The iPhone 18 Pro and Pro Max are coming in September, potentially with significantly higher prices. For months, rumors and leaks have been providing information on what to expect from the devices, and the picture is getting clearer as the launch window approaches. Here are the most significant upgrades reportedly coming to Apple’s next flagship lineup.

A Familiar Design With New Colors and Improved Durability

The iPhone 18 Pro and Pro Max are reportedly getting the same design on the back that Apple introduced with the iPhone 17 Pro. The camera plateau is here to stay, but Apple is reportedly equipping the models with several new color options. The most talked-about addition may be a new Dark Cherry shade that has been extensively leaked. Apart from it, reports also point to a light blue, a dark blue, and a silver colorway.

Durability is reportedly improving as well, with a new manufacturing process for the aluminum body expected to strengthen the iPhone’s corrosion resistance and make discoloration less likely — an issue some iPhone 17 Pro models reportedly suffered from.

An Almost 50% Smaller Dynamic Island

One of the most significant visual changes coming to this year’s Pro models involves a substantial reduction in the size of the Dynamic Island, the interactive cutout area on the front of the display. Rumor has it that the Dynamic Island could be around 50% smaller than what the element was in the iPhone 17 Pro, which should make the display more elegant and immersive.

According to leaked specifications, the Dynamic Island is said to be around 13.49 millimeters wide, compared to 20.76 millimeters wide on the iPhone 17 Pro. Apart from the visual change, the functionality of the Dynamic Island is reportedly staying the same as last year’s.

A New A20 Pro Chip Built on a 2nm Process

On the performance front, the iPhone 18 Pro Max and Pro are reportedly going to be powered by Apple’s next-generation 2nm chip, the A20 Pro. Significant increases in power and efficiency are expected thanks to the new 2nm manufacturing process, which would represent a meaningful step forward from the chip architecture used in the current generation.

Meanwhile, the A20 Pro is reportedly getting paired with the C2 modem, Apple’s second-generation connectivity chip, which is also rumored to bring satellite 5G capabilities. The phone is also reportedly featuring Apple’s N2 wireless networking chip with Wi-Fi 7 connectivity and Bluetooth 6, improvements that should boost AirDrop and Personal Hotspot performance, as well as download and upload speeds.

A Variable Aperture Camera, a First for iPhone

Perhaps the most technically significant camera upgrade involves a feature that has never before appeared on an iPhone. The main 48-megapixel camera of the iPhone 18 Pro Max and Pro may be gaining a variable aperture feature this year. A variable aperture would allow the camera to adjust the amount of light that enters the sensor based on lighting conditions and give users control over the depth of field for a DSLR-like blur in portrait photos.

Before this change, iPhone cameras have always come with a fixed aperture. This change could noticeably elevate the photo quality and overall look of images produced by the Pro-branded iPhone 18 models, bringing a level of optical control previously found primarily on dedicated cameras to Apple’s flagship smartphone line.

Siri AI and Expanded Apple Intelligence Features

On the software side, Apple has already begun rolling out one of its most significant updates in years, with the new iPhones expected to showcase the feature at launch. Apple unveiled Siri AI during WWDC 2026 not too long ago, and it’s coming with iOS 27. The long-anticipated generative AI Siri upgrade is finally arriving, with the assistant gaining serious AI capabilities including the ability to see what’s on a user’s screen, process natural language, and learn personal context. The upgraded Siri will also be able to take actions in apps on a user’s behalf.

A wide range of iOS 27 apps are also gaining Apple Intelligence integrations as part of the broader update. Image Playground is gaining new capabilities such as tackling more complex scenes and creating wallpaper backgrounds based on user prompts, while the Camera app is getting a brand-new Siri AI mode, along with two new features designed to elevate photographs: extend and reframe.

An Upgraded LTPO+ Display

Rounding out the major hardware changes, the iPhone 18 Pro and Pro Max are reportedly going to feature LTPO+ displays, which should ensure lower power consumption and higher refresh rates. Standard OLED screens use LTPS, or Low-Temperature Polycrystalline Silicon, for their backplane transistors, while LTPO panels use IGZO, or Indium Gallium Zinc Oxide.

