<p>撰写者：jsai@金色财经</p>
<p>在 2026 年 3 月，在美伊战争的一个不为人知的角落，美国私人借贷市场突然面临赎回压力的高峰。</p>
<p>黑石集团的旗舰基金 HPS 企业借贷基金（HLEND），管理资产达 260 亿美元，宣布将严格限制季度赎回比例为 5%，尽管投资者的赎回请求达到了 9.3%（约 12 亿美元的请求，仅批准了约 6.2 亿美元）。</p>
<p>这并不是个别案例；黑石、蓝猫资本、Cliffwater 和摩根士丹利等领先机构旗下的基金也面临类似困境。</p>
<h2>一、哪些基金已经实施了赎回限制？</h2>
<p>目前尚未达到行业普遍强制关闭赎回的地步，但压力高度集中在针对零售和高净值客户的 “半开放” 或间隔基金（BDC）上。</p>
<p>这些基金通常每季度提供高达净资产价值 5% 的赎回窗口。如果申请超过此限制，管理者可以合法启动限制机制。已知开始限制赎回的基金包括：黑石 HPS 企业借贷基金（HLEND，260 亿美元）：2026 年第一季度的申请达到了 9.3%，严格限制在 5%，首次触发了 “结构性上限”。这是近期市场动荡以来，第一家明确限制永久性私人借贷产品的大型机构。黑石 BCRED（约 820 亿美元）：申请达到了创纪录的 7.9%，超过了通常的 5% 上限。公司使用了约 4 亿美元的自有资金和高管资金来完全满足赎回，没有正式 “关门”，但显示出显著的缓冲压力。蓝猫资本的 OBDC II 和其他 BDC（16-19 亿美元）：自 2 月起，常规季度赎回停止，取而代之的是定期分配（贷款偿还或资产出售），实际上是一种限制。此前，它已回购了 15.4% 的持股，压力测试显示出其首次裂痕。Cliffwater 企业借贷基金（330 亿美元）：面对超过 7% 的赎回请求，窗口在 3 月 10 日（星期二）刚刚关闭，公司尚未决定是限制在 5% 还是提高到 7%。摩根士丹利北港私人收入基金（80 亿美元）：请求约为 11%，北港在设定 5% 赎回上限后返还了约 1.69 亿美元，远低于投资者的赎回请求。其他基金如 Ares 和 Fidelity 也见证了赎回率的上升，但尚未正式实施限制。总体而言，在 1.8-2 万亿美元的私人借贷市场中，面向零售的基金受到的冲击最大，而机构基金相对稳定，但信心溢出风险已经显现。</p>
<h2>二、为何限制赎回：根本原因在于结构性不匹配和市场担忧</h2>
<p>私人借贷的核心卖点是 “高回报 + 低波动 + 季度流动性”，但其基础资产是长期的、非公开的、难以变现的企业贷款（尤其是 SaaS、技术杠杆收购等）。</p>
<p>尽管许多基金明确规定了高达净资产价值 5% 的赎回窗口，但在赎回潮来袭时，限制赎回是合规和合法的，基金面临着 “流动性幻觉” 的破裂。</p>
<p>触发赎回潮的因素包括：人工智能影响：许多基金重仓投资于软件公司的抵押贷款；生成性人工智能可能会摧毁它们的商业模式，导致估值下调。摩根大通已经下调了一些软件抵押贷款的估值并收紧了贷款。期限错配：投资者可以每季度退出他们的基金，但贷款期限通常为数年。如果超额赎回完全满足，基金经理只能以亏损出售资产或增加杠杆，这会损害剩余投资者的利益。黑石明确表示，“如果没有 5% 的上限，投资者资本与私人信贷贷款之间将存在结构性错配。” 