Small-Cap Defense Stocks: Hidden Gems in Times of Global Uncertainty

Key Points:
– Small-cap defense companies operate in specialized sectors with higher agility and acquisition potential compared to mega-cap contractors
– Cybersecurity, drone systems, and advanced materials offer the strongest growth opportunities in current geopolitical climate
– Market volatility creates entry opportunities before institutional recognition drives valuations higher

While major defense contractors like Lockheed Martin and Northrop Grumman capture headlines during geopolitical tensions, astute small-cap investors should turn their attention to the lesser-known defense players positioned to benefit from increased military spending and technological innovation. Small-cap defense companies often operate in specialized niches that make them indispensable to larger prime contractors and government agencies, and unlike their mega-cap counterparts, these firms can pivot quickly to emerging threats and technologies, making them attractive acquisition targets or compelling long-term growth stories.

The current geopolitical climate, highlighted by recent Middle East tensions and ongoing global conflicts, has created a sustained tailwind for defense spending. President Trump’s pledge of a $1 trillion defense budget, while potentially falling short in fiscal 2026, signals a multi-year commitment to military modernization that extends far beyond traditional weapons systems. This environment particularly benefits small-cap companies specializing in cybersecurity and electronic warfare, where firms focusing on cyber defense, electronic countermeasures, and signal intelligence are experiencing unprecedented demand. These companies often possess proprietary technologies that are difficult to replicate and command premium margins, creating substantial competitive advantages.

The drone revolution presents another compelling opportunity, extending beyond consumer applications into military reconnaissance, logistics, and combat operations. Small-cap manufacturers of specialized UAV components, software, and support systems are capturing market share from traditional aerospace giants, while companies developing next-generation materials for armor, stealth applications, and extreme environment operations often fly under the radar while generating substantial returns for early investors.

When evaluating small-cap defense opportunities, successful investors focus on companies with government contract diversification across multiple agencies and international allies to reduce single-customer risk. The most attractive investments typically feature proprietary technology through patents and specialized expertise that create competitive moats justifying premium valuations. Experienced management teams with deep defense industry connections and security clearances consistently accelerate contract wins, while financial discipline demonstrated through strong balance sheets and consistent cash flow generation proves crucial despite the lumpy nature of contract timing.

Small-cap defense investing requires careful risk assessment, as government budget cycles, security clearance requirements, and regulatory compliance create unique challenges. However, companies that successfully navigate these hurdles often enjoy sustained competitive advantages and multi-year revenue visibility that reward patient investors. The current environment of elevated geopolitical tensions, combined with technological disruption in warfare, creates an ideal backdrop for small-cap defense investments. While large-cap names grab immediate attention during crisis periods, the real long-term value creation often occurs in the innovative small companies that power the next generation of military capabilities. Smart investors should use market volatility as an opportunity to build positions in quality small-cap defense names before institutional recognition drives valuations higher.

Middle East Tensions Move the Global Markets

The escalating conflict between Israel and Hamas has sent shockwaves around the world, with major implications for global financial markets. This past weekend, Hamas militants launched a deadly attack in Israel, killing over 700 people. Israel has retaliated with airstrikes in Gaza and a blockade, leading to rising casualties on both sides. As the violence continues, here is how the clashes could impact the stock market and oil prices.

Stocks Tumble Over 2%

Major US stock indexes fell sharply on Monday in early trading, with the Dow Jones Industrial Average dropping over 700 points, or 2.1%. The S&P 500 declined 2.2% while the Nasdaq Composite sank 2.5%. The declines came amid a broader sell-off as investors fled to safe haven assets like bonds, but stocks trimmed losses as the day progressed.

By early afternoon, the Dow Jones Industrial Average was down just 0.7% after falling over 700 points earlier. The S&P and Nasdaq posted similar reversals after opening sharply lower.

Energy and defense sector stocks bucked the downward trend, rising on expectations of higher oil prices and military spending. But the prospect of further violence dragged down shares of transportation, tourism, and other cyclical firms that benefit from economic growth. Stock markets in Europe and Asia also posted sizable losses.