The newer LTPO+ technology gives the phone finer control over the electrical current sent to each OLED pixel, allowing the device to adjust dynamically to on-screen content. There’s also reportedly going to be a new M16 material used for the displays of the two Pro-branded models, aimed at delivering greater color accuracy than previous generations.

What It All Means for Pricing

While Apple has not officially confirmed pricing details, the cumulative scope of this year’s upgrades — spanning a new chip architecture, a first-ever variable aperture camera system, an entirely overhauled Siri experience, and a significantly redesigned Dynamic Island — has fueled widespread speculation that the iPhone 18 Pro and Pro Max could carry a noticeably higher price tag than their predecessors when they launch this September.

With Apple historically unveiling its new iPhone lineup in September, the coming months are likely to bring additional leaks and more detailed specifications as the launch window draws closer. Given the breadth of changes reportedly in store — from the camera system’s first-ever variable aperture to the dramatically reduced Dynamic Island and the long-anticipated arrival of a true AI-powered Siri — this year’s Pro-branded iPhones appear positioned to represent one of the more substantial generational upgrades in recent years, assuming the current wave of rumors and leaked renders proves accurate once Apple makes its official announcement.

A retired FBI agent is raising new questions about the investigation into Nancy Guthrie’s disappearance, explaining why certain details could make the case especially difficult for law enforcement to solve if the abduction was tied to a cryptocurrency-motivated scheme rather than a more conventional crime.

Coffindaffer’s Latest Analysis

Jennifer Coffindaffer took to X to share her latest thoughts on the case, outlining several elements she believes would point to a sophisticated and deliberately calculated operation if her theory proves accurate. Coffindaffer outlined several elements that she believes would point to a complex operation, writing, “This attack was sophisticated enough to: Stump the FBI and LE for 4 months. Send ransom messages via media website in boxes that can’t be traced. Set up a Crypto Bitcoin account whose wallet holder can’t be identified. Hire a mope(s) to do the job who will stay silent.”

Questioning How Guthrie Was Targeted

Coffindaffer also raised pointed questions about how Guthrie, as an individual, would have come to be selected for this type of crime in the first place. “How was Nancy targeted if it was a Wrench by Proxy?” she wondered. “It just has to be someone familiar with [Tucson] and one of their most famous celebrities-Savannah. Someone they knew would pay, until mope messed up like mopes do.”

That line of reasoning suggests Coffindaffer believes whoever orchestrated the crime, if her theory holds, would have needed specific local knowledge of the Tucson area combined with an awareness of Savannah Guthrie’s public profile and presumed financial means — a combination that narrows, at least theoretically, the pool of people who might have had both the motive and the information necessary to plan such an operation.

A Hope for Resolution, Tempered by Realism

Despite the complexity she described, Coffindaffer expressed continued hope that the case will ultimately be solved, while acknowledging the specific theory she has raised would complicate that path considerably. “I just hope Nancy will be found and those responsible will face justice. If it is a Wrench by Proxy, the case will be much tougher to solve,” Coffindaffer added.

What a “Wrench Attack” Actually Means

Coffindaffer has previously discussed the possibility that Guthrie’s disappearance could involve a “wrench attack,” which involves “the use of physical force or intimidation to gain access to a victim’s cryptocurrency holdings,” according to blockchain analytics firm TRM Labs. The term has become an established piece of vocabulary within the cryptocurrency security industry, used to describe crimes in which physical coercion — rather than technical hacking — is used to force a victim or their associates to hand over digital currency holdings.

The “by proxy” variation of the theory that Coffindaffer has raised specifically would involve targeting a victim’s family member or associate as leverage, rather than the cryptocurrency holder directly — a scenario that would apply to Guthrie’s case given that any presumed digital asset wealth would more plausibly be tied to her daughter, Today co-anchor Savannah Guthrie, rather than to Nancy Guthrie herself.

Law Enforcement’s Response to the Theory

Although investigators have not said whether they believe Guthrie’s disappearance involved a “wrench attack,” Pima County Sheriff Chris Nanos said that he had “flagged it to the investigation team,” according to Fox News Digital’s Mike Ruiz. That acknowledgment from the sheriff represents one of the more direct, if still measured, responses from law enforcement to the cryptocurrency-related theory that has continued circulating in connection with the case.

