Odd Lots Podcast: How a Geopolitical Analyst Predicts the Outcome of War
Hosted by Joe Weisenthal and Tracy Alloway | Released on July 10, 2025

Introduction

In this episode of Bloomberg's Odd Lots podcast, hosts Joe Weisenthal and Tracy Alloway delve into the intricate world of geopolitical risk analysis with their guest, Andrew Bishop, Senior Partner and Global Head of Policy Research at Signum Global Advisors. The discussion centers around the methodologies and challenges involved in predicting the outcomes of geopolitical conflicts, with a particular focus on the recent Israel-Iran tensions and the broader implications for global markets.

Understanding Geopolitical Risk Analysis

[01:37] Tracy Alloway:
“Why don't you tell us? Okay, you explained what Sigma, what's your background? How do you develop an expertise in these areas?”

Andrew Bishop begins by outlining the foundation of Signum Global Advisors, explaining its origins and the blend of market instincts with deep political insights. He emphasizes the importance of rigorous analytical processes over mere predictions, drawing from his extensive experience at Eurasia Group and the World Economic Forum.

The Complexity of Assigning Probabilities

[06:06] Andrew Bishop:
“There are three main ways that I think the probabilities can be useful. The first is if you're drawing out scenario trees and you're assigning probabilities to various sub-events before getting to the total cumulative outcome.”

Bishop discusses the inherent difficulties in assigning probabilities to geopolitical events due to the scarcity of historical data and the uniqueness of each conflict. He critiques the simplistic 70-30 probability splits commonly used today, advocating for a more nuanced approach that considers multiple independent variables influencing outcomes.

[17:15] Joe Weisenthal:
“...you gave these odds. 20% preemptive Iranian capitulation, 45% Israeli mission accomplished, followed by Iranian capitulation, 25% chance US intervention and 10% Iranian nuclear breakout.”

Joe references a specific note from June 16th where Bishop assigned probabilities to various outcomes of the Israel-Iran conflict. Bishop reflects on his initial estimates, acknowledging an underestimation of US intervention probability, and discusses the importance of iterative learning and reassessment in geopolitical forecasting.

Client Utilization of Geopolitical Analysis

[09:52] Tracy Alloway:
“Why do I want to get this analysis?”

Bishop explains that Signum's primary clientele comprises financial investors and corporate entities, each utilizing the analysis differently. For investors, understanding geopolitical risks is crucial for navigating short-term market volatilities in niche sectors like oil and gas or the travel industry. He emphasizes that clients use Signum not just for predictions but to prepare for a range of possible scenarios, much like an F1 driver uses training tracks to be ready for any race conditions.

[13:45] Joe Weisenthal:
“Do you see anyone in your clients who are actually in the prediction markets looking for opportunity there yet?”

Bishop notes that while prediction markets are growing, they still lack sufficient liquidity and flexibility for Signum's clients to integrate their analyses effectively. He underscores the value of scenario-based planning over rigid prediction models.

Challenges in Geopolitical Forecasting

[22:25] Tracy Alloway:
“How do you take into account the unpredictability of anything can happen?”

Bishop addresses the immense challenges posed by the unpredictability of geopolitical events, especially under leadership figures like Donald Trump. He highlights the difficulty in framing realistic scenarios amid rapidly changing political landscapes and the limitations of tools like prediction markets in adapting to unexpected shifts.

[35:56] Joe Weisenthal:
“You think that China holds back on Russian access to drone materials...”

Bishop discusses the complexities in assessing military capabilities and alliances, emphasizing that while technical knowledge of weapon systems is essential, it is equally important to understand the motivations and decision-making processes of the involved nations.

Dealing with Unexpected Outcomes

[33:46] Tracy Alloway:
“Events didn't pan out quite the way you expected. What happens when you're just wrong about a particular prediction?”

Bishop candidly discusses the fallibility inherent in geopolitical forecasting. He explains that when predictions do not materialize as expected, it is crucial to analyze the reasons behind the inaccuracies to refine future models. He maintains that although not all predictions may be correct, the overarching analytical framework remains valuable.

[34:18] Andrew Bishop:
“There is no one rule that you can like, you know, to sort of rules them all right? There is no such thing. You've got to constantly be reassessing.”

This highlights the necessity of flexibility and continuous learning in geopolitical analysis, acknowledging that rigid adherence to outdated models can lead to flawed predictions.

Future Geopolitical Hotspots

[41:26] Andrew Bishop:
“What's the surprise thing that you think is not on anyone's radar right now, geopolitically, that you think we should be focusing more on?”

Bishop touches upon the potential for a Chinese blockade of Taiwan as a more imminent and underappreciated risk compared to full-scale invasion. He explains that such an action could be executed swiftly and with significant economic repercussions, particularly affecting global markets reliant on Taiwanese manufacturing.

Adapting to a Changing Geopolitical Landscape

[39:34] Andrew Bishop:
“The fact that so much stuff is changing so fast means that you have even less historical background or historical data...”

Bishop reflects on the increasing complexity and volatility of the geopolitical environment, noting that accelerated changes reduce the reliability of historical data in forecasting. He stresses the importance of developing adaptable analytical frameworks that can respond to rapid shifts in international relations and power dynamics.

Concluding Insights

The episode concludes with reflections on the limitations and necessities of geopolitical risk analysis. Bishop reiterates the importance of a methodical, flexible approach in understanding and preparing for the multifaceted outcomes of global conflicts. Hosts Joe Weisenthal and Tracy Alloway commend Bishop for his insightful contributions, highlighting the value of his expertise in navigating the uncertain terrains of geopolitical risks.

Notable Quotes

• Andrew Bishop [06:06]:
  “There is no one rule that you can like, you know, to sort of rules them all right? There is no such thing. You've got to constantly be reassessing.”

• Joe Weisenthal [17:15]:
  “...you gave these odds. 20% preemptive Iranian capitulation, 45% Israeli mission accomplished, followed by Iranian capitulation, 25% chance US intervention and 10% Iranian nuclear breakout.”

• Andrew Bishop [34:18]:
  “There is no one rule that you can like, you know, to sort of rules them all right? There is no such thing. You've got to constantly be reassessing.”

• Andrew Bishop [41:26]:
  “What's the surprise thing that you think is not on anyone's radar right now, geopolitically, that you think we should be focusing more on?”

Conclusion

This episode of Odd Lots offers a deep dive into the nuanced and often uncertain realm of geopolitical risk analysis. Through Andrew Bishop's expertise, listeners gain an appreciation for the complexities involved in forecasting conflict outcomes and the critical importance of adaptable analytical strategies in an increasingly volatile world.

For more detailed insights and discussions, visit Bloomberg Odd Lots where you can access all episodes, subscribe to the daily newsletter, and join the community on Discord.