贷款质量担忧：违约率在 2025 年上升至 9.2%（惠誉数据）。高调的违约事件（如英国的 MFS 欺诈破产，风险敞口超过 20 亿英镑）加剧了恐慌。散户投资者撤资：在过去几年中，散户投资者的入市推动了市场规模的增长。现在，随着美联储降息、人工智能的影响和宏观经济的不确定性，散户投资者是首批撤资者，形成了 “先到先得” 的困境。面对赎回潮，基金经理也面临困境。完全满足赎回将损害他们的声誉和长期纪律；严格限制可能会引发更多的恐慌赎回。黑石选择 “自掏腰包” 来缓冲损失，黑岩坚持条款，而 Cliffwater 仍在权衡其选择。三、对金融市场的影响：系统性风险正在显现，类似于 2007 年的前夕？私人借贷已成为 “影子银行” 的核心，规模接近 2 万亿美元。如果流动性危机蔓延，将产生以下影响：资产管理巨头股价暴跌：黑岩在公告后股价下跌超过 7%，黑石、KKR 和 Ares 等另类资产管理公司集体承压，标志着它们今年表现最差。资产抛售和去杠杆化：如果更多基金被迫以低价出售贷款，将压低公共债券市场的估值，银行将收紧对私人借贷的杠杆融资（摩根大通已经采取行动）。信心危机溢出：散户投资者信心的崩溃可能会影响整个另类资产类别，导致二级市场折扣交易增加。分析师将此比作 2007 年次贷危机的 “金丝雀时刻”——流动性枯竭和估值不透明的早期信号。在短期内，基金经理可以通过使用自有资金或出售资产作为缓冲来避免立即崩溃；然而，如果违约率持续上升或经济放缓，系统性风险将被放大。四、对加密市场的影响：间接传导占主导，RWA 成为关键渠道 私人借贷危机对加密市场的直接影响有限，但有两条溢出路径：宏观经济风险厌恶和去杠杆化：私人借贷去杠杆化可能引发更广泛的风险资产抛售，高贝塔资产如比特币首当其冲。历史经验表明，传统金融流动性收紧通常伴随着加密市场的 “去风险化”。RWA 和 DeFi 中的链上传导：当前链上私人借贷规模接近 50 亿美元，主要以代币化借贷的形式进入 DeFi。如果基础的传统贷款受到损害或违约，RWA 净值的波动将触发 DeFi 清算和流动性收紧。分析师警告称，这可能通过两个渠道传导到加密生态系统：“宏观去杠杆化 + 代币化信用产品。” 然而，总体而言，加密市场受到的影响更多是 “情绪传染”，而非直接资产关联。短期内波动性可能增加，但长期表现取决于美联储政策和人工智能经济的实际实施。这也提醒加密市场在将真实世界资产（RWA）上链的过程中必须密切关注基础资产。一旦基础资产出现问题，所谓的 RWA 代币化和 DeFi 将是空中楼阁。结论：警惕 “流动性幻觉”，私人借贷进入压力测试期。这波赎回潮不是私人借贷的终结，而是其快速扩张后的首次真正流动性测试。虽然像黑岩这样的巨头坚持上限在短期内保护了基金，但从长远来看，这考验了投资者的信任。金融市场需要关注后续的季度报告（更多基金将在 3 月和 4 月披露其业绩），而加密市场应密切监测 RWA 违约信号和宏观流动性。对于投资者，建议仔细评估自身的流动性需求，避免追逐 “高收益幻觉”。监管机构可能会加强对散户投资者的准入审查，以防止过度风险转移到散户投资者。这个危机是 “煤矿中的金丝雀” 还是 “暂时的痛苦”，将在 3-6 个月的数据中得到答案。市场总是在波动中寻求平衡——私人借贷的下一个篇章可能是一个更加透明和可持续的篇章。</p>

