuclear infrastructure while shutting out other foreign competitors.

A key provision of the new accord would have American companies build a uranium enrichment facility in Saudi Arabia if a joint U.S.-Saudi study determines such a step would be warranted.

That stipulation would give the U.S. influence over the Saudi nuclear program and, Trump administration officials argue, a way to prevent it from being misused for military purposes.

Yet the deal, which is expected to be submitted to Congress for review in the coming days, is certain to prove controversial among many lawmakers who oppose the spread of nuclear technology in the volatile Middle East.

The accord will be difficult for lawmakers to block because doing so would require a joint resolution and a two-thirds majority vote if it was necessary to override a potential presidential veto.

Trump greenlit the agreement late last week, and the accord is expected to be signed Wednesday by U.S. Energy Secretary Chris Wright, who discussed the deal during his first overseas trip to the region in April 2025 with his Saudi counterpart, Prince Abdulaziz bin Salman, who will also sign the deal.

“The agreement could help revitalize the U.S. nuclear industry, strengthen U.S.-Saudi ties and deny Russia and China a strategically important role in the Saudi nuclear program,” said Robert Einhorn, a former longtime senior State Department official who advised both Republican and Democratic administrations on nonproliferation issues.

“But unless it contains adequate constraints, including on enrichment, it could increase nuclear proliferation risks in the Middle East and beyond,” Einhorn added.

Saudi officials have long argued that the deal is necessary to enable the kingdom to develop a nuclear industry, which would draw on unproven uranium ore deposits to try to meet energy needs at home. That would free up more of its oil production for export and boost revenues.

Saudi Arabia insists its intentions are peaceful, although Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, the de facto leader of the country, said in 2018 that if Iran ever develops a nuclear weapon, his nation will follow suit.

Westinghouse Electric and its AP1000 reactor would be among the biggest beneficiaries of the deal. The AP1000 reactor produces about 1,100 megawatts of electricity—enough to power a midsize city or a major AI data center.

An increasing focus by lawmakers will be whether the deal’s safeguards are adequate to shut the door on the development of a potential nuclear weapon at a time of war in the Middle East.

Under the agreement, new power reactors and other nuclear technology would be provided by American companies with potentially a secondary role for some of those companies’ foreign suppliers.

As the reactor projects advance, U.S. and Saudi officials would also carry out a two-year study to examine the value of enrichment for Saudi Arabia, including whether it would be commercially viable to enrich uranium on Saudi soil instead of relying on imported fuel.

If the study concludes that indigenous enrichment is warranted, Americans would build the enrichment facility under a secretive “black box” arrangement that would preclude the transfer of sensitive enrichment technology to Riyadh.

Trump administration officials say that the American role would preclude the enriched uranium from being diverted for military purposes and would ensure that the spent fuel from the reactor couldn’t be reprocessed to make a bomb.

If the U.S. objects to proceeding with enrichment following the study, the kingdom wouldn’t be allowed to carry out enrichment on its own or with another foreign partner for 10 years.

Trump administration officials say the U.S. playing a central role in the Saudi nuclear program would ensure enrichment remains peaceful.

But critics argue that providing Saudi Arabia with a nuclear program, especially with an uranium enrichment or plutonium reprocessing capability, would encourage the spread of nuclear technology in the Middle East. In contrast to the United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia has rejected the so-called “gold standard,” a commitment never to enrich uranium at home or reprocess the spent fuel from a reactor.

“Whither goes Saudi Arabia, so goes the United Arab Emirates, Turkey and Egypt. The idea that this will have a happy ending is delusional,” said Henry Sokolski, executive director of the Nonproliferation Policy Education Center.

The debate around the Saudi nuclear deal has also been sharpened by a dispute over future inspections.

The Saudis rejected the “Additional Protocol,” an arrangement implemented by the International Atomic Energy Agency that would have provided more rigorous monitoring and inspections. Trump officials say the separate agreement negotiated with the Saudis will still provide for adequate monitoring of the U.S.-provided sites. But critics say the plan will be inadequate for investigating suspected nuclear activities that don’t involve the U.S.

