Gold Plunges for a Week, '1983 Great Sell-Off' Repeats, Middle East 'Selling Gold for Funds'?

marsbitPublished on 2026-03-21Last updated on 2026-03-21

Abstract

Gold recorded its worst weekly decline in 43 years, echoing the historic 1983 sell-off. Spot gold fell for eight consecutive days, while silver dropped over 15%, with palladium and platinum also declining. The sell-off was triggered by escalating Middle East conflicts, which raised energy prices and reduced expectations for Fed rate cuts. Markets now price a 50% chance of a Fed hike by October. Higher inflation expectations and rising real interest rates diminished gold's appeal as a non-yielding asset. Additionally, tightening dollar liquidity, reflected in widening cross-currency basis swaps, intensified pressure on gold, often liquidated first during dollar shortages. Technical indicators worsened, with RSI falling below 30, triggering stop-losses and self-reinforcing selling. Gold ETFs saw outflows for three straight weeks, losing over 60 tons. The current situation parallels the 1983 crash when OPEC nations, facing falling oil revenue, sold gold reserves to raise cash, causing a rapid price collapse. Then, as now, Middle Eastern selling pressured gold, with impacts spreading across commodities. Despite a 4% year-to-date gain, stagflation risks are rising. Goldman Sachs estimates energy price increases could reduce global growth by 0.3% and raise inflation by 0.5-0.6%. Gold's future depends on real interest rates and geopolitical developments—continued conflict may sustain pressure, while de-escalation could revive safe-haven demand.

Gold suffered its worst weekly drop in 43 years this week, with echoes of history sending chills through the market.

This week, gold recorded its largest weekly percentage decline since March 1983, with the spot price falling for eight consecutive days, marking the longest losing streak since October 2023. Meanwhile, silver fell more than 15% this week, and palladium and platinum also moved lower.

The trigger for this plunge was the escalating conflict in the Middle East, which pushed up energy prices and, in turn, suppressed expectations for interest rate cuts. Market bets on a Federal Reserve rate hike rose to 50%, fueling this wave of precious metal liquidation.

What's more alarming to the market is that the current situation bears a striking resemblance to the historic crash in March 1983, which was triggered by massive gold sales by Middle Eastern oil producers—back then, OPEC members, facing a sharp drop in oil revenues, were forced to sell off gold reserves for cash, causing the gold price to plummet by over a hundred dollars in a matter of days.

It is worth noting that, according to historical data, this week's decline in gold is the most severe since that "selling gold for funds" storm 43 years ago.

Rate Cut Expectations Unravel, Gold's Safe-Haven Logic Fails

Since the US and Israel launched attacks on Iran last month, gold has been falling for several weeks, a stark contrast to its traditional role as a "safe-haven asset."

The reason is that the war brings not expectations of easing but inflationary pressures. Currently, the market's anticipation of the Fed's policy path has undergone a fundamental reversal.

Traders are now pricing in a 50% probability of a Fed rate hike by October. Soaring energy prices are boosting inflation expectations, and gold, as a non-yielding asset, becomes significantly less attractive in an environment of rising real interest rates.

At the same time, there are signs of tightening US dollar liquidity. Cross-currency basis swaps began to widen noticeably this week, indicating a certain degree of dollar funding pressure.

This phenomenon may explain the deeper logic behind the gold sell-off—when dollar liquidity tightens, gold is often one of the first assets investors liquidate.

It is noteworthy that the most severe declines in the metal markets this week were concentrated during Asian and European trading hours, consistent with the pattern that dollar shortage pressures first manifest in offshore markets.

Technical Stop-Losses Triggered, Selling Reinforces Itself

Amid the sustained decline, gold's technical indicators deteriorated significantly, with the 14-day Relative Strength Index (RSI) falling below 30, entering a zone some traders consider oversold.

Rhona O'Connell, an analyst at StoneX Financial, pointed out that this gold correction is the result of profit-taking and liquidity liquidation. She stated that the price above $5,200 had attracted substantial buying, making the market accumulate considerable vulnerability to a pullback.

Once prices started to slide, stop-loss orders from a large number of investors were automatically triggered, and selling quickly formed a self-reinforcing spiral. Technical signals like moving averages further exacerbated the downward pressure.

Meanwhile, passive selling triggered by falling stock markets also spilled over into gold.

O'Connell noted that forced liquidations related to equity assets may have dragged down gold prices, while slowing central bank gold purchases and continued outflows from gold ETFs further dampened market sentiment. According to Bloomberg data, gold ETFs have seen net outflows for three consecutive weeks, with combined holdings dropping by more than 60 tonnes over those three weeks.

The Ghost of the 1983 Middle East 'Selling Gold for Funds'

The current situation reminds market participants of the gold crash triggered by the oil crisis 43 years ago.

Historical data shows that around February 21, 1983, British and Norwegian oil producers led price cuts, putting pressure on OPEC to follow suit, abruptly intensifying the global oil market's oversupply situation. Faced with a sharp contraction in oil revenues, Middle Eastern oil producers (mainly OPEC members) were forced to sell off gold reserves on a large scale to raise cash, triggering a gold price avalanche.

A report in The New York Times at the time corroborated this view. According to a March 1, 1983, New York Times report, traders explicitly stated that Middle Eastern oil producers selling gold was the direct trigger for the price crash and warned that if oil revenues fell further, these Arab countries might sell more gold. At that time, the gold price plunged more than $105 from its high in less than a week, with the largest single-day drop reaching $42.50, the worst in nearly three years.

