<p>作者：Naeem Aslam</p>
<p>如果像黄金和白银这样的 “安全” 投资在一天之内崩溃，投资者需要重新考虑他们的投资组合对冲策略。</p>
<p>这是一个买入机会吗？这是错误的问题。</p>
<p>对于许多投资者视为保护的资产来说，周五黄金和白银的快速崩溃令人不安。</p>
<p>立即的本能是问出了什么问题——但这忽略了要点。这次抛售的真正教训不是关于方向或估值，而是关于流动性——以及当过多资本试图同时退出同一 “安全” 交易时会发生什么。</p>
<p>这一波动幅度超出了许多人的想象。黄金（GC00）和白银（SI00）的急剧回调抹去了估计 7.4 万亿美元的市场总值，基于地面供应和现货价格。</p>
<p>黄金从 5598 美元的峰值下跌 9%，白银从 121 美元的峰值下跌 27%——显然是在宣布凯文·沃什（Kevin Warsh）作为特朗普总统选择的美联储主席后——显示这不仅仅是情绪的变化。这是全球流动性的突然收缩——直接影响到被广泛视为实物价值储存的资产。</p>
<p>这不是一次基本面的冲击。通胀数据并没有突然改变。政策预期也没有在一夜之间逆转。失败的是对被广泛视为防御性资产的假设，即在压力下它们会保持流动性。</p>
<p>阅读：凯文·沃什并不是投资者认为的那样——你如何从他们的错误中获利。</p>
<p>当安全资产变成拥挤的出口时</p>
<p>黄金和白银作为对冲工具被大量持有。这种持有创造了一种安全的错觉——并不是因为价格不能下跌，而是因为投资者假设流动性总是可用的。</p>
<p>当波动性激增时，这种假设崩溃了。流动性首先在持仓最拥挤的地方枯竭。抛售加速并不是因为信念崩溃，而是因为风险限制、保证金要求和波动控制迫使投资者减少敞口。</p>
<p>这种动态解释了为什么这次抛售感觉更像是机械而非情绪化。它也解释了为什么白银的跌幅远远超过黄金。</p>
<p>白银并没有失败——它放大了压力。</p>
<p>白银处于对冲、投机和杠杆的交汇点。它的市场更为稀薄，持仓更为激进，波动性结构性更高。当流动性收紧时，白银不仅仅是跟随黄金——它放大了这一波动。</p>
<p>黄金揭示了持仓压力。白银揭示了流动性压力。</p>
<p>这种区别对试图理解刚刚发生了什么以及尚未解决的事情的投资者来说很重要。</p>
<p>阅读：特朗普提名凯文·沃什担任美联储主席的蜜月期？短暂的——然后推向了紧要关头。</p>
<p>为什么实物购买并不能抵消抛售</p>
<p>关于买家涌入实物市场的报道，包括在迪拜等地，是真实的——而且它们很重要。它们表明，当波动性迫使价格下跌时，价格敏感的需求会迅速出现。</p>
<p>但实物购买回答的是与金融抛售不同的问题。实物需求可以随着时间的推移稳定价格；流动性压力决定了短期内的路径。</p>
<p>这就是许多投资者出错的地方。看到实物积累并得出抛售 “结束” 的结论混淆了两种截然不同的力量。实物买家对价格水平做出反应。金融市场则对波动性、杠杆和风险约束做出反应。这两者并不在同一个时间框架内运作。</p>
<p>投资者在剧烈抛售后犯的错误</p>
<p>问题不是买什么，而是你是什么样的买家？</p>
<p>在这样的波动之后，讨论很快转向下跌是否代表买入机会。这是错误的起点。</p>
<p>更有用的问题不是买什么，而是你是什么样的买家？</p>
<p>价格敏感的买家——通常是长期或实物持有者——可以以价值和积累的方式思考。流动性敏感的持有者——那些通过期货、期权或高度交易的工具暴露的投资者——则受波动性和风险控制的支配，而不是信念。</p>
<p>将两者混淆是投资者最终在不稳定中买入而非机会的原因。</p>
<p>真正的教训：多样化你的对冲方式，而不仅仅是你用什么对冲。</p>
<p>在压力市场中，流动性——而非逻辑——决定价格。</p>
<p>这一事件的更深层次启示令人不安但必要。许多投资组合按资产类别进行多样化，但并未按流动性行为进行多样化。当压力到来时，所谓不同的对冲可能会同时将投资者引导到同一出口。</p>
<p>这就是数万亿美元如何从旨在保护资本的资产中消失的原因。</p>
<p>这并不否定黄金或白银作为长期对冲工具的有效性。它确实挑战了安全仅仅是拥有正确资产的假设。在压力市场中，流动性——而非逻辑——决定价格。</p>
<p>接下来要关注什么</p>
<p>“全清” 信号不是价格是否反弹，而是波动性是否压缩。在此之前，流动性仍然脆弱。实物需求可能会减缓下跌，但无法阻止因强制重新定位而导致的剧烈波动。</p>
<p>贵金属的抛售并不是对其角色的拒绝。这是一次压力测试——它揭示了即使是安全资产在每个人同时依赖时也会变得不稳定。</p>
<p>Naeem Aslam 是伦敦 Zaye Capital Markets 的首席投资官。</p>
<p>更多：白银遭遇 46 年来最大跌幅，“每个人都在急于逃离”。</p>
<p>另请阅读：特朗普提名凯文·沃什担任美联储主席并不足以安抚动荡的市场。</p>
<p>——Naeem Aslam</p>
<p>本文由 MarketWatch 创作，MarketWatch 由道琼斯公司运营。MarketWatch 与道琼斯新闻社和《华尔街日报》独立出版。</p>
<p>（完）道琼斯新闻社</p>
<p>02-01-26 1605ET</p>

