Why Iranian missiles have more frequently breached targets in Israel

The effectiveness of Iranian strikes on Israel has noticeably increased, and for the Israeli audience, it no longer appears as a mere technical detail of the war. J.P. Morgan, in a review dated April 6, citing JINSA, indicated that the hit rate of Iranian missiles on Israel increased from 3% in the first two weeks of the war to 27%. It also mentions the risk of interceptor shortages amid ongoing attacks, including more complex munitions to intercept.

On the same page, J.P. Morgan presents a chart on Iran’s attacks on Gulf countries since March 11, 2026, with the data source named as the Institute for the Study of War. The chart shows that with consistently high drone activity, the share of missile strikes is increasing by the end of March. For Israel, this is an important signal because such dynamics indicate not just continued pressure but a shift in the nature of the threat towards more heavy and destructive means of impact.

In other words, it’s not just about the number of launches anymore.

It’s about the fact that the adversary, despite strikes on its infrastructure, retains the ability to adapt, change tactics, and achieve more painful results.

What the new figures show

The increase from 3% to 27% — why this is an alarming threshold

The figure of 27% looks particularly dangerous in the Israeli context. If at the beginning of the war the interception system held back the bulk of threats, now even a limited increase in the share of successful strikes changes the overall picture. Each additional missile breakthrough is no longer just statistics but a risk to residential areas, infrastructure, industrial facilities, and critical nodes on which the country’s daily life depends. J.P. Morgan’s data in this sense sounds like a warning: even with a high overall interception level, the system wears out, and the adversary seeks ways to increase the cost of each new salvo.

It is particularly important that J.P. Morgan writes about 90%+ interception rates of missiles and drones by the forces of the US, Israel, and Gulf countries, but simultaneously warns of a possible shortage of interceptors. For Israel, this is a sensitive topic not only from a military but also from a political point of view. When the war drags on, it’s not just the quality of the missile defense that matters, but also its endurance, the pace of replenishing stocks, and the ability to withstand repeated waves of attacks.

This is where the most unpleasant part begins.

Even strong defense can lose its resilience if the war becomes a war of attrition.

Why the share of missile strikes is growing

According to the J.P. Morgan chart citing the Institute for the Study of War, from March 11 to the end of the month, there was a high level of drone use against Gulf countries, but the missile component of attacks was strengthening. For Israel, this means that Iran is likely not abandoning the combined pressure model but, on the contrary, trying to complicate defense by combining different types of threats. Drones can overload the system, divert resources, and create a background, while missiles carry a heavier destructive load and increase the chance of sensitive hits.

This transition is especially important for understanding the entire logic of the current war. Israel and its allies can destroy warehouses, production sites, and launch positions, but this does not automatically mean the collapse of the adversary’s strike potential. On the contrary, if Iran moves to a more calculated and flexible use of its remaining arsenal, each subsequent wave may be less massive but more dangerous in result.

Why Iran retains the ability to strike

Damaged facilities are being restored faster than expected

An additional alarming factor is that Iran, judging by recent reports, is restoring damaged missile bunkers and silos much faster than its adversaries expected. Reuters on March 27, citing sources familiar with US intelligence, reported that the US can confidently confirm the destruction of only about a third of Iran’s missile arsenal, while another third is likely damaged, destroyed, or buried under rubble. This in itself shows that the damage picture for Tehran is much less clear-cut than loud military statements might suggest.

Simultaneously, The Times of Israel, citing an American intelligence assessment, wrote that Iranian forces are clearing debris in underground missile bunkers and bringing them back into operation literally within hours after strikes. If this assessment is correct, then Israel is facing not just an adversary that suffers losses, but a system capable of quickly bringing part of the damaged infrastructure back into action.

This changes the entire meaning of previous successes.

A strike on a bunker no longer guarantees that this point has disappeared from the war for a long time.

The war is turning into a competition of adaptations

For the Israeli audience, one key conclusion is important here. The confrontation with Iran increasingly resembles less a linear scheme where one side consistently loses capabilities after a series of strikes. On the contrary, the events of recent weeks show that the conflict is entering a phase where the speed of adaptation plays a crucial role: who restores capacities faster, who better distributes munitions, who withstands the load on the missile defense system longer, and who uses even partially damaged arsenal more effectively.

Against this backdrop, the phrase НАновости — Новости Израиля | Nikk.Agency acquires not only editorial but also semantic weight in the material: for Israeli society today, it is important to see not just individual headlines about salvos and interceptions, but the overall picture of the war of endurance, where the increase in the percentage of hits may turn out to be more important than the total number of missiles launched.

What this means for Israel right now

The threat has become more technological and more resilient

If the hit rate has indeed increased from 3% to 27%, and damaged launch and underground facilities are being restored in a matter of hours, then Israel is dealing with an adversary that not only continues attacks but learns to make them more effective. In such a situation, public discussion can no longer be limited only to the number of interceptions. It is equally important to understand how long the defense can maintain the pace, how quickly interceptor stocks will be replenished, and what types of strikes Iran will focus on in the coming weeks.

For Israel, this is also a question of civil resilience. The higher the share of breakthroughs, the greater the pressure not only on the army but also on the economy, transport, energy, schools, hospitals, and the psychological resilience of society itself. When a missile more frequently reaches its target, not only military statistics change. The everyday reality of the country changes.

And that is why the new increase in the effectiveness of Iranian strikes cannot be considered a passing episode. It is a marker that the war is entering a more dangerous stage — a stage in which Israel has to think not only about the strength of the strike on the adversary but also about its own resilience over the long distance.