The sheriff’s confirmation that the theory has at least been formally noted by investigators does not constitute an endorsement of the theory itself, nor does it indicate that detectives have shifted the overall direction of the investigation toward a cryptocurrency-focused motive. It does, however, suggest that the possibility has not been dismissed outright by the team leading the inquiry.

The Case So Far

Guthrie, 84, has been missing since Sunday, February 1. Investigators believe that she was abducted from her Arizona home in the middle of the night. Despite receiving thousands of tips — and obtaining video footage of a possible suspect on Guthrie’s front stoop — authorities have not publicly named a person of interest in the case.

That combination of an active, evidence-rich investigation that has nonetheless failed to produce a named suspect after more than four and a half months has fueled much of the ongoing public speculation surrounding the case, including the various theories Coffindaffer and other retired law enforcement professionals have continued to put forward in the absence of an official resolution.

A Pattern of Public Commentary From Retired Investigators

Coffindaffer’s latest remarks continue a broader pattern that has developed throughout the case, with multiple former law enforcement officials offering their own analysis and, at times, pointed criticism of how the investigation has been handled and communicated to the public. That ongoing public discourse reflects both the intense national interest in the case, given Savannah Guthrie’s profile as a national television anchor, and a degree of frustration among some retired investigators over what they perceive as a lack of transparency from the agencies leading the inquiry.

With no official suspect named and the case now stretching well past the four-month mark, the path forward remains uncertain. If Coffindaffer’s “wrench by proxy” theory does reflect the underlying motive behind Guthrie’s disappearance, her own assessment suggests investigators may be facing one of the more challenging categories of crime to solve, given the deliberate use of untraceable communication methods, anonymous cryptocurrency wallets, and intermediaries hired specifically to carry out the abduction while insulating those who ordered it from direct exposure.

Whether law enforcement ultimately confirms or rules out that theory, Coffindaffer’s continued public engagement with the case underscores how much remains unresolved — and how significantly the eventual explanation for Guthrie’s disappearance could shape both the difficulty of bringing those responsible to justice and the public’s understanding of what happened to her on the night she vanished from her Tucson home.

SpaceX said it will acquire Anysphere, the company behind the popular AI coding assistant Cursor, in a $60 billion deal that marks one of Elon Musk’s most aggressive moves yet into the enterprise artificial intelligence market. The announcement comes just days after SpaceX’s blockbuster Nasdaq debut, which valued the company at more than $2 trillion. Here are 10 reasons behind one of the largest startup acquisitions in history.

1. xAI’s coding tools were falling badly behind rivals

The most immediate driver behind the deal was a glaring weakness in Musk’s existing AI division. Musk has previously expressed frustration that xAI was not “built right the first time around” and with its subpar coding product, which lags behind popular coding tools such as Anthropic’s Claude Code and OpenAI’s Codex. The company’s most recent model, Grok 4.3, placed at number 33 on AI benchmarking startup Vals.AI’s proprietary vibe coding benchmark, well below older models from OpenAI, Anthropic, and Google.

2. xAI was in genuine crisis when the deal came together

Beyond the coding gap, xAI faced a broader leadership exodus that made an external acquisition more urgent. While SpaceX was rocketing toward an IPO, its AI arm, xAI, was struggling. By the end of March, all 11 co-founders who helped build xAI alongside Elon Musk had quit the company.

3. The deal had already been quietly in motion for months

The acquisition was not a snap decision but rather the exercise of an option negotiated earlier in the year. In April, SpaceX said it had obtained the right to acquire Cursor for $60 billion later this year. The transaction materializes an option SpaceX unveiled in April, which gave the aerospace-and-AI giant the choice to either buy the San Francisco-based startup for $60 billion or pay $10 billion to work with it through a partnership.

4. Musk had already been poaching Cursor’s talent

Months before the formal acquisition, Musk had begun siphoning resources directly from the startup. The Tesla CEO had been gradually siphoning resources away from Cursor, one of the first startups to go all-in on AI-generated coding. In March, Musk confirmed that he had hired two product and engineering leads away from Cursor.