Trump’s new deal is controversial for foreign policy reasons as well.

The Biden administration was prepared to move ahead with nuclear cooperation with Riyadh but conditioned that deal on Saudi Arabia’s willingness to normalize relations with Israel. Prospects for that normalization were sidetracked by Hamas’s October 2023 attack on Israel and the Israeli military’s subsequent intervention in Gaza.

While Trump has urged Saudi Arabia and other Islamic states to join the Abraham Accords, he isn’t insisting that Riyadh establish ties with Israel in order to purchase American nuclear technology and launch its civil nuclear program.

The Saudi deal also comes as the White House is still trying to pressure Iran to curtail its nuclear program and hand over its supply of highly enriched uranium.

Iran and Saudi Arabia are regional rivals, and critics say the agreement puts the Trump administration in the awkward position of insisting that Tehran agree to stringent limits on its nuclear efforts as it helps Saudi Arabia develop a civilian nuclear program. Trump officials say there is no contradiction if the Saudi program is subject to effective safeguards.

“Rest assured, these agreements uphold the highest standards of nuclear safety and nonproliferation, while relying on the world’s best nuclear technology and scientists, designed right here in the United States,” Wright said in a statement. “Thanks to President Trump, the American nuclear renaissance is underway and will deliver long-term benefits to the American and Saudi people.”

Democratic and Republican presidents have long resisted efforts by Middle Eastern countries to enrich uranium. But blocking the deal is likely to be an uphill battle for lawmakers who oppose it.

Some lawmakers have argued that a nuclear deal with Saudi Arabia is such a sensitive issue that it should face a tougher congressional standard. In 2018, a group of Democratic and Republican lawmakers sponsored an act that would block nuclear cooperation with Riyadh unless Congress affirmatively voted to approve it.

One of the senators who urged the higher hurdle was then Florida Republican Sen. Marco Rubio, now Trump’s secretary of state. It was never brought to a vote.

Utilities Join Trump Pledge to Limit AI-Driven Increases in Electricity Bills

Effort could prove hard to enforce because state regulators and electricity buyers and sellers often decide power prices

WASHINGTON—The nation’s largest utilities and developers of data centers have signed on to President Trump’s pledge to pay more for the electricity needed to run artificial-intelligence models, hoping to quell a backlash that has fueled protests and political proposals to halt the AI boom.

NextEra Energy, Duke Energy, Equinix and Digital Realty are among the nearly 200 entities committing to the president’s promise aimed at ensuring AI’s energy consumption doesn’t push up electric bills for consumers across the U.S., according to a White House list of signatories obtained by The Wall Street Journal. Trump is expected to announce the new commitments at a Thursday event at the Environmental Protection Agency, a White House official said. Republican governors including Louisiana’s Jeff Landry and Georgia’s Brian Kemp also signed the pledge and are expected to attend.

The new commitments mean that signatories now account for some 80% of all power delivered to U.S. homes and businesses, the official said.

The pledges could prove difficult to enforce because power prices are often decided by state regulators and electricity buyers and sellers, but they represent the strongest effort by the White House and private sector to fight anger about AI.

Rising electricity prices and opposition to new data centers have driven concerns among industry executives that more of the facilities that power models will have to move overseas, potentially challenging an engine of the economy. Chinese AI-model developers recently released tools that impressed Western investors and industry analysts, adding to an already frenetic industry competition.

“The president’s bold action is turning data centers into engines of growth for local communities, while cementing America’s dominance in the global AI race,” said White House spokeswoman Taylor Rogers in a written statement.

Last week, Trump criticized New York Gov. Kathy Hochul’s executive order barring the construction of data centers for a year until regulatory and environmental frameworks are created. Trump called the order a “terrible decision” and said the taxes and jobs from data centers “amount to LIQUID GOLD.”

