La brecha de expectativas del petróleo: ¿Por qué el mercado está valorado en un nivel más bajo para el año 2026?

The market is pricing in a bearish 2026, but the gap between that consensus and the whisper numbers from the industry floor is widening. This disconnect sets up a classic expectation arbitrage: if the pessimistic forecast proves overly gloomy, the correction could be swift.

The official consensus is clear. A Reuters poll conducted in December forecast Brent crude averaging $61.27 per barrel in 2026, a downward revision from the prior month. That forecast implies a WTI price around $58.15. More broadly, independent forecasters project 2026 WTI prices in the low- to mid-$50s per barrel. This is the priced-in reality-a market braced for a supply surplus and weak demand.

Yet, oil executives are still looking through the fog. The latest Dallas Fed Energy Survey reveals a notable gap. While their average expectation for WTI in 2026 has fallen from earlier hopes of $70, it still sits at $62.41 per barrel. That figure is a full $10 above the low end of the independent forecast range. More telling is the capital planning number: executives are using a WTI price of $59 per barrel for 2026 in their budgets, which is still above the independent consensus. This suggests a cautious but still bullish tilt in the industry's forward view.

The bottom line is a widening expectation gap. The market is pricing in a low-$50s WTI, while the industry's average bet is still in the low-$60s. If the bearish supply-demand outlook proves less severe than feared, or if geopolitical events shift the risk premium, this gap could snap shut. For now, the market is priced for pessimism, leaving room for a surprise if reality meets the higher whisper numbers.

The Supply-Demand Engine: Why the Bearish Forecast is Building

The expectation gap is being built on a foundation of clear, bearish fundamentals. The market is pricing in a prolonged period of price pressure, and the data supports it. The U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) sees a supply glut in the making, forecasting that global oil inventories will continue to rise through 2026. This accumulation of barrels is the direct engine of downward price pressure, a dynamic that has shaped oil markets for decades.

The supply side is the key driver. While U.S. production has peaked at 13.6 million barrels per day and is expected to decline slightly next year, that domestic peak is being more than offset by ample global supply. The market is facing a growing oil surplus, not a shortage. This imbalance is what technical analysts are watching closely. The recent price action, with oil breaking the $70 level in April 2025 and now hovering near $55, shows the market is already in a weak trend. More critically, the technical patterns on the charts resemble the 2014–2016 collapse, with bearish formations pointing to further downside. This isn't just a supply story; it's a signal that the market's psychology is shifting toward a sustained bearish view.

The bottom line is that the bearish consensus is not speculative. It is a direct response to a tangible supply-demand imbalance. With inventories set to keep rising and technicals flashing warning signs, the market is pricing in a lower 2026. The industry's whisper numbers, while higher, are being tested against this hard data. For the expectation gap to close in a bullish direction, the market would need to see this surplus narrative reverse-either through a sharper demand shock than forecast or a more aggressive supply cut than currently priced in. Until then, the supply-demand engine is firmly in the bearish column.

Geopolitical Noise vs. Structural Headwinds

The recent U.S. military operation in Venezuela and the capture of its President occurred after the December poll that established the current bearish consensus. Yet, this event is more noise than a fundamental catalyst for a guidance reset. The market's focus remains firmly on the structural headwinds of growing supply and weak demand, where geopolitical risks often amplify volatility rather than change the fundamental trend.

Venezuela's current production is minimal, at around 1 million barrels per day, which accounts for less than 1% of global output. Any meaningful expansion in output would require massive investment to repair neglected infrastructure and stable governance-conditions that are far from certain. As analysts note, while the event introduces "ambiguous but modest risks" to prices in the short run, the path to increased supply is long and uncertain. This is not a near-term supply shock that can offset the projected global surplus of 0.5 to 3.5 million barrels per day for 2026.

The bottom line is that geopolitical events like this one are typically priced as a volatility premium, not a permanent shift in the supply-demand baseline. The market is already pricing in a surplus, and the technical setup points to further downside. For a guidance reset to occur, the market would need to see a tangible acceleration in demand or a more aggressive supply cut from OPEC+. A political change in Venezuela, while significant, does not yet meet that threshold. It may cause a temporary spike in sentiment or volatility, but it is unlikely to alter the structural bearish trajectory that has been priced in. For now, the event is noise against the louder, persistent signal of a supply glut.

Catalysts and Risks: What Could Close the Gap?

The expectation gap between the market's bearish forecast and the industry's higher whisper numbers will be tested by a handful of forward-looking catalysts and risks. The path to a guidance reset-or a further widening of the gap-depends on how these factors unfold.

First, watch OPEC+ meetings for any coordinated production cuts. The group's recent decision to hold output steady through the first quarter of 2026 provided only "some support to prices" but did not materially alter the underlying surplus, according to analysts. Any move to actively cut supply later in the year would be a direct attempt to bolster prices and limit declines. Such a step could force a reassessment of the bearish consensus, acting as a catalyst to close the gap. Conversely, continued inaction or further increases would validate the market's pricing for a glut.

Second, the key data point to monitor is the actual evolution of the market surplus. The bearish forecast hinges on a projected surplus of 0.5 to 3.5 million barrels per day for 2026. The expectation gap could snap shut if this surplus narrows more quickly than anticipated. As one forecast notes, a narrowing market surplus should push up oil prices later this year. This would trigger a price recovery and force a reassessment of the low-$50s WTI baseline. The market is pricing in a persistent surplus; any sign that this imbalance is shrinking would be a powerful bullish signal.

The primary risk, however, is that the expectation gap widens further. This would happen if either demand disappoints or supply growth accelerates beyond current forecasts. The market is already pricing in weak demand and ample supply. If economic data shows a sharper slowdown than expected, or if non-OPEC producers like the U.S. exceed their modest decline projections, the surplus narrative would strengthen. This would likely push prices lower and deepen the disconnect between the industry's capital planning numbers and the harsher reality, making the guidance reset even more distant.

In short, the catalysts are clear: OPEC+ action and a narrowing surplus could close the gap. The risks-demand weakness or faster supply growth-could make it worse. For now, the market is positioned for the latter, leaving the former as the speculative play.