5. Cursor’s revenue growth was simply too attractive to ignore

Cursor’s underlying business performance gave SpaceX a financially compelling target regardless of the broader strategic rationale. Cursor built a popular AI coding tool that helps software developers generate, edit and review code, and the company has experienced explosive growth since its founding in 2022. In November, Cursor said it crossed $1 billion in annualized revenue. According to more recent reporting, the AI startup’s latest annualized recurring revenue has since surpassed $2.6 billion.

6. The acquisition fits SpaceX’s broader vertical-integration strategy

In its IPO prospectus, SpaceX said it sees its compute deal with Cursor as a natural extension of its strategy to vertically integrate compute infrastructure, AI models, and applications. In its own regulatory filing, SpaceX said Cursor fits its strategy to vertically integrate “compute infrastructure, models, and applications” — positioning the purchase not as a side bet, but as a core piece of the company’s long-term technology stack.

7. Cursor’s developer data could directly improve Grok

Beyond the product itself, SpaceX is targeting the enormous trove of usage data Cursor generates from its developer base. “The depth of Cursor’s integration with a high-frequency coding workflow generates valuable developer interaction data, including coding generation prompts, iteration cycles, and software architecture decisions,” SpaceX said. “We expect that access to this data will enhance our model training and inference, including with respect to Grok.”

8. It supports Musk’s broader ambitions for autonomous, agentic AI

The deal also ties directly into Musk’s stated vision for a fully self-directed AI ecosystem capable of supporting SpaceX’s manufacturing operations. According to disclosures in SpaceX’s S-1 IPO prospectus, the company has outlined a strategy called Macrohard, aiming to build a next-generation, fully autonomous agentic AI ecosystem platform to facilitate the manufacturing, testing, and orbital docking of future Starships. The acquisition of Cursor will primarily help accelerate the construction of the Macrohard platform’s core, bypassing the need to develop underlying tools from scratch.

9. The all-stock structure made the deal financially efficient

The transaction’s structure allowed SpaceX to make an enormous acquisition without touching cash reserves, a dynamic analysts say was central to the deal’s logic. The $60 billion in Class A common stock that SpaceX has agreed to pay to acquire Cursor represented a 3.4% dilution at the aerospace and technology conglomerate’s IPO valuation. Under the agreement, Cursor common and preferred stock will convert into SpaceX Class A common stock, with the exact exchange ratio determined by the volume-weighted average closing price of SpaceX stock over the seven trading days prior to closing.

10. It positions SpaceX to compete directly against Anthropic and OpenAI

Ultimately, the acquisition gives SpaceX a recognizable, developer-favored product to compete head-on in one of the fastest-growing corners of the AI market. The Cursor deal could bolster SpaceX efforts to compete with rivals like Anthropic and OpenAI, which offer popular coding tools. If completed, the $60 billion purchase would give SpaceX one of the most recognizable AI coding products in the market, a developer-heavy customer base, and a direct weapon in its race against Anthropic and OpenAI.

A Joint Model Already in Development

Beyond the strategic rationale, SpaceX confirmed that work between the two companies was already well underway before the acquisition was even finalized. “For the past few months, SpaceXAI has been jointly training a model with Cursor, which will be released in Cursor and Grok Build soon,” SpaceX said in a post on X announcing the deal.

Cursor CEO Michael Truell welcomed the acquisition publicly, framing it as a natural next step for his company’s product ambitions. “Excited to partner with the SpaceX team to scale up Composer,” Truell said in a post on X, referring to his company’s AI model. “A meaningful step on our path to build the best place to code with AI.”

What Happens if the Deal Falls Through

The acquisition agreement also included specific financial protections in case the transaction does not ultimately close. If, for some reason, the deal is not consummated, SpaceX had agreed to pay Cursor a “termination fee” of $1.5 billion, and $8.5 billion in computing resources, according to its IPO filings — terms that underscore just how seriously both companies treated the binding nature of their original April agreement.