Many other states and towns have proposed similar moratoriums, while Sen. Bernie Sanders (I., Vt.) has introduced a bill that would impose a federal data-center ban. The success of progressive Democrats in recent primaries is fueling fears among tech executives of increased regulation and actions targeting the AI industry.

Many consumers now oppose the construction of data centers in their communities and support increased government regulation of AI.

Trump has increased the federal government’s oversight of the industry but still pledged to avoid regulations that hinder the deployment of models. The utilities’ electricity promise includes commitments to pay for grid upgrades and infrastructure needed to support data centers, a crucial challenge facing ratepayers around the U.S. Other notable utility signatories include Southern Co. and American Electric Power.

In March, tech executives from OpenAI, Amazon.com, Microsoft, Google, Meta Platforms, Oracle and Elon Musk’s xAI, recently acquired by SpaceX, signed the pledge, which Trump introduced in his State of the Union address early this year. Other commitments include negotiating separate rate structures with utilities and states and coordinating with grid operators to prevent blackouts and power shortages.

Utilities and AI-industry participants have said an important question is whether promises from profitable tech giants will ripple through the AI ecosystem to partners operating on the ground.

Another challenge for the effort is reaching upset consumers and showing them the pledges are having an impact, AI analysts have said. Tech companies and utilities have said their commitments in states from Louisiana to Indiana will save consumers billions of dollars and tout the tax dollars data centers generate.

Trade tech company says Cervo AI can speed up customs brokerage tasks as tariff and trade policies shift

Trade technology provider Altana is acquiring Cervo AI, an artificial-intelligence platform that automates writing customs entries.

Altana’s acquisition of Cervo could be worth more than $100 million in cash and equity if certain performance milestones are reached.

U.S. Customs has handled more than 63 million entry summaries this fiscal year, up 27% from all of last year.

Changing tariffs and trade policies are setting off a race to build technology that can help companies navigate the complexity.

Trade technology provider Altana said Tuesday it is acquiring Cervo AI, an artificial-intelligence platform that automates the process of writing customs entries.

Altana uses AI to map supply chains and build a digital trade network where importers, suppliers, logistics providers and customs agencies can track risks and trade-compliance requirements. Its customers include logistics companies such as A.P. Moller-Maersk, government agencies such as U.S. Customs and Border Protection, and importers including Boston Scientific and L.L.Bean.

Maker of Mike Lynch’s Bayesian superyacht loses CEO and board as difficulties mount

Vessel made by The Italian Sea Group’s Perini Navi sank off the coast of Sicily in 2024

The chief executive of The Italian Sea Group, builder of Mike Lynch’s sunken Bayesian superyacht, has stepped down, triggering the departure of the company’s entire board amid a painful financial restructuring at the luxury yacht-making group.

The Bayesian, made by TISG’s Perini Navi, sank off the coast of Sicily during a violent storm in 2024, killing UK tech entrepreneur Lynch, his 18-year-old daughter and five others.

Giovanni Costantino, who is also the controlling shareholder, resigned on Monday alongside his son Gianmaria following financial difficulties at Milan-listed TISG, which disclosed unauthorised cost overruns and alleged accounting irregularities in March before seeking court protection from creditors and opening a restructuring process.

The company’s board, which must now be replaced under Italian law, will continue to operate on an interim basis until a new one is appointed, “to ensure continuity and the continuation of the restructuring process,” the company said in a statement.

TISG’s share price has fallen by almost 78 per cent over the past six months.

The group last year brought a €456mn damages claim against the Lynch estate and members of the crew on the Bayesian, claiming that negligence caused the yacht to sink and inflicted severe reputational and commercial damage on the shipbuilder. The Lynch estate has previously rejected the claim, describing the lawsuit as “cynical”.

Investigations into the causes of the disaster are ongoing, with Italian prosecutors examining possible human error while a preliminary UK investigation identified design vulnerabilities that may have contributed to the yacht’s rapid sinking.

At the time, TISG maintained that the vessel was safe and suggested that human errors were behind the disaster. It has said its Perini Navi brand has not sold another vessel since the sinking. TISG said on Tuesday that there were no updates on the case.