<p>黄金和白银的市场价值损失约为 7.4 万亿美元，突显了被视为安全投资的风险。这一抛售是由于全球流动性突然收缩所驱动，而非市场条件的基本变化。投资者被敦促重新考虑他们的对冲策略，关注流动性行为，而不仅仅是资产类别的多样化。在市场波动期间，价格敏感型买家和流动性敏感型买家之间的区别对于理解市场动态至关重要。目前市场信号显示谨慎，因为尽管潜在的实物需求可能会随着时间的推移稳定价格，但流动性仍然脆弱</p>

<p>By Naeem Aslam</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>作者：Naeem Aslam</p>
</div><p>If 'safe' investments like gold and silver can crash in a single day, investors need to reconsider their portfolio hedges</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>如果像黄金和白银这样的 “安全” 投资在一天之内崩溃，投资者需要重新考虑他们的投资组合对冲策略。</p>
</div><p>Is this a buying opportunity? That is the wrong question.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>这是一个买入机会吗？这是错误的问题。</p>
</div><p>For assets that many investors treat as protection, the speed and scale of the wipeout in gold and silver on Friday was unnerving.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>对于许多投资者视为保护的资产来说，周五黄金和白银的快速崩溃令人不安。</p>
</div><p>The immediate instinct is to ask what went wrong - but that misses the point. The real lesson from this selloff is not about direction or valuation. It is about liquidity - and what happens when too much capital tries to exit the same &#34;safe&#34; trades at once.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>立即的本能是问出了什么问题——但这忽略了要点。这次抛售的真正教训不是关于方向或估值，而是关于流动性——以及当过多资本试图同时退出同一 “安全” 交易时会发生什么。</p>
</div><p>The scale of the move is larger than many realize. The sharp pullback across gold (GC00) and silver (SI00) erased an estimated $7.4 trillion in combined market value, based on above-ground supply and prevailing spot prices.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>这一波动幅度超出了许多人的想象。黄金（GC00）和白银（SI00）的急剧回调抹去了估计 7.4 万亿美元的市场总值，基于地面供应和现货价格。</p>
</div><p>Gold's 9% drop from its peak of $5,598 and silver's 27% fall from its peak of $121 - ostensibly after the announcement of Kevin Warsh, a vocal critic of the Federal Reserve, as President Donald Trump's choice to lead the U.S. central bank - show that this was not a shift in sentiment alone. It was a sudden contraction in global liquidity - one that spilled directly into assets widely regarded as physical stores of value.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>黄金从 5598 美元的峰值下跌 9%，白银从 121 美元的峰值下跌 27%——显然是在宣布凯文·沃什（Kevin Warsh）作为特朗普总统选择的美联储主席后——显示这不仅仅是情绪的变化。这是全球流动性的突然收缩——直接影响到被广泛视为实物价值储存的资产。</p>
</div><p>This was not a fundamental shock. Inflation data did not suddenly change. Policy expectations did not reverse overnight. What failed was the assumption that assets widely viewed as defensive would remain liquid under stress.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>这不是一次基本面的冲击。通胀数据并没有突然改变。政策预期也没有在一夜之间逆转。失败的是对被广泛视为防御性资产的假设，即在压力下它们会保持流动性。</p>
</div><p>Read: Kevin Warsh isn't who investors think he is - how you can profit from their mistake</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>阅读：凯文·沃什并不是投资者认为的那样——你如何从他们的错误中获利。</p>
</div><p>When safe assets become crowded exits</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>当安全资产变成拥挤的出口时</p>
</div><p>Gold and silver had become heavily owned as hedges. That ownership created an illusion of safety - not because prices could not fall, but because investors assumed liquidity would always be available.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>黄金和白银作为对冲工具被大量持有。这种持有创造了一种安全的错觉——并不是因为价格不能下跌，而是因为投资者假设流动性总是可用的。</p>
</div><p>When volatility surged, that assumption broke down. Liquidity dried up first where positioning was most crowded. Selling accelerated not because conviction collapsed, but because risk limits, margin requirements and volatility controls forced exposure to be reduced.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>当波动性激增时，这种假设崩溃了。流动性首先在持仓最拥挤的地方枯竭。抛售加速并不是因为信念崩溃，而是因为风险限制、保证金要求和波动控制迫使投资者减少敞口。</p>
</div><p>This dynamic explains why the selloff felt mechanical rather than emotional. It also explains why silver fell so much harder than gold.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>这种动态解释了为什么这次抛售感觉更像是机械而非情绪化。它也解释了为什么白银的跌幅远远超过黄金。</p>
</div><p>Silver didn't fail - it amplified the stress</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>白银并没有失败——它放大了压力。</p>
</div><p>Silver sits at the intersection of hedging, speculation and leverage. Its market is thinner, its positioning more aggressive and its volatility structurally higher. When liquidity tightens, silver does not simply follow gold - it magnifies the move.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>白银处于对冲、投机和杠杆的交汇点。它的市场更为稀薄，持仓更为激进，波动性结构性更高。当流动性收紧时，白银不仅仅是跟随黄金——它放大了这一波动。</p>
</div><p>Gold revealed positioning stress. Silver revealed liquidity stress.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>黄金揭示了持仓压力。白银揭示了流动性压力。</p>
</div><p>That distinction matters for investors trying to understand what just happened - and what has not yet resolved.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>这种区别对试图理解刚刚发生了什么以及尚未解决的事情的投资者来说很重要。</p>
</div><p>Read: A Fed honeymoon for Trump pick Kevin Warsh? Briefly - then push comes to shove.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>阅读：特朗普提名凯文·沃什担任美联储主席的蜜月期？短暂的——然后推向了紧要关头。</p>
</div><p>Why physical buying doesn't negate the selloff</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>为什么实物购买并不能抵消抛售</p>
</div><p>Reports of buyers rushing into physical markets, including in places such as Dubai, are real - and they are important. They show that price-sensitive demand emerges quickly when volatility forces prices lower.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>关于买家涌入实物市场的报道，包括在迪拜等地，是真实的——而且它们很重要。它们表明，当波动性迫使价格下跌时，价格敏感的需求会迅速出现。</p>
