The oil and gas industry is no stranger to volatility, and 2025 is shaping up to be another wild ride. A recent headline grabbed the attention of investors and analysts alike: Banks Cut 2025 Oil Price Forecast Below $60, Survey Shows. According to a survey by law firm Haynes Boone LLP, 28 banks have slashed their expectations, pegging West Texas Intermediate (WTI) crude at an average of $58.30 per barrel for 2025—a 5.8% drop from their December projections. The reasoning? OPEC+ production hikes and flat global demand growth are flooding the market with more oil than it can consume, driving prices down. But here’s the million-dollar question for Energy News Beat readers: Are these banks the right ones to trust, or are there other experts with a sharper crystal ball?
Let’s dive into a story that unpacks this forecast, explores the track record of banks versus other industry voices, and offers a roadmap for oil and gas investors navigating this murky landscape.
The Bankers’ Bet: Why $60?
Picture a boardroom filled with Wall Street suits, poring over spreadsheets and sipping overpriced coffee. These are the analysts at major banks like Goldman Sachs, Barclays, and J.P. Morgan, who’ve collectively lowered their 2025 oil price forecasts. Their logic, as outlined in the Haynes Boone survey, is straightforward: OPEC+ is opening the taps, planning to add 411,000 barrels per day (bpd) to the market, nearly triple the initially scheduled volume. Meanwhile, global demand growth is stuck in neutral, with China’s economic slowdown and trade tensions—think U.S. tariffs on Canada, Mexico, and China—dampening consumption. The result? A projected surplus that could push oil inventories higher and prices lower.
Goldman Sachs, for instance, now sees Brent crude averaging $60 per barrel in 2025, down from $63, and WTI at $56, down from $59. J.P. Morgan is even more bearish, forecasting Brent at $66 and WTI at $62 for 2025, with a further slide to $58 and $53, respectively, in 2026. The banks point to high spare capacity among OPEC+ producers and a potential recession triggered by trade wars as key risks tilting prices downward.
For investors, this sounds like a grim setup. If oil dips below $60, high-cost producers—think U.S. shale operators needing $65 per barrel to profitably drill new wells—could face serious pain. But before you sell your oil stocks or double down on renewables, let’s ask: Do banks have the best track record for calling oil prices, or are they just the loudest voices in the room?
The Banks’ Track Record: Hits and Misses
Banks have deep pockets, armies of analysts, and access to cutting-edge data models, but their oil price forecasts aren’t gospel. Historically, they’ve had mixed success. Take 2020, when oil prices briefly went negative due to a Saudi-Russia price war and COVID-induced demand collapse. Few banks saw that coming. In 2022, when Brent spiked above $100 per barrel amid Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, many banks underestimated the rally, projecting prices in the $80s.
A 2024 Reuters poll showed analysts downgrading Brent forecasts for seven straight months, from $84 to $74.53 for 2025, reflecting a reactive rather than predictive approach. This suggests banks often adjust to market trends rather than anticipate them. Their models lean heavily on supply-demand fundamentals, but they can miss wildcards like geopolitical shocks, policy shifts, or technological breakthroughs.
On the flip side, banks’ bearish calls sometimes align with reality. In 2023, Goldman Sachs accurately predicted a softening market as non-OPEC+ supply (especially from the U.S.) outpaced demand. Their current pessimism about 2025 could prove prescient if OPEC+ overproduces and trade tariffs tank global growth. But their reliance on macroeconomic models can make them overly cautious, underestimating the resilience of oil demand or the agility of producers to cut output.
Other Voices: Who Else Should You Listen To?