The company’s financial disclosures this year have suggested financial issues that extend beyond the fallout from the Bayesian’s sinking. Three directors, including its chair and vice-chair, resigned after the group uncovered significant unauthorised cost overruns on yacht projects, prompting a forensic investigation into whether former senior executives concealed the true state of its orders and finances.

More recently, faltering negotiations with yacht owners, legal disputes over vessels under construction, potential job losses and mounting pressure on suppliers have left the group racing to renegotiate contracts, reduce its debt and secure fresh capital.

Novo Nordisk sues Eli Lilly over ‘deliberately false’ weight-loss drug ads

Danish group claims rival used outdated data to support claims that its products were more effective than Wegovy

Novo Nordisk has accused arch-rival Eli Lilly of peddling false claims about its weight-loss products in advertising campaigns, marking the latest salvo in the battle for supremacy between the world’s biggest makers of obesity drugs.

Novo alleged in a lawsuit filed on Tuesday in a New Jersey court that Lilly was running an advertising campaign that was “deliberately false” and designed to mislead consumers over the “comparative efficacy” of the diabetes and weight-loss drugs sold by both companies.

The Danish drugmaker’s claim argues that Lilly has been citing outdated clinical trial data to support claims that its obesity drug, Zepbound, delivered higher average weight loss than Novo’s competing product, Wegovy.

Novo further alleges that Lilly’s ad campaign has falsely told patients that its diabetes medication, Mounjaro, was more effective than Novo’s Ozempic in lowering blood sugar levels.

The claim comes as the two big pharma groups are rolling out oral weight-loss pills that could increase take-up of the treatments significantly.

Novo’s filing said Lilly’s ads for injectable products Zepbound and Mounjaro were “maliciously and deceptively false”, and they created the impression that the company had more effective diabetes and weight-loss treatments than its rival.

Novo is seeking a permanent injunction barring Lilly from continuing to run the advertisements and a correction. Its filing also calls for “any and all of defendants’ profits” collected as a result of the advertising to be paid as damages.

John Kuckelman, Novo’s general counsel, told the FT that the group had sent a cease-and-desist letter to Lilly in April but Novo “did not get the courtesy of a response”.

Kuckelman said Lilly instead added a “very small” disclaimer that the Wegovy 7.2mg injectable, the highest dose approved by the FDA in March, was not included in the trials claiming that Zepbound delivered superior weight loss to Wegovy. “You cannot use a misleading disclaimer to fix a misleading advertisement,” he said.

Lilly said in a statement on Tuesday that it would “defend against this lawsuit vigorously” and said the trial results it was publicising in its adverts were the “gold standard for comparing medicines”.

“Rather than compete on the merits of its products, Novo is asking a court to stop Lilly from communicating the results of that trial,” a spokesperson for Lilly said. “We stand firmly behind our advertising.”

The lawsuit, lodged in the US District Court for the District of New Jersey, marks the latest showdown between the two groups, the only companies with approved products in the blockbuster weight-loss market.

Lilly has an edge over Novo in the weight-loss market across both diabetes and obesity drugs. But Novo has gained ground with its Wegovy weight-loss pill, which launched in the US in January before Lilly’s oral option became available to patients in April.

Bidder accuses Segro of ‘aspirational’ projections to justify rejecting £13.5bn offer

UK property group has resisted three proposals from US-listed real estate giant Prologis

The chief executive of Prologis has accused the board of UK property group Segro of relying on “very aspirational” projections as it resists a £13.5bn takeover bid by his company that would rank as the largest acquisition in London this year.

The US real estate giant has been stepping up pressure on London-listed Segro after going public last month with its first takeover proposal. Prologis said this week that it had made two further bids, which Segro had also rejected.

In an interview with the FT, Prologis boss Dan Letter said of Segro’s board: “It’s hard to see what they’re really thinking with the very aspirational business plan they’ve put out,” he added.

Since the initial offer, both sides have argued the case in press releases and presentations to investors.

