Cross-Sector CFO · Board ◎ Open CEO Sentiment 13 April 2026 · review 7 May

The survey closed March 13. The decisions taken inside the gap are now operating baseline.

57% of 415 CEOs — representing 10% of global market cap — named macro as their top threat. They correctly identified the threat. Every number in that survey was produced before this signal environment existed.

The Signal Environment

Macro Threat

57%

of 415 CEOs, named before the blockade

Board Engagement

96%

more involved — 61% on strategy & governance

Planning < 1yr

50%

of planning time, up from 43% in 2025

Geo-Scenario Gap

27%

of long-horizon planners run geopolitical scenarios. Short-horizon: 12%.

Signal read

The problem was never awareness. It was translation. Not just from signal to cost line — from cost line to customer behaviour to revenue impact.

415 CEOs. Companies representing 10% of global market capitalisation. Surveyed between January 12 and March 13, 2026 by Oliver Wyman Forum and NYSE. The Hormuz blockade took effect today — Day 86. Brent at $105.63. CPI’s largest monthly move since June 2022.

The CFO whose automotive customers are deferring capex approvals does not see that in their own order book yet. The signal is in their customers’ planning cycles, not their own pipeline. That is the transmission path internal models miss.

Signal · Precedent · Window

Three readings of the same survey.

Active Signal

OWF/NYSE CEO Survey 2026 — closed 17 days before Hormuz.

415 CEOs, 10% of global market cap, fielded Jan 12 – Mar 13. 57% named macro as top threat. 96% reported increased board involvement — highest in strategy and governance (61%) and executive performance (35%). 50% of planning time now on sub-one-year horizons, up from 43% in 2025.

Precedent

Long-horizon planners already ran the scenarios.

Long-horizon planners are twice as likely to run geopolitical scenarios (27% vs 12%). They accepted that the environment is part of the forecast. The 73% who haven’t are carrying the same exposure with less visibility into it.

Preparation Window

The board is already building the question.

The board is not waiting to be briefed — 61% more engaged on strategy. The CFO who pre-empts the question with a signal-adjusted scenario owns the narrative. The one who waits explains the miss.

Four Numbers Before the Next Board Meeting

The threat level was named before the environment worsened. The board will re-rate it. The CFO who hasn’t re-rated first, loses the narrative.

57% — the threat level before the blockade existed. More than half of CEOs at companies representing 10% of global market cap named macro as their top threat in a world where Hormuz was still open. The current environment is materially worse. The threat level has not been re-rated. The board will re-rate it.

96% — boards more engaged, highest in strategy and governance. The board is not waiting to be briefed. 61% more engaged on strategy. The CFO who pre-empts the question with a signal-adjusted scenario owns the narrative. The one who waits explains the miss.

50% planning time on sub-one-year horizons — up from 43%. Compressed planning horizons create blind spots at exactly the moment the signal environment is expanding. The signals transmitting into Q3 are running now. The window to adjust assumptions before the board cycle closes is shorter than it looks.

Pre-committed Response

Before the next board meeting.

CFO — Before the Board Cycle Closes

Audit which macro assumptions underpin the current Q3 forecast. If they were set before March 13 — before the blockade, before CPI +3.3% monthly, before Brent peaked at $116 then retraced — they are stale either way.

Present the board with a signal-adjusted scenario alongside the current plan. Not as a revision. As a confidence interval.

Frame the delta clearly: Hormuz Day 86 vs Day 0, Brent $116 peak then $101, CPI monthly move of +3.3% vs baseline — quantify the exposure each creates.

Own the question the board is building toward: "how confident are you in the number given what has changed."

Window: before Q2 close

Board Committee — The Reframe

Acknowledge that pre-blockade macro assumptions cannot be left intact in the forecast book

Request a signal-adjusted scenario from the CFO — with named assumptions and confidence intervals

Review executive performance metrics set against the pre-blockade environment — calibrate to the new environment

Separate signal awareness (which executives clearly have) from signal translation to P&L (which most don’t)

Decision: this cycle

Before the board meeting

The CEO survey is the environment your Q3 forecast was approved in. It closed on 13 March.

Take the revision early, or take it under board questioning in Q3. The diagnostic reads your current assumptions against the live signal environment — and returns the delta.

Run the diagnostic →