If banks aren’t the sole arbiters of oil’s future, who else should Energy News Beat readers turn to? Let’s meet a few contenders with potentially sharper insights:
-
The U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)
The EIA, a government agency, offers data-driven forecasts that often rival banks in accuracy. In its April 2025 Short-Term Energy Outlook, the EIA projects Brent at $66 per barrel in 2025 and $59 in 2026, aligning closely with banks but with a slightly less dire tone. The EIA’s strength lies in its granular data on U.S. production, global inventories, and consumption trends. For instance, it expects U.S. shale growth to slow in 2026 as low prices curb drilling, which could tighten supply and lift prices—something banks might underweight. Investors should check EIA’s monthly reports for a balanced, less Wall Street-flavored view. -
Independent Analysts and Industry Insiders
Voices like Ole Hansen of Saxo Bank or John Paisie of Stratas Advisors often cut through the noise. Hansen, for example, has noted that geopolitical risks (e.g., Middle East tensions or stricter U.S. sanctions on Iran) could cap price declines, a factor banks sometimes downplay. Paisie suggested OPEC+ might delay production hikes until spring 2025 to avoid a first-quarter glut, a nuanced take that could keep prices above $60. These analysts, less tethered to corporate agendas, often spot tactical shifts banks miss. -
Oil Sands and Shale Operators
Don’t sleep on the folks in the trenches. Canadian oil sands producers like Cenovus and Suncor have weathered low prices before, maintaining dividends at $35 per barrel thanks to low-cost, long-life assets. In the U.S., shale giants like Diamondback Energy and Occidental Petroleum have signaled that $60 oil could force a drilling slowdown, potentially stabilizing prices. Their earnings calls and investor presentations offer real-time insights into how low prices affect operations, giving investors a ground-level view banks can’t match. -
OPEC and the International Energy Agency (IEA)
OPEC and the IEA often present contrasting views on demand. OPEC’s bullish 2025 forecast predicts 1.4 million bpd growth, while the IEA’s bearish outlook sees just 730,000 bpd, revised down due to trade tensions. Both have biases—OPEC wants higher prices, the IEA leans green—but their detailed supply-demand balances can help investors cross-check bank forecasts. The IEA’s monthly Oil Market Report, in particular, is a goldmine for data on non-OECD demand trends, like India’s rising fuel consumption. -
Commodity Traders and Hedge Funds
The folks betting real money—commodity traders and hedge funds—often have a keener sense of short-term price moves. Posts on X highlight traders’ skepticism of sub-$60 forecasts, with some pointing to tight Cushing inventories and potential supply disruptions from sanctions on Russia and Iran. While not always public, their sentiment (gleaned from platforms like X or Bloomberg Terminal) can signal where smart money is flowing.
The Investor’s Playbook: Navigating the $60 Forecast
So, what’s an oil and gas investor to do? The banks’ $60 forecast isn’t a death knell, but it’s not the whole story either. Here’s a strategy to stay sharp:
-
Diversify Your Sources: Don’t hang your hat on bank forecasts alone. Cross-reference with EIA data, IEA reports, and industry voices like shale operators or independent analysts. Each offers a piece of the puzzle—banks for macro trends, EIA for data, operators for operational realities, and analysts for tactical shifts.
-
Watch Geopolitical Wildcards: Banks often underplay sudden disruptions. Stricter U.S. sanctions on Iran or Russia, or a flare-up in the Middle East, could send prices spiking. Keep an eye on X for real-time sentiment from traders reacting to such events.
-
Focus on Resilient Assets: If prices dip below $60, favor companies with low breakeven costs. Canadian oil sands firms like Suncor can profit at $35 per barrel, while U.S. shale players with prime Permian acreage (e.g., Diamondback) can weather low prices better than high-cost peers.
-
Hedge Against Volatility: Consider ETFs like the United States Oil Fund (USO) for broad exposure or options strategies to hedge downside risk. If you’re bullish, look at undervalued mid-cap E&P firms that could rally if prices rebound.
-
Stay Liquid: Low prices could trigger M&A activity, as seen in the Permian’s consolidation wave. Cash-rich majors like ExxonMobil or Chevron might scoop up distressed assets, offering opportunities for nimble investors.
The Verdict: Banks Aren’t the Only Oracles
The banks’ $60 forecast for 2025 is a loud warning, backed by solid reasoning about supply gluts and weak demand. But their track record shows they’re not infallible, often lagging behind market shifts or missing black-swan events. For Energy News Beat readers, the smart move is to treat their predictions as one data point among many. The EIA’s data-driven outlook, independent analysts’ tactical insights, operators’ ground-level realities, and traders’ market bets all add depth to the picture.
As an investor, your edge lies in synthesizing these voices.
If OPEC+ delays production hikes, or if geopolitical risks flare, that $60 floor could hold or even climb. But if the banks are right, and supply swamps demand, you’ll want to be positioned in resilient, low-cost producers or hedged against a downturn. Either way, the oil market’s twists and turns demand a sharp eye and a steady hand.
One key point remains: oil demand has remained solid, and this is a critical point that the banks seem to have overlooked. If India continues its economic growth and outpaces China’s slowdown, the overall global market is poised to rise. The world is short over $4 trillion in oil and gas exploration to meet normal decline curves.
I have enjoyed my interviews and meetings with the team from Haynes and Boone LLP, and they are a good group of attorneys. However, when investing, it’s essential to check multiple sources, unless, of course, it’s Jim Cramer, in which case the “Jim Cramer Effect” kicks in and then do the exact opposite of what he recommends.
Stay tuned to Energy News Beat for the latest, and keep your portfolio ready for whatever 2025 throws your way.
Sources: Bloomberg, Haynes Boone LLP, EIA, IEA, Reuters, OilPrice.com, X posts
The post The $60 Oil Conundrum: Are Banks the Oracles of Oil Prices? appeared first on Energy News Beat.