Letter said his company was putting out information on its proposals, including an earlier 2024 bid, because of a lack of engagement from Segro’s board and that he was seeking a “constructive process”.

“We thought we would get better engagement from them as we continued to provide them proposals,” he said.

Segro has insisted that remaining as an independent company will provide superior returns for its shareholders, and said its shares had been valued at about £13 in a report it commissioned from commercial property firm CBRE — well above the 993p offered most recently by Prologis.

The offer from US-listed Prologis is largely made up of shares in itself but includes a 20 per cent cash component.

In a boost to Letter, the bid gained tentative backing on Tuesday from Norway’s sovereign wealth fund, which owns 8 per cent of Segro and 1 per cent of Prologis. “We believe the proposal merits consideration, and we encourage the boards of both Segro and Prologis to enter into constructive discussions,” the fund said.

Letter’s remarks came after Prologis representatives met with Segro management on Sunday. While the Norwegian wealth fund indicated it could be open to backing a deal, UK-based investor M&G said it would not support the latest takeover bid.

“The price that has been offered is way below what we would consider an acceptable offer for this set of assets,” said Michael Stiasny, head of UK equities at M&G, which owns about 1 per cent of Segro. He added that the bid did not “reflect the potential long-term upside” of Segro’s business.

Segro said: “Segro has engaged and met with Prologis management to understand Prologis’s ability to improve its financial terms to a level that could be capable of being recommended by the Board of Segro.” It added that Prologis had provided “no new information and made no improvement” to its latest proposal.

Shares in Segro fell about 3 per cent on Tuesday while Prologis stock rose about 0.6 per cent in morning trading in New York.

Under UK takeover rules, Prologis must make a firm offer by Wednesday or walk away from a deal, and it is encouraging Segro shareholders to urge the UK group’s board to back the deal.

While Segro has argued a higher bid would be needed, Letter suggested there were limits to how much he would pay to secure a deal, saying Prologis would remain “disciplined stewards of capital” as it sought to grow.

“They have an attractive portfolio that, if combined with our platform, we can do a lot more with and a lot faster,” he said of Segro.

“We’ve given them constructive, compelling offers that are good for both [sets of] shareholders. We will continue to be disciplined in how we execute this,” he said.

Liverpool FC owner in talks to sell stake to Mittal family-backed consortium

Deal would value English Premier League side at more than $6bn

A consortium of investors led by Amit Bhatia and backed by the Mittal family is in talks to buy a significant minority stake in Liverpool Football Club, in a deal that would value the English Premier League side at more than $6bn.

The investor group headed by Bhatia, the son-in-law of steel tycoon and billionaire Lakshmi Mittal, has hired advisers to work on the offer and is in active talks with Liverpool’s current US owners Fenway Sports Group, according to people familiar with the matter.

The football club was expected to be valued at more than $6bn in any transaction, three people said, one of the highest in football history. The attempted deal underlines the continued appeal of England’s top-tier football clubs and the global reach of the Premier League.

FSG confirmed the consortium’s interest in a statement to the FT. “An investment consortium led, managed and represented by Amit Bhatia has expressed interest in making a strategic minority investment in Liverpool Football Club,” it said.

Bhatia declined to comment.

People familiar with the talks stressed that no deal had yet been struck and there was no certainty an agreement would be reached.

It would be the latest big-money deal in English football, following the £2.5bn takeover of Chelsea FC in 2022 and Sir Jim Ratcliffe’s purchase of a minority stake in Manchester United, which valued Liverpool’s arch-rivals at more than $6.3bn, including debt, in 2023.

Liverpool is owned by FSG, which is controlled by American billionaire John Henry, who made his fortune in commodities trading. His group bought Liverpool for £300mn in 2010.

FSG also owns the Boston Red Sox baseball team and in 2024 led a consortium in a $1.5bn investment into the commercial arm of the PGA Tour golf competition. In December last year, FSG sold the Pittsburgh Penguins hockey franchise to the Hoffman family for $1.7bn.