The deal is expected to close in the third quarter of 2026, subject to regulatory approvals, with Cursor becoming a wholly owned subsidiary of SpaceX once the transaction is finalized. Industry analysts have framed the acquisition as a signal that the broader AI coding tools market is consolidating rapidly, noting that GitHub Copilot has always been a Microsoft play, while Windsurf was acquired by OpenAI earlier this year — leaving Cursor as one of the last major independent players in the space before SpaceX’s purchase. With the deal expected to close within months, attention now turns to how quickly SpaceX can integrate Cursor’s technology and developer base into its broader Grok and Macrohard ambitions, and whether the acquisition meaningfully closes the coding-capability gap that helped trigger the deal in the first place.

Claude Guillemot, one of the five brothers who founded Ubisoft in 1986, has been killed in a plane crash in western France, the video game company confirmed. He was 69.

What Happened

On Friday, June 19, Guillemot was flying in a Cessna 421 twin-engine propeller aircraft that crashed in a field near the La Baule aerodrome in the Loire-Atlantique region of France. The circumstances of the crash are not entirely clear, but two fatalities were confirmed: Guillemot and a flight instructor from Rennes.

According to Ouest-France, the aircraft had departed from Rennes and crashed during its approach to the La Baule aerodrome, killing both passengers on board. The mayor of La Baule, Franck Louvrier, described the moments leading up to the crash. “It was a Cessna 421, a twin-engine propeller, with eight seats… The plane was on approach for the landing phase, when, according to witnesses, it made a turn and crashed,” Louvrier said.

Citing a source close to the investigation, one outlet reported that Guillemot was at the plane’s controls at the time of the crash.

A Delayed Identification Amid a Fire

The identification of the victims was complicated by the severity of the crash itself. Per reports, identification was delayed due to the nature of the crash, with the plane being ablaze when emergency services reached the crash site. According to one report, the aircraft burst into flames upon crashing, setting fire to several football fields’ worth of vegetation.

The scale of the emergency response reflected the severity of the incident. Emergency services launched a major response, deploying 63 firefighters and 29 specialized vehicles to the crash site. One report noted that 60 firefighters and 30 ambulances were mobilized in an attempt to tackle the blaze and search for a potential third victim, although fire and rescue officials stated that the search proved to be “futile.”

Guillemot’s family was informed of the tragic news the evening of the crash, several hours after it occurred.

Guillemot Was the Plane’s Owner

It was explained that Guillemot was the owner of the plane that crashed, and that he was on board with a flight instructor, who also died in the crash. Guillemot was also reported to be a member of the La Baule flying club.

According to multiple reports, Guillemot had been expected in La Baule that weekend for a gathering of more than 100 aircraft, an aviation enthusiasts’ event he was traveling to attend at the time of the crash.

An Investigation Now Underway

French authorities and aviation investigators have opened an inquiry to determine the cause of the crash. As of the most recent reporting, the precise cause of the accident has not been officially determined.

A Tribute From Ubisoft

The company Guillemot helped found nearly four decades ago issued a formal statement confirming his death. “Ubisoft has learned with profound sadness of the death of Claude Guillemot, co-founder of the Group and Chairman of Guillemot Corporation, in an accident,” the company said in a statement. “Our thoughts are with his family and loved ones during this difficult time,” Ubisoft added, noting that “no further communication will be made at this stage.”

Flags Lowered in Tribute

In a further sign of mourning tied to the crash, flags were flown at half-mast at the La Baule aerodrome on June 20, as a tribute to both victims of the accident.

Guillemot’s Role at Ubisoft

Claude was one of five brothers who co-founded Ubisoft in 1986. He started the company alongside Christian, Gérard, Michel, and Yves Guillemot. In company documentation, Ubisoft described Claude’s role: he sat on Ubisoft’s Board and served as Executive Vice-President in charge of operations. “He provides entrepreneurial spirit to the Ubisoft Board, as well as his international experience of Asia, where he lived, and his in-depth knowledge of gaming technologies for PCs, consoles and accessories,” the company’s documentation stated.

At the time of his passing, Claude Guillemot was also the Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Guillemot Corporation, the family-founded company specializing in audio and gaming hardware that predated Ubisoft’s creation.