Prolonged Instability Adds Downside Risks

While markets often rebound after initial geopolitical shocks, an extended conflict between Israel and Hamas could lead to a deeper, sustained selloff. Investors fear that rising tensions in the Middle East could upend the post-pandemic economic recovery. Supply chains already facing shortages and logistical bottlenecks could worsen if violence escalates. US fiscal spending could also spike higher if military involvement grows.

Surging oil prices feeding into already high inflation may spur the Federal Reserve to tighten policy faster. This risks hampering consumer spending and growth. Elevated uncertainty tends to erode business confidence and curb capital expenditures as well. From an earnings perspective, prolonged fighting dents bottom lines of various multinationals operating in the region. The potential economic fallout from persistent Middle East unrest weighs heavily on investors.

Oil Jumps Over 4%

Brent crude oil surged above $110 per barrel, gaining over 4% on Monday before paring some gains. West Texas Intermediate also vaulted over 4% to above $86 per barrel. The jump in oil prices came amid worries that supplies from the Middle East could be disrupted if violence spreads.

The Middle East accounts for about one-third of global oil output. While Israel is not a major producer, heightened regional tensions tend to lift crude prices. Oil markets fear that unrest could spill over into other parts of the region or lead oil producers to curb supply.

Prolonged Supply Issues

If the Israel-Hamas conflict draws in more countries or persists in disrupting regional stability, crude prices could head even higher. Any supply chain troubles that keep oil from reaching end markets will feed into rising inflation. High energy costs are already squeezing consumers and corporations worldwide.

Organizations like OPEC could decide to take advantage of conflict-driven oil spikes by reducing output further. Constraints on Middle East oil transit and infrastructure damage could also support higher prices. From an economic perspective, pricier crude weighs on growth by driving up business costs and crimping consumer purchasing power. Prolonged oil supply problems due to Middle East unrest would prove corrosive for the global economy.

Hope for Swift Resolution

With oil surging and equities declining, investors hope the clashes between Israel and Hamas wind down rapidly. Markets are likely to remain choppy and risks skewed to the downside in the interim. But a quick de-escalation and return to stability could spark a relief rally.

Energy and defense sectors may give back some gains while cyclical segments would likely rebound. Still, the massive human toll and damage already incurred will weigh on regional economic potential for years to come. The attacks also shattered a delicate effort to broker ties between Israel and Saudi Arabia. Hopes for a durable resolution between Israelis and Palestinians have once again been dashed. The economic impacts already felt across global markets are only a glimpse of the long-term consequences of deepening conflict.

Will the Dollar and Securities Markets Sink When the War Ends?

Image Credit: Andre Furtado

The Story of War and Peace in the Currency Markets

There is a story of war and peace in the contemporary currency markets. It has a main plot and many subplots. As yet, the story is without end. That may come sooner than many now expect.

The narrator today has a more challenging job than the teller of the story about neutral, Entente, and Central Power currencies during World War I. (See Brown, Brendan “Monetary Chaos in Europe” chapter 2 [Routledge, 2011].)

Today’s Russia war (whether the military conflict in Ukraine or the EU/US-Russia economic war) is not so all-pervasive in global economic and monetary affairs, though it is doubtless prominent. The monetary setting of the story today is much more nuanced than in World War I when the prevailing expectation was that peace would mark the start of a journey where key currencies eventually returned to their prewar gold parities.

In the 1914–18 conflict, any sudden news of a possible end to the conflict—as with the peace notes of President Woodrow Wilson in December 1916—would cause a sharp fall of the neutral currencies (Swiss franc, Dutch guilder, Spanish peseta), a big rise in the German mark and Austrian-Hungarian crown, and lesser rises in sterling and the French franc. Today, in principle, a sudden emergence of peace diplomacy would most plausibly send the euro and British pound higher on the one hand and the Canadian dollar, US dollar, and Swiss franc lower on the other hand.

Mutual exhaustion and military stalemate are a combination from which surprise diplomatic moves to end war can emerge. These circumstances apply today.

Ukraine is falling into an economic abyss—much of its infrastructure reportedly destroyed and its government is resorting to the money printing press to pay its soldiers (see Kenneth Rogoff et al., “Macroeconomic Policies for Wartime Ukraine,” Center for Economic and Policy Research, August 12, 2022). General economic aid from Western donors (as against military aid) is running far short of promises. All these pictures of Russian munitions stores on fire may or may not have excited some potential donors, but they have not heralded any breakthrough.

