Goldman Sachs analysts have examined over 1,000 social media posts by former President Donald Trump and uncovered insights relevant to energy markets, particularly regarding crude oil price expectations.
Their findings suggest that Trump consistently signals a preference for West Texas Intermediate (WTI) crude prices in the $40 to $50 per barrel range—levels that appear to align with his messaging cadence and political positioning.
Goldman’s commodities research team combed through posts on both Twitter and Truth Social, analyzing a 16-year span to better understand Trump’s sentiment around oil markets. Although energy-related content made up just over 1% of his posts, nearly 900 of them since 2009 touched on oil, energy production, or pricing—indicating a persistent focus on the sector throughout his political and public career.
The analysts observed that Trump’s commentary tends to intensify when WTI prices rise above $50 per barrel, with posts often calling for price relief or celebrating price declines. Conversely, when oil prices fall below $30, Trump has historically shifted tone, advocating for higher prices—typically in support of U.S. oil producers and energy independence.
This nuanced stance reflects a dual objective: keeping prices low enough to reduce inflationary pressure for consumers while high enough to sustain domestic energy production. Goldman notes that the average breakeven point for U.S. shale producers hovers around $51 per barrel, placing Trump’s comfort zone just below the sustainability threshold for a large segment of the domestic industry.
The analysts add that policymakers—Trump included—appear aware that when WTI prices fall into the low $60s, U.S. oil supply growth tends to decelerate, as producers begin to pull back capital expenditures and reduce output. While Trump’s public statements often support increased production, such as through his “drill, baby, drill” rhetoric, they also reflect political sensitivity to consumer-facing issues like gas prices and inflation.
At present, WTI crude is trading around $63 per barrel, a level notably above Trump’s historically inferred target range. Goldman Sachs forecasts a modest decline in prices over the next two years, projecting WTI to average $56 per barrel for the remainder of 2025 and $52 in 2026. The firm notes that this outlook aligns with Trump’s apparent long-standing preferences and could gain further traction if he resumes influence over energy policy.
Still, Goldman cautions that Trump’s ability to shape global oil production dynamics is likely to remain limited in the near term. While a potential second term might bring further regulatory easing, any substantial boost in U.S. production would take time to materialize due to infrastructure and capital investment lead times.
Trump’s posts have become a lens through which markets try to anticipate potential policy shifts, particularly as he remains a central figure in American politics and a likely contender in the upcoming election cycle. For RIAs and wealth managers, these signals are increasingly relevant—not only as political indicators but as inputs to commodity pricing models and inflation forecasts.
Oil market volatility in 2025 has been driven in part by geopolitical tensions, including Trump’s aggressive trade policy toward China and continued uncertainty around OPEC’s production strategy. While the recent trade agreement with China has buoyed prices—pushing WTI up roughly 9% over the past five sessions—oil remains down approximately 12% year to date.
This ongoing price compression highlights the tug-of-war between market fundamentals and macro-level sentiment. Trump’s vocal stance on energy and his desire to position the U.S. as an energy superpower continue to influence investor expectations and sector performance. His use of social media to broadcast those views has created a new dimension of headline risk—and opportunity—for market participants.
For financial advisors, these developments emphasize the importance of monitoring political rhetoric as part of a broader macroeconomic and asset allocation strategy. With energy prices tied closely to inflation expectations, consumer sentiment, and the Fed’s policy outlook, understanding the influence of political commentary on commodities may help advisors position portfolios more effectively amid evolving geopolitical risk.
Goldman’s report reinforces the view that Trump’s social media content is not just noise—it may offer meaningful insight into future policy direction, particularly in energy markets. While his posts represent a small fraction of the broader market narrative, they carry disproportionate weight given their potential to move markets and signal regulatory or policy shifts.
As the 2025–2026 election cycle intensifies and energy remains a core campaign issue, wealth managers should stay attuned to this intersection of political messaging and market dynamics. A Trump-led energy agenda would likely prioritize deregulation, increased domestic production, and low consumer prices—each of which carries implications for energy sector allocation, inflation hedging strategies, and commodity-linked assets.
Ultimately, Goldman’s research serves as a reminder that in today’s market environment, political signals—especially those amplified through social media—can offer early insights into commodity price trends and regulatory momentum. Advisors may consider incorporating such qualitative inputs alongside traditional economic indicators to inform energy exposure decisions and broader portfolio strategy.