The Origins of the Guillemot Brothers’ Business Empire

The path that led the five Guillemot brothers to found one of the world’s largest video game publishers began in an entirely different industry. In the early 1980s, the Guillemot family ran a successful agricultural supply business in France’s Brittany region. However, as the five brothers — Claude, Christian, Gérard, Michel, and Yves — returned home from university with business degrees, they sought to diversify into the burgeoning electronics market.

Claude initially experimented with selling audio CDs, but the brothers quickly recognized a much more lucrative frontier in the rapidly expanding home computing market. Realizing that importing hardware and software from the UK and U.S. was incredibly expensive for French consumers, they pooled their resources and established Guillemot Informatique, a mail-order business dedicated to selling affordable computer software and hardware components. By cutting out traditional middlemen, the brothers quickly turned their regional startup into a national success, setting the stage for their eventual leap into video game development and the creation of Ubisoft.

A Company Built on Major Gaming Franchises

In the decades since its inception, Ubisoft has been responsible for numerous hit franchises, including Rayman, Assassin’s Creed, Far Cry, and Anno. To gamers, Ubisoft CEO Yves Guillemot is perhaps the best-known member of the Guillemot family, but Claude played a vital role in the company’s success throughout its history, overseeing operational functions that helped the publisher grow into one of the largest names in the global video game industry.

With the investigation into the cause of the crash still underway, French aviation authorities are expected to provide further details in the coming days and weeks as the inquiry progresses. Ubisoft has indicated it does not plan further public statements regarding Guillemot’s death at this stage, leaving the company’s earlier tribute as its primary public acknowledgment of the loss of one of its five founding brothers, whose work helped build the foundation of one of the gaming industry’s most influential publishers.

This article was written by

Follow

Analyst’s Disclosure: I/we have a beneficial long position in the shares of AMZN, GOOGL, META either through stock ownership, options, or other derivatives. I wrote this article myself, and it expresses my own opinions. I am not receiving compensation for it (other than from Seeking Alpha). I have no business relationship with any company whose stock is mentioned in this article.

Seeking Alpha’s Disclosure: Past performance is no guarantee of future results. No recommendation or advice is being given as to whether any investment is suitable for a particular investor. Any views or opinions expressed above may not reflect those of Seeking Alpha as a whole. Seeking Alpha is not a licensed securities dealer, broker or US investment adviser or investment bank. Our analysts are third party authors that include both professional investors and individual investors who may not be licensed or certified by any institute or regulatory body.

This article was written by

Follow

Analyst’s Disclosure: I/we have a beneficial long position in the shares of WFC.PR.L either through stock ownership, options, or other derivatives. I wrote this article myself, and it expresses my own opinions. I am not receiving compensation for it (other than from Seeking Alpha). I have no business relationship with any company whose stock is mentioned in this article.

I also have a long position in WFC’s common stock.

Seeking Alpha’s Disclosure: Past performance is no guarantee of future results. No recommendation or advice is being given as to whether any investment is suitable for a particular investor. Any views or opinions expressed above may not reflect those of Seeking Alpha as a whole. Seeking Alpha is not a licensed securities dealer, broker or US investment adviser or investment bank. Our analysts are third party authors that include both professional investors and individual investors who may not be licensed or certified by any institute or regulatory body.

WASHINGTON — The national average for a gallon of regular gasoline stood at $3.9510 as of Saturday, June 20, according to AAA, marking a slight pullback from the conflict-driven highs seen earlier this spring but leaving drivers still paying significantly more than they did a year ago.

A Sharp Climb Since February

The current price reflects the lingering effects of months of volatility tied to the conflict between the U.S., Israel, and Iran, which sent crude oil prices soaring and disrupted the Strait of Hormuz, one of the world’s most critical oil shipping routes. The national average for a gallon of regular gasoline went up 10 cents from one week and one dollar since the prior month at one point during the conflict, with prices climbing from $2.98 on February 26 to roughly $3.98 by late March. The national average could reach $4 a gallon in the coming days for the first time since August 2022, AAA had warned at the time — a threshold the national average ultimately did cross in early April.

Gas prices subsequently peaked even higher as the conflict intensified. Gas prices were up roughly 54% higher than they were on February 26, 2026, when the average sat at $2.96, with prices peaking at $4.55 per gallon on May 21, 2026, before beginning their more recent gradual decline.