CVMC

MSSM

MSLC

<p>在 2026 年 3 月，美国私人贷款市场面临重大赎回压力，像贝莱德的 HPS 企业贷款基金等主要基金将赎回限制在 5%，尽管请求超过 9%。其他基金，包括黑石和摩根士丹利的基金，也遇到了类似的问题。这波赎回潮归因于结构性不匹配、市场担忧和上升的违约率。这种情况提高了金融市场的系统性风险，让人想起 2007 年危机前的情形，私人贷款规模接近 2 万亿美元，可能影响资产管理公司的股价</p>

<p>Written by: jsai@Jinse Finance</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>撰写者：jsai@金色财经</p>
</div><p>In March 2026, in a corner unseen by the US-Iran war, the US private lending market suddenly faced a peak in redemption pressure.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>在 2026 年 3 月，在美伊战争的一个不为人知的角落，美国私人借贷市场突然面临赎回压力的高峰。</p>
</div><p>BlackRock's flagship fund, the HPS Corporate Lending Fund (HLEND), with $26 billion in assets under management, announced that it would strictly limit quarterly redemptions to 5%, despite investor redemption requests reaching 9.3% (approximately $1.2 billion in requests, with only about $620 million approved).</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>黑石集团的旗舰基金 HPS 企业借贷基金（HLEND），管理资产达 260 亿美元，宣布将严格限制季度赎回比例为 5%，尽管投资者的赎回请求达到了 9.3%（约 12 亿美元的请求，仅批准了约 6.2 亿美元）。</p>
</div><p>This is not an isolated case; funds under leading institutions such as Blackstone, Blue Owl, Cliffwater, and Morgan Stanley have also faced similar predicaments.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>这并不是个别案例；黑石、蓝猫资本、Cliffwater 和摩根士丹利等领先机构旗下的基金也面临类似困境。</p>
</div><h2>I. Which funds have already implemented redemption restrictions?</h2>
<div class="lb-trans"><h2>一、哪些基金已经实施了赎回限制？</h2>
</div><p>Currently, it has not reached the point of a &#34;general&#34; industry-wide mandatory shutdown of redemptions, but the pressure is highly concentrated on &#34;semi-open&#34; or interval funds (BDC) targeting retail and high-net-worth clients.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>目前尚未达到行业普遍强制关闭赎回的地步，但压力高度集中在针对零售和高净值客户的 “半开放” 或间隔基金（BDC）上。</p>
</div><p>These funds typically offer a redemption window of up to 5% of net asset value each quarter. If applications exceed this limit, the manager can legally initiate a restriction mechanism. Funds known to have begun restricting redemptions include: BlackRock HPS Corporate Lending Fund (HLEND, $26 billion): Applications in Q1 2026 were 9.3%, strictly limited to 5%, triggering the &#34;structural cap&#34; for the first time. This is also the first large institution to explicitly restrict perpetual private lending products since the recent market turmoil. Blackstone BCRED (approximately $82 billion): Applications reached a record 7.9%, exceeding the usual 5% cap. The company used approximately $400 million of its own funds and those of its executives to fully meet redemptions, without officially &#34;closing the gate,&#34; but demonstrating significant buffering pressure. Blue Owl Capital's OBDC II and other BDCs ($1.6-1.9 billion): Starting in February, regular quarterly redemptions ceased, replaced by periodic distributions (loan repayments or asset sales), effectively a restriction. Previously, it had repurchased 15.4% of its holdings, and the stress test revealed its first cracks. Cliffwater Corporate Lending Fund ($33 billion): Facing redemption requests exceeding 7%, the window just closed on Tuesday (March 10th), and the company has not yet decided whether to limit it to 5% or increase it to 7%. Morgan Stanley North Haven Private Income