</div><p>But physical buying answers a different question than financial selling. Physical demand can stabilize price over time; liquidity stress determines the path in the short term.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>但实物购买回答的是与金融抛售不同的问题。实物需求可以随着时间的推移稳定价格；流动性压力决定了短期内的路径。</p>
</div><p>This is where many investors go wrong. Seeing physical accumulation and concluding the selloff is &#34;over&#34; confuses two very different forces. Physical buyers react to levels. Financial markets react to volatility, leverage and risk constraints. The two do not operate on the same clock.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>这就是许多投资者出错的地方。看到实物积累并得出抛售 “结束” 的结论混淆了两种截然不同的力量。实物买家对价格水平做出反应。金融市场则对波动性、杠杆和风险约束做出反应。这两者并不在同一个时间框架内运作。</p>
</div><p>The mistake investors make after violent selloffs</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>投资者在剧烈抛售后犯的错误</p>
</div><p>The question is not what to buy, but what kind of buyer are you?</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>问题不是买什么，而是你是什么样的买家？</p>
</div><p>After moves like this, the conversation quickly turns to whether the decline represents a buying opportunity. That is the wrong starting point.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>在这样的波动之后，讨论很快转向下跌是否代表买入机会。这是错误的起点。</p>
</div><p>The more useful question is not what to buy, but what kind of buyer are you?</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>更有用的问题不是买什么，而是你是什么样的买家？</p>
</div><p>Price-sensitive buyers - typically long-term or physical holders - can afford to think in terms of value and accumulation. Liquidity-sensitive holders - those exposed through futures, options or highly traded vehicles - are governed by volatility and risk controls, not conviction.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>价格敏感的买家——通常是长期或实物持有者——可以以价值和积累的方式思考。流动性敏感的持有者——那些通过期货、期权或高度交易的工具暴露的投资者——则受波动性和风险控制的支配，而不是信念。</p>
</div><p>Confusing one for the other is how investors end up buying into instability rather than opportunity.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>将两者混淆是投资者最终在不稳定中买入而非机会的原因。</p>
</div><p>The real lesson: Diversify how you hedge, not just what you hedge with</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>真正的教训：多样化你的对冲方式，而不仅仅是你用什么对冲。</p>
</div><p>In stressed markets, liquidity - not logic - sets the price.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>在压力市场中，流动性——而非逻辑——决定价格。</p>
</div><p>The deeper takeaway from this episode is uncomfortable but necessary. Many portfolios are diversified by asset class, but not by liquidity behavior. When stress arrives, supposedly different hedges can funnel investors into the same exits at the same time.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>这一事件的更深层次启示令人不安但必要。许多投资组合按资产类别进行多样化，但并未按流动性行为进行多样化。当压力到来时，所谓不同的对冲可能会同时将投资者引导到同一出口。</p>
</div><p>That is how trillions of dollars can disappear from assets designed to protect capital.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>这就是数万亿美元如何从旨在保护资本的资产中消失的原因。</p>
</div><p>This does not invalidate gold or silver as long-term hedges. It does challenge the assumption that safety is simply about owning the right assets. In stressed markets, liquidity - not logic - sets the price.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>这并不否定黄金或白银作为长期对冲工具的有效性。它确实挑战了安全仅仅是拥有正确资产的假设。在压力市场中，流动性——而非逻辑——决定价格。</p>
</div><p>What to watch from here</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>接下来要关注什么</p>
</div><p>The &#34;all-clear&#34; signal is not whether prices bounce, but whether volatility compresses. Until it does, liquidity remains fragile. Physical demand may slow declines, but it cannot prevent sharp moves driven by forced repositioning.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>“全清” 信号不是价格是否反弹，而是波动性是否压缩。在此之前，流动性仍然脆弱。实物需求可能会减缓下跌，但无法阻止因强制重新定位而导致的剧烈波动。</p>
</div><p>The selloff in precious metals was not a rejection of their role. It was a stress test - and it revealed that even safe assets can become unstable when everyone relies on them at once.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>贵金属的抛售并不是对其角色的拒绝。这是一次压力测试——它揭示了即使是安全资产在每个人同时依赖时也会变得不稳定。</p>
</div><p>Naeem Aslam is chief investment officer at Zaye Capital Markets in London.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>Naeem Aslam 是伦敦 Zaye Capital Markets 的首席投资官。</p>
</div><p>More: Silver suffers biggest drop in 46 years, with 'every man and his dog rushing for the exit'</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>更多：白银遭遇 46 年来最大跌幅，“每个人都在急于逃离”。</p>
</div><p>Also read: Trump picking Kevin Warsh as Fed chair wasn't enough to soothe shaky markets</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>另请阅读：特朗普提名凯文·沃什担任美联储主席并不足以安抚动荡的市场。</p>
</div><p>-Naeem Aslam</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>——Naeem Aslam</p>
</div><p>This content was created by MarketWatch, which is operated by Dow Jones &amp; Co. MarketWatch is published independently from Dow Jones Newswires and The Wall Street Journal.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>本文由 MarketWatch 创作，MarketWatch 由道琼斯公司运营。MarketWatch 与道琼斯新闻社和《华尔街日报》独立出版。</p>
</div><p>(END) Dow Jones Newswires</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>（完）道琼斯新闻社</p>
</div><p>02-01-26 1605ET</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>02-01-26 1605ET</p>
</div>