Year-Over-Year Increases Across Nearly Every State

The broader pattern of rising gas prices has affected nearly the entire country over the past 12 months, though the severity of those increases has varied dramatically from state to state. Average gas prices increased by double digits in every state except one between June 16, 2025, and June 16, 2026. The average gas price increased the most in New Hampshire, rising 41.9% from $2.91 to $4.13 per gallon, followed by New York and Vermont, both up 39.3%, where prices rose from $3.11 and $3.07 to $4.34 and $4.28, respectively.

California also posted a substantial year-over-year increase, with prices rising 22.7% from $4.66 to $5.71, followed by Maryland, where prices rose 24.7% from $3.06 to $3.82.

Indiana Stands Out as the Exception

Amid the broad nationwide trend of rising prices, one state has bucked the pattern significantly. Average gas prices increased the least in Indiana between June 16, 2025, and June 16, 2026, with prices there rising just 6.4%, from $3.16 to $3.36 per gallon — by far the smallest year-over-year increase recorded anywhere in the country.

Where Gas Is Most and Least Expensive Right Now

As of June 16, 2026, the highest average gas price nationwide was in California at $5.71 per gallon, followed by Hawaii at $5.58 and Washington at $5.49. Four states had average gas prices above $5.00 per gallon.

At the other end of the spectrum, Indiana had the lowest average gas price at $3.36 per gallon, followed by Texas at $3.50 and Oklahoma at $3.53 — illustrating the wide geographic disparity that continues to define gasoline pricing across the country even amid a broadly elevated national average.

The Role of the Strait of Hormuz

Much of the volatility behind this year’s gas price swings traces directly back to disruptions in one of the world’s most important oil shipping corridors. Roughly 20% of the world’s daily oil supply passes through the Strait of Hormuz, a narrow waterway between Iran and Oman. When shipping through the strait is threatened or disrupted, global oil traders price in the risk immediately, even before any physical shortage appears. Since crude oil is priced on a global market, a disruption anywhere impacts prices everywhere — a dynamic that played out repeatedly throughout the conflict as fighting periodically closed or threatened to close the strait.

Demand Factors Compounding the Price Pressure

Beyond the geopolitical disruption, ordinary seasonal demand patterns have also contributed to elevated prices throughout the year. Gasoline demand increased during the spring as the driving season ramped up, with the Energy Information Administration reporting gasoline demand climbing from 8.72 million barrels per day to 8.92 million at one point, even as total domestic gasoline supply simultaneously decreased — a combination that tends to put further upward pressure on pump prices regardless of crude oil costs alone.

How This Compares to Recent History

The current $3.95 national average places this year’s gas prices well above the levels drivers experienced for most of the prior decade. Over the past eight years, the price of gas has averaged $3.04 per gallon, roughly a dollar less expensive than the current national average. The most expensive weekly national average recorded since 2018 was $4.99 per gallon, set the week of June 16, 2022, while the cheapest weekly national average over that same period was $1.84 per gallon, recorded on April 16, 2020, during the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic when demand collapsed.

Tips for Drivers Looking to Save

For drivers looking to minimize the impact of currently elevated prices, several practical strategies remain available. Apps and websites like AAA, GasBuddy, and Google Maps show real-time prices at stations in a given area, allowing drivers to compare costs before filling up. Membership warehouses like Costco and Sam’s Club often have the lowest prices in a given area but require a membership, while some credit cards also offer bonus rewards on gas purchases, which can effectively reduce the price per gallon for everyday purchases.

With the national average now sitting just below the $4 mark after peaking above $4.50 in May, the trajectory of gas prices in the coming weeks will likely depend heavily on the durability of the recent ceasefire arrangements between the U.S. and Iran and the consistency of oil tanker traffic through the Strait of Hormuz. Should that de-escalation hold and shipping continue normalizing through the strait, drivers may see further gradual relief at the pump in the weeks ahead. However, given the scale of the price swings already seen this year — from below $3 in February to above $4.50 in May — continued volatility remains a real possibility depending on how the broader geopolitical and seasonal demand picture evolves through the remainder of the summer driving season.