Majors

Munetaka Murakami hit his 14th homer and Miguel Vargas also went deep as the Chicago White Sox beat the Angels 6-0 Monday night.

Murakami’s two-run blast in the fourth inning kept the Japanese rookie tied with New York Yankees slugger Aaron Judge for the major league lead in home runs. Murakami also hit his first double of the season in the sixth, singled and scored in the eighth, finishing three for four with two RBIs and three runs scored.

Davis Martin gave up five hits in seven shutout innings, with 10 strikeouts and no walks. He improved to 5-1 and lowered his ERA to 1.64. The right-hander escaped his only jam in the seventh, getting Josh Lowe to fly to deep center with runners on first and third.

Andrew Benintendi added four hits — all singles — and an RBI for the White Sox, who have won six of their last seven games.

Nolan Schanuel and Travis d’Arnaud had two hits apiece for the Angels, who have lost 13 of 15 and have the worst record in the majors at 13-23.

Angels starter José Soriano looked nothing like the ace who went 5-1 with an 0.84 ERA in his first seven starts and became the first Angel to win AL pitcher-of-the-month honors since Matt Shoemaker in August 2014.

Soriano, slowed by neck stiffness in his previous start, gave up a season-high five runs and eight hits in four innings, striking out five, walking three and needing 88 pitches to record 12 outs. The right-hander looked out of whack mechanically in the first, throwing nine of his first 11 pitches for balls and walking two. Run-scoring singles by Chase Meidroth and Benintendi gave Chicago a 2-0 lead.

Soriano escaped two-on, two-out jams in the second and third innings before being tagged for three runs in the fourth. Murakami followed Sam Antonacci’s single by clubbing an up-and-away 98-mph fastball an estimated 429 feet to center for a two-run homer. Vargas followed with a solo shot to right-center to make it 5-0.

Up next: RHP Erick Fedde (0-3, 3.24 ERA) will start for the White Sox on Tuesday night. LHP Sam Aldegheri (1-0, 5.40 ERA) is expected to start for the Angels.

The conflict involving Iran and the disruption of the Strait of Hormuz have shaken global energy markets. Supply constraints and extreme volatility have driven oil prices sharply higher, exposing a growing structural divide in how major oil companies operate across the Atlantic.

European majors profit from trading strength
Companies such as BP, Shell, and TotalEnergies have benefited from strong oil trading performance. Their global trading networks allow them to move crude and refined products across regions, taking advantage of price differences created by supply disruptions.

These firms trade volumes far exceeding their own production, turning volatility into profit. In the current crisis, trading has significantly boosted earnings, offsetting weaker performance in other segments.

Volatility creates both gains and exposure
The sharp rise in Brent crude prices and market instability has created lucrative arbitrage opportunities. Companies have rerouted fuel shipments across longer and unusual routes to capture higher margins.

However, these strategies come with risks. Trading at such scale requires large amounts of capital, and holding cargoes for extended periods increases financial exposure if market conditions shift.

Trading as a shock absorber
For European majors, trading divisions have acted as a buffer during the crisis. Losses from disrupted production or regional exposure have been partially offset by gains in trading, highlighting the strategic importance of these operations in volatile markets.

US majors rely on production strength
In contrast, Exxon Mobil and Chevron focus primarily on large scale oil and gas production. Their output significantly exceeds that of European rivals, giving them a strong advantage when prices rise.

While they have more limited trading operations, their upstream strength allows them to generate substantial cash flow in high price environments without relying heavily on market arbitrage.

Structural differences in strategy
The divergence reflects long term strategic choices. European companies invested more heavily in renewables and diversified energy portfolios, which limited growth in their upstream production. US firms, by contrast, maintained a strong focus on expanding oil and gas output.

As a result, European majors depend more on trading to drive returns, while US majors depend on production scale.

Analysis
The Iran war has highlighted a clear split in the global energy industry between trading focused and production focused business models. European majors have shown that strong trading capabilities can generate significant profits during periods of disruption, effectively turning volatility into an advantage.

However, this model is inherently unpredictable. Trading gains depend on market conditions and may not be sustainable if volatility declines. In contrast, the US model offers more stable returns tied directly to production levels and commodity prices.

In the long term, this divide could shape investor perceptions and valuations. If European companies continue to rely heavily on trading while lagging in production, the gap between them and US rivals may widen. The industry is increasingly defined by a fundamental question: whether it is more profitable to move oil around the world or to produce it at scale.

With information from Reuters.