Fund ($8 billion): With requests around 11%, North Haven returned approximately $169 million after setting a 5% redemption cap, less than half of the investor redemption requests. Other funds such as Ares and Fidelity have also seen increased redemption rates, but have not yet officially imposed restrictions. Overall, in the $1.8-2 trillion private lending market, retail-oriented funds are the hardest hit, while institutional funds are relatively stable, but the risk of confidence spillover has already emerged.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>这些基金通常每季度提供高达净资产价值 5% 的赎回窗口。如果申请超过此限制，管理者可以合法启动限制机制。已知开始限制赎回的基金包括：黑石 HPS 企业借贷基金（HLEND，260 亿美元）：2026 年第一季度的申请达到了 9.3%，严格限制在 5%，首次触发了 “结构性上限”。这是近期市场动荡以来，第一家明确限制永久性私人借贷产品的大型机构。黑石 BCRED（约 820 亿美元）：申请达到了创纪录的 7.9%，超过了通常的 5% 上限。公司使用了约 4 亿美元的自有资金和高管资金来完全满足赎回，没有正式 “关门”，但显示出显著的缓冲压力。蓝猫资本的 OBDC II 和其他 BDC（16-19 亿美元）：自 2 月起，常规季度赎回停止，取而代之的是定期分配（贷款偿还或资产出售），实际上是一种限制。此前，它已回购了 15.4% 的持股，压力测试显示出其首次裂痕。Cliffwater 企业借贷基金（330 亿美元）：面对超过 7% 的赎回请求，窗口在 3 月 10 日（星期二）刚刚关闭，公司尚未决定是限制在 5% 还是提高到 7%。摩根士丹利北港私人收入基金（80 亿美元）：请求约为 11%，北港在设定 5% 赎回上限后返还了约 1.69 亿美元，远低于投资者的赎回请求。其他基金如 Ares 和 Fidelity 也见证了赎回率的上升，但尚未正式实施限制。总体而言，在 1.8-2 万亿美元的私人借贷市场中，面向零售的基金受到的冲击最大，而机构基金相对稳定，但信心溢出风险已经显现。</p>
</div><h2>II. Why Restrict Redemptions: The Root Cause Lies in Structural Mismatch and Market Concerns</h2>
<div class="lb-trans"><h2>二、为何限制赎回：根本原因在于结构性不匹配和市场担忧</h2>
</div><p>The core selling point of private lending is &#34;high returns + low volatility + quarterly liquidity,&#34; but the underlying assets are long-term, non-public, and difficult-to-liquidate corporate loans (especially SaaS, technology LBOs, etc.).</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>私人借贷的核心卖点是 “高回报 + 低波动 + 季度流动性”，但其基础资产是长期的、非公开的、难以变现的企业贷款（尤其是 SaaS、技术杠杆收购等）。</p>
</div><p>Although many funds have explicitly stipulated a redemption window of up to 5% of net asset value, restricting redemptions is compliant and legal, when a wave of redemptions hits, funds face the shattering of their &#34;liquidity illusion.&#34;</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>尽管许多基金明确规定了高达净资产价值 5% 的赎回窗口，但在赎回潮来袭时，限制赎回是合规和合法的，基金面临着 “流动性幻觉” 的破裂。</p>
</div><p>Factors triggering the redemption wave include: AI Impact: Many funds heavily invest in software company mortgage loans; generative AI could destroy their business models, leading to valuation downgrades. JPMorgan Chase has already downgraded the valuation of some software mortgage loans and tightened lending. Duration Mismatch: Investors can exit their funds quarterly, but loan terms are often several years. If excess redemptions are fully met, managers can only sell assets at a loss or increase leverage, harming the interests of remaining investors. BlackRock explicitly stated that &#34;without the 5% cap, there will be a structural mismatch between investor capital and private credit loans.