The human toll—both amongst military personnel and civilians—fans Moscow propaganda that the US and UK are willing to conduct their proxy war against Russia down to the life of the last Ukrainian soldier.

Meanwhile there are these presumably leaked stories in the Washington Post about how President Volodymyr Zelensky betrayed the Ukrainian people by not sharing with them in late 2021 and early 2022 the US intelligence alerts about a looming Russian invasion. According to the stories, many Ukrainians resent that they were not warned by their government and do not accept its shocking excuses (for example, to prevent a flight of capital out of the country).

Is all this preparing ground for a possible power shift in Kiev that might favor an early diplomatic solution even in time for President Joe Biden to claim credit ahead of the midterms? Western Europe will be spared some pain this winter if the initial ceasefire agreement includes a provision that Moscow desist from turning off the gas pipelines.

The purpose here is not to predict the war’s outcome but to describe a peace scenario that is within the mainstream and to map out how the rising likelihood of its realization would influence currency markets.

The main channel of influence on currencies would be the course of the EU/US-Russia economic war. A ceasefire would excite expectations of big relief to the natural gas shortage in Western Europe.

Prices there for natural gas would plunge. In turn, that would lift consumer and business spirits, now depressed by feared astronomic gas bills and even gas rationing this winter. Massive programs to relieve fuel poverty, financed by monetary inflation, would stop in their tracks. The European Central Bank (ECB) could move resolutely to tighten monetary conditions as the depression fears faded.

We could well imagine that the peace scenario would mean the European economies in 2023 would rebound from a winter downturn. That would coincide with the US economy sinking into recession as the “Powell disinflation” works its way through—including continued bubble bursting in the tech space and residential construction sector plus a possible private equity bust.

A big rise of the euro under the peace scenario, though likely, is not a slam-dunk proposition. Russia might delay turning the gas pipelines back on until there is an assurance about its central bank’s frozen deposits in Western Europe. There has been chatter from the top of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) down that a reparations commission would sequester these.

More broadly, it could be that most European households are not cutting back their spending to the extent assumed in the consensus economic forecasts. Many individuals may have never believed that the high natural gas prices would persist beyond this winter. Then they faced, in effect, a transitory rather than permanent tax rise. Economic theory suggests that such transitory taxes, paid in this case to North American natural gas producers, have much less impact than permanent ones on spending.

There are still the deep ailments of the euro. How can the ECB ever normalize monetary conditions when so much of the monetary base is backed by loans and credits to weak sovereigns and banks (see Brendan Brown, “ECB’s Long Journey into Currency Collapse Just Got a Lot Shorter,” Mises Wire, July 23, 2022)?

In principle, the US dollar, and even more so the Canadian dollar, would lose from peace as they have gained from war. Both have obtained fuel from the boom in their issuing country’s energy sector. In neither country has there been aggregate real income loss due to the economic war—in fact, there has been a gain in the case of Canada. A further positive for the US dollar has been the boom in the US armaments sector—and this should continue beyond a ceasefire.

Peace will not deflect Europe from seeking to diversify its energy supplies away from Russia and to North American gas and to renewables. But we can imagine that in the long-run, Germany could have a comparative advantage in the renewable space; and North America could lose potential sales outside Europe to Russian gas at discounted prices. Russia is widely expected to prioritize a vamped-up construction program for LNG (liquid natural gas) terminals. These will enable the export of its natural gas to world markets.

Bottom line: peace is likely to be a negative for the US dollar. But transcending this influence is the huge issue of how and when US monetary inflation regains virulence.

About the Author:

Brendan Brown is a founding partner of Macro Hedge Advisors (www.macrohedgeadvisors.com) and senior fellow at Hudson Institute. He is an international monetary and financial economist, consultant, and author, his roles have included Head of Economic Research at Mitsubishi UFJ Financial Group and is also a Senior Fellow of the Mises Institute. Brendan authored Europe’s Century of Crises under Dollar Hegemony: A Dialogue on the Global Tyranny of Unsound Money with Philippe Simonnot.

The article was republished with permission from The Mises Institute. The original version can be found here.