Ahead of the potential deal, Bhatia agreed to transfer his shareholding in Queens Park Rangers, which plays in the English second tier, to majority owner Ruben Gnanalingam. This is to avoid holding stakes in two clubs.

The Liverpool talks come two months after the Mittal family agreed in May to buy a minority stake in the Rajasthan Royals, the Indian Premier League cricket franchise.

Liverpool is one of the biggest brands in global sport. The club has won the Uefa Champions League six times and the English top flight a joint-record 20 times. Under FSG, it has undergone a turnaround on and off the pitch.

The club won the Premier League in 2020 when they were crowned champions of England for the first time in 30 years. Another title followed in 2025. Liverpool also won the Uefa Champions League in 2019.

Liverpool’s revenue rose to north of £700mn in the 2024-2025 season, a club record, from £613mn the prior year. Its commercial partners include bank Standard Chartered, German sportswear maker Adidas and Google Pixel. 

FSG sold a minority stake in September 2023 to US private equity firm Dynasty Equity.

Intergovernmental agency says ‘no room for complacency’ and points to tightness in refined products

The International Energy Agency has warned of a growing risk to energy supplies following the escalation of the war in the Middle East, with the renewed shutdown of the Strait of Hormuz once again severely restricting shipments from the Gulf.

The intergovernmental agency said in a rare statement on Tuesday that while the crude market was benefiting from some “cushioning factors”, such as the continuation of an emergency oil stock release by member governments, it was “closely monitoring the situation” in markets.

“The escalation in hostilities affecting the Strait of Hormuz and energy infrastructure in the region increases security of supply concerns and uncertainty over the market outlook,” said IEA executive director Fatih Birol.

“There is no room for complacency on oil security amid the escalation in hostilities and a continued drawdown of available commercial inventories,” he added.

The statement will fuel speculation that the IEA is examining potential options if the strait does not open quickly, including further stock releases by members.

The IEA described the shutdown of the strait as the biggest supply disruption in history earlier in the war, and helped co-ordinate the largest release of emergency government oil stocks in history in March.

Birol said about 290mn barrels of the planned 400mn barrel emergency release had been drawn down so far, but said IEA members still held “in reserve” over “1bn barrels of government-controlled stocks”.

Oil prices fell sharply after a preliminary ceasefire in mid-June, with Brent crude dropping to around $70 a barrel — down from a high above $126 a barrel early in the war. But prices have since rebounded to about $90 a barrel, as traffic again slows to a trickle in the strait, with Iran striking a number of tankers in recent days.

The renewed closure of the waterway comes as oil and natural gas inventories have already been diminished, and the IEA said only an “unconditional” reopening of the passageway from the Gulf could stop “a further deterioration in global energy security”.

The US resumed air strikes against Iran two weeks ago and there has been an escalation in tit-for-tat attacks between the sides over control of the narrow waterway at the mouth of the Gulf through which a fifth of the world’s oil usually passes.

As attacks on energy assets in the Gulf and shipping have intensified in recent days, Yemen’s Houthi rebels have said they will impose a “maritime embargo” against Saudi Arabia’s ports, threatening an important lifeline for crude exports from the kingdom when the strait is impassable.

Saudi Aramco has exported nearly 5mn barrels a day through the Saudi port of Yanbu on the Red Sea during the Iran war, according to data from Kpler, the energy data company. Before the war the kingdom exported about 7mn b/d of crude.

“Threats to the Bab el-Mandeb Strait [at the mouth of the Red Sea], which has become increasingly important as a route to bypass the Strait of Hormuz, exacerbate these concerns further,” said Birol.

He also highlighted that petrol and diesel markets were much tighter than crude oil, and that Europe had struggled to refill natural gas storage sites ahead of winter due to a drop in Middle Eastern supplies.

The price premium for diesel over crude oil from refineries in north-west Europe hit a record high in recent days, reaching more than $80 a barrel and meaning diesel is changing hands for about $170 a barrel.