The Iran war is now in its fifth week and Brent crude is above $108/barrel with the IEA warning the supply crunch will intensify through April. At this duration and magnitude, the oil shock is no longer a short-term event to ride out passively. It has become a structural factor that changes the relative performance of asset classes, sectors, and currencies in ways that are relevant to how registered accounts are positioned. A deliberate account-level review, not a reactive trade, is the appropriate response.

The review does not need to be complex. It requires answering four questions for each account: what is the energy weighting, what is the fixed income duration, what is the currency exposure, and does the overall allocation still match the client's time horizon and risk tolerance given what has changed since January.

Energy Weighting: More Than Most Clients Realize

Canadian equity ETFs tracking the S&P/TSX Composite Index carry energy weightings that typically range from 17% to 22% of the index. A client who holds a broad Canadian equity ETF as the core of their TFSA or RRSP holds meaningful oil price sensitivity without necessarily thinking of themselves as an energy investor. At $108/barrel Brent, that weighting has been a significant contributor to performance over the past five weeks. The question is whether the current energy weighting still reflects the client's intended risk profile, or whether the oil shock has caused passive drift into a higher-than-intended energy concentration.

The inverse question applies to clients who hold primarily U.S. equity ETFs inside their registered accounts. The S&P 500 has no structural energy benefit from the Hormuz disruption and is instead facing headwinds from the inflation and growth implications of sustained high oil. A client whose RRSP is concentrated in S&P 500 index funds has been on the wrong side of the energy trade for five weeks while their neighbour with a TSX-heavy TFSA outperformed.

Fixed Income Duration: The Quiet Risk

Bond yields have moved significantly without the Bank of Canada changing its policy rate. The 5-year Government of Canada bond yield rose from approximately 2.7% to 3.2% this month, driven by the bond market's repricing of inflation risk from the oil shock. For clients holding longer-duration bond funds or ETFs inside their RRSP or TFSA, this yield movement creates negative mark-to-market returns on the fixed income sleeve even if no rate hike has occurred.

The mechanics are straightforward: bond prices move inversely to yields. A longer-duration bond fund falls more in price for a given yield increase than a shorter-duration one. A client in a 10-year+ duration bond ETF inside their RRSP has experienced a meaningful negative return on that holding this month despite holding what they consider a conservative asset. This is not a reason to panic-sell bond holdings. It is, however, a reason to review whether the duration profile of the fixed income sleeve still matches the client's time horizon and income needs.

Currency Exposure And The Rrsp Dimension

The Canadian dollar has behaved differently during this conflict than it typically does during oil price surges. Normally, CAD strengthens with rising oil prices because Canada is a net energy exporter. During this conflict, the safe-haven bid for the U.S. dollar has at times offset or reversed that relationship, leaving the CAD broadly flat against the USD even as oil surged. The behaviour reflects global risk-off positioning rather than Canadian economic fundamentals.

For clients with unhedged U.S. equity or global equity exposure inside their RRSP, this currency dynamic has added a layer of complexity. When the USD strengthens as a safe haven, unhedged U.S. equity positions in a Canadian-dollar account receive a translation benefit. Whether that currency exposure is intentional or incidental depends on the original portfolio design, and it is worth confirming in the current environment.

The Rrif Drawdown Consideration

For clients in registered retirement income fund drawdown, the oil shock adds a specific planning dimension. RRIF minimum withdrawal requirements are based on account value at January 1 of each year. A client whose RRIF was heavily weighted to energy at the January 1 valuation date has seen that sleeve appreciate significantly. The mandatory minimum withdrawal calculation for the current year was locked at January 1, so the energy appreciation accrues to the client's benefit without mechanically increasing this year's required minimum. But the asset mix question, whether to hold, trim, or rebalance the energy position, is now a live planning conversation for RRIF holders who have seen significant unrealized gains in the energy sleeve.

SOURCES Bank of Canada (March 18 rate statement), The Globe and Mail, True North Mortgage, NerdWallet Canada, Simply Wall St. (TSX Oil and Gas industry data), Trading Economics, Investing.com, Canada Revenue Agency (RRIF minimum withdrawal rules), Statistics Canada