&#34; Loan Quality Concerns: The default rate has risen to 9.2% in 2025 (Fitch data). High-profile defaults (such as the UK's MFS fraud bankruptcy, with risk exposure exceeding £2 billion) exacerbate panic. Retail investor runs: In the past few years, retail investors' entry into the market has driven up its size. Now, with the Fed's interest rate cuts, the impact of AI, and macroeconomic uncertainty, retail investors are the first to withdraw, creating a &#34;first come, first served&#34; dilemma. When faced with a wave of redemptions, fund managers also face a dilemma. Fully satisfying redemptions would damage their reputation and long-term discipline; strict restrictions could trigger more panic redemptions. Blackstone chose to &#34;pay out of its own pocket&#34; to buffer the losses, BlackRock adhered to the terms, and Cliffwater is still weighing its options. III. Impact on financial markets: Systemic risks are emerging, similar to the eve of 2007? Private lending has become the core of &#34;shadow banking,&#34; approaching $2 trillion in size. If a liquidity crisis spreads, it will have the following impacts: Asset management giants' stock prices plummet: BlackRock's stock price fell more than 7% after its announcement, and alternative asset management firms such as Blackstone, KKR, and Ares are collectively under pressure, marking their worst performance in a decade this year. Asset sell-offs and deleveraging: If more funds are forced to sell loans at bargain prices, it will depress valuations in the public bond market, and banks will tighten leverage financing for private lending (JPMorgan Chase has already taken action). Confidence crisis spillover: The collapse of retail investor confidence may affect the entire alternative asset class, leading to increased discounted trading in the secondary market. Analysts have likened this to the &#34;canary moment&#34; of the 2007 subprime crisis—an early sign of liquidity depletion and valuation opacity. In the short term, managers can avoid an immediate collapse by using their own funds or selling assets as a buffer; however, if the default rate continues to rise or the economy slows down, systemic risks will be amplified. IV. Impact on the Crypto Market: Indirect Transmission Predominates, RWA Becomes a Key Channel The direct impact of the private lending crisis on the crypto market is limited, but there are two spillover paths: Macroeconomic Risk Aversion and Deleveraging: Private lending deleveraging may trigger a wider sell-off of risky assets, with high-beta assets such as Bitcoin bearing the brunt. Historical experience shows that traditional financial liquidity tightening is often accompanied by a crypto &#34;de-risking&#34; market. RWA and On-Chain Transmission in DeFi: The current on-chain private lending scale is close to $5 billion, mainly entering DeFi in the form of tokenized lending. If the underlying traditional loans are impaired or defaulted, fluctuations in RWA net worth will trigger DeFi liquidations and liquidity tightening. Analysts warn that this could be transmitted to the crypto ecosystem through two channels: &#34;macro deleveraging + tokenized credit products.&#34; However, overall, the crypto market is more affected by &#34;emotional contagion&#34; than by direct asset linkages. Short-term volatility may increase, but long-term performance depends on Federal Reserve policy and the actual implementation of AI economy. This also serves as a warning that the crypto market must pay close attention to the underlying assets of RWA during the process of putting real-world assets (RWA) on-chain. Once the underlying assets encounter problems, the so-called RWA tokenization and DeFi will be castles in