Gold and silver's $7 trillion wipeout delivers a painful lesson about risk

Dow Jones

SPDR金-R

Sprott Active Gold & Silver Miners ETF

黄金信托 ETF - GraniteShares

Sprott Silver Mnrs & Physical Silver ETF

SPDR金

Gold.com

价值黄金

黄金信托 VanEck Merk - Merk

2 倍做多白银 ETF - ProShares

黄金ETF工银

国泰黄金ETF

SPDR金-U

黄金 MiniShares 信托 - SPDR

黄金 ETF - SPDR

全球黄金矿业股 MSCI ETF - iShares

实物白银股票 ETF - ETFS

富国上海金ETF

华夏黄金ETF

博时黄金ETF

Sprott PHYs Silver

山东黄金

黄金 ETF - iShares

华安黄金易(ETF)

紫金矿业

贵金属股 ETF -ETFS

白银矿业股 ETF - GlobalX

2 倍做多黄金 ETF - ProShares

黄金股ETF

环球银矿 MSCI ETF - iShares

金矿股 ETF - VanEck Vectors

黄金和贵金属矿商 ETF - U.S. Global

前海开源黄金ETF

阿尼科伊格尔矿业

金矿小盘股 ETF - VanEck Vectors

中金黄金

华夏中证沪深港黄金产业股票ETF

恒生黄金ETF

黄金勘探商 ETF - GlobalX

Kinross Gold

白银信托 ETF - iShares

实物黄金股 ETF - ETFS

纽蒙特矿业

黄金和白银的 7 万亿美元损失给我们上了一堂关于风险的痛苦课