According to the New York Times report at the time, the funds from the Middle Eastern sales immediately flowed into Eurodollars and other short-term investment instruments, causing short-term interest rates to soften, which in turn sent warning signals to the global gold market. Since February 21 coincided with the US Presidents' Day holiday, with the New York market closed, the full impact wasn't felt until the following week, subsequently triggering chain-reaction forced liquidations that also affected commodity markets like copper, grains, soybeans, and sugar.

ZeroHedge pointed out that the 1983 gold crash marked the entry of the oil market into a bear market cycle that lasted for years—OPEC discipline frayed, market share was continuously lost, and oil prices remained under pressure throughout the 1980s.

Stagflation Clouds Loom, Can Gold Prices Stabilize?

Despite this week's heavy losses, gold is still up about 4% year-to-date. The price hit a record high of nearly $5,600 per ounce in late January, supported at that time by investor enthusiasm, central bank buying sprees, and market concerns about Trump interfering with Fed independence.

However, the current macroeconomic environment has deteriorated significantly. According to a Bloomberg report, Goldman Sachs economist Joseph Briggs expects rising energy prices to drag down global GDP by 0.3 percentage points over the next year and push overall inflation up by 0.5 to 0.6 percentage points. Rising stagflation risks are severely constraining central banks' policy space.

Goldman Sachs analyst Chris Hussey noted that the blockade of the Strait of Hormuz has entered its fourth week, and hopes for a quick resolution to the conflict are fading. If the conflict persists, the longer oil prices remain high, the harder it becomes for the "looking through the short-term pain" narrative in stock and bond markets to hold, and the vulnerability of global assets will be further exposed.

For gold, the path of real interest rates will be the key variable. If the conflict drags on, inflation expectations continue to heat up, and the Fed's rate hike path becomes clearer, pressure on gold may continue; whereas, once signals of easing geopolitical tensions emerge, whether suppressed safe-haven demand can be released again remains the market's biggest悬念 (suspense).

Related Questions

QWhat was the main trigger for gold's sharp decline this week, according to the article?

AThe main trigger was the escalation of conflicts in the Middle East, which pushed up energy prices and suppressed expectations for interest rate cuts.

QHow does the current gold sell-off compare historically to the 1983 event mentioned?

AThis week's gold decline is the most severe single-week drop since the historic crash in March 1983, which was also triggered by Middle Eastern oil producers selling gold reserves to raise cash.

QWhy did the traditional 'safe-haven' logic for gold fail during the recent geopolitical tensions?

AThe traditional safe-haven logic failed because the war brought inflationary pressure instead of expectations for monetary easing. Rising inflation expectations led to bets on Federal Reserve rate hikes, making non-yielding assets like gold less attractive.

QWhat technical and market factors contributed to the self-reinforcing selling spiral in gold?

ATechnical factors like stop-loss orders being triggered and deteriorating indicators (e.g., RSI below 30), combined with liquidations from equity-related forced selling and continued outflows from gold ETFs, created a self-reinforcing selling spiral.

QWhat are the key factors that will determine whether gold prices can stabilize, as per the article?

AThe key factors are the path of real interest rates, which depends on the Federal Reserve's policy response to inflation, and potential signals of easing in geopolitical tensions that could reignite suppressed safe-haven demand.

Related Reads

How to Do Research Well: Deliberately Practice the Real Skills That Matter

No one truly teaches you how to do research. You're often given a desk, a pre-selected problem, and vague instructions to "create something new." Consequently, many people reverse-engineer the job based on visible outputs—papers, posts, announcements—learning only how to *appear* like a researcher rather than how to *become* one. True research capability is built from stacking small, trainable skills, nearly all of which can be developed through deliberate practice. **Pick Your Own Problem:** Most researchers absorb problems from advisors or trends, lacking the underlying reasoning. Choosing a problem you genuinely care about, as John Schulman advises, leads to original work. Develop "taste" like a muscle: predict experiment outcomes, guess paper results from methods, and track which findings remain important over time. **Upgrade Your Inputs:** Relying on shared reading lists (arXiv hot lists, filtered group chats) leads to unoriginal conclusions. Undervalued old literature often holds crucial insights (e.g., MoE, LSTM, backpropagation). Richard Sutton's "The Bitter Lesson" or Claude Shannon's 1952 talk on creative thinking are more predictive than lengthy modern surveys. Breadth matters as much as depth: draw from neuroscience, mechanism design, hardware knowledge, and honest statistics. Read papers directly, especially appendices and limitations sections. **Write Everything Down:** As Paul Graham noted, writing exposes flaws in seemingly mature ideas. Writing is the cheapest defense against self-deception. Following Feynman's principle, Darwin programmatically wrote down facts contradicting his theory to combat memory bias. Maintain a detailed log of hypotheses, setups, predictions, results, and updated understandings. Reviewing past logs fosters essential humility.

marsbit1h ago

How to Do Research Well: Deliberately Practice the Real Skills That Matter

marsbit1h ago

Following US Ban on Fable 5, Zhipu AI's Stock Soars 47%

On June 15th, shares of Zhipu AI surged dramatically on the Hong Kong stock market, peaking at a 47.6% gain before closing 32.82% higher. This sharp increase was directly triggered by two recent industry events. On June 12th, Anthropic announced it was suspending global