the air. Conclusion: Beware of &#34;liquidity illusion,&#34; private lending enters a stress test period. This wave of redemptions is not the end of private lending, but rather its first real liquidity test after rapid expansion. While the adherence to caps by giants like BlackRock has protected funds in the short term, it tests investor trust in the long run. Financial markets need to pay attention to subsequent quarterly reports (more funds will disclose their results in March and April), while the crypto market should closely monitor RWA default signals and macro liquidity. For investors, it is advisable to carefully assess their own liquidity needs and avoid chasing the &#34;high-yield illusion.&#34; Regulators may strengthen retail access scrutiny to prevent excessive risk transfer to retail investors. Whether this crisis is a &#34;canary in the coal mine&#34; or a &#34;temporary pain&#34; will be answered by data in 3-6 months. Markets always seek balance amidst volatility—the next chapter in private lending may well be a more transparent and sustainable one.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>触发赎回潮的因素包括：人工智能影响：许多基金重仓投资于软件公司的抵押贷款；生成性人工智能可能会摧毁它们的商业模式，导致估值下调。摩根大通已经下调了一些软件抵押贷款的估值并收紧了贷款。期限错配：投资者可以每季度退出他们的基金，但贷款期限通常为数年。如果超额赎回完全满足，基金经理只能以亏损出售资产或增加杠杆，这会损害剩余投资者的利益。黑石明确表示，“如果没有 5% 的上限，投资者资本与私人信贷贷款之间将存在结构性错配。” 贷款质量担忧：违约率在 2025 年上升至 9.2%（惠誉数据）。高调的违约事件（如英国的 MFS 欺诈破产，风险敞口超过 20 亿英镑）加剧了恐慌。散户投资者撤资：在过去几年中，散户投资者的入市推动了市场规模的增长。现在，随着美联储降息、人工智能的影响和宏观经济的不确定性，散户投资者是首批撤资者，形成了 “先到先得” 的困境。面对赎回潮，基金经理也面临困境。完全满足赎回将损害他们的声誉和长期纪律；严格限制可能会引发更多的恐慌赎回。黑石选择 “自掏腰包” 来缓冲损失，黑岩坚持条款，而 Cliffwater 仍在权衡其选择。三、对金融市场的影响：系统性风险正在显现，类似于 2007 年的前夕？私人借贷已成为 “影子银行” 的核心，规模接近 2 万亿美元。如果流动性危机蔓延，将产生以下影响：资产管理巨头股价暴跌：黑岩在公告后股价下跌超过 7%，黑石、KKR 和 Ares 等另类资产管理公司集体承压，标志着它们今年表现最差。资产抛售和去杠杆化：如果更多基金被迫以低价出售贷款，将压低公共债券市场的估值，银行将收紧对私人借贷的杠杆融资（摩根大通已经采取行动）。信心危机溢出：散户投资者信心的崩溃可能会影响整个另类资产类别，导致二级市场折扣交易增加。分析师将此比作 2007 年次贷危机的 “金丝雀时刻”——流动性枯竭和估值不透明的早期信号。在短期内，基金经理可以通过使用自有资金或出售资产作为缓冲来避免立即崩溃；然而，如果违约率持续上升或经济放缓，系统性风险将被放大。四、对加密市场的影响：间接传导占主导，RWA 成为关键渠道 私人借贷危机对加密市场的直接影响有限，但有两条溢出路径：宏观经济风险厌恶和去杠杆化：私人借贷去杠杆化可能引发更广泛的风险资产抛售，高贝塔资产如比特币首当其冲。历史经验表明，传统金融流动性收紧通常伴随着加密市场的 “去风险化”。RWA 和 DeFi 中的链上传导：当前链上私人借贷规模接近 50 亿美元，主要以代币化借贷的形式进入 DeFi。如果基础的传统贷款受到损害或违约，RWA 净值的波动将触发 DeFi 清算和流动性收紧。分析师警告称，这可能通过两个渠道传导到加密生态系统：“宏观去杠杆化 + 代币化信用产品。” 然而，总体而言，加密市场受到的影响更多是 “情绪传染”，而非直接资产关联。短期内波动性可能增加，但长期表现取决于美联储政策和人工智能经济的实际实施。这也提醒加密市场在将真实世界资产（RWA）上链的过程中必须密切关注基础资产。一旦基础资产出现问题，所谓的 RWA 代币化和 DeFi 将是空中楼阁。结论：警惕 “流动性幻觉”，私人借贷进入压力测试期。这波赎回潮不是私人借贷的终结，而是其快速扩张后的首次真正流动性测试。虽然像黑岩这样的巨头坚持上限在短期内保护了基金，但从长远来看，这考验了投资者的信任。金融市场需要关注后续的季度报告（更多基金将在 3 月和 4 月披露其业绩），而加密市场应密切监测 RWA 违约信号和宏观流动性。对于投资者，建议仔细评估自身的流动性需求，避免追逐 “高收益幻觉”。监管机构可能会加强对散户投资者的准入审查，以防止过度风险转移到散户投资者。这个危机是 “煤矿中的金丝雀” 还是 “暂时的痛苦”，将在 3-6 个月的数据中得到答案。市场总是在波动中寻求平衡——私人借贷的下一个篇章可能是一个更加透明和可持续的篇章。</p>
</div>

How will the wave of redemptions from private credit funds affect the financial and crypto markets?

CoinLive

Calvert US Mid-Cap Core Responsible Index ETF

Morgan Stanley Pathway Sm-Md Cp Eq ETF

Morgan Stanley Pathway Large Cap Eq ETF

Calvert US Large-Cap Diversity Equity & Inclusion Index ETF

黑石集团

贝莱德

全球上市私募股权 ETF - ProShares

Calvert US Select Equity ETF

美国经纪商&证券交易所 ETF - iShares

摩根士丹利

金融业 ETF - Vanguard

金融业 ETF - SPDR

金融指数 MSCI ETF - Fidelity

Calvert US Large-Cap Core Responsible Index ETF

黑石抵押信托

私人信贷基金的赎回浪潮将对金融市场和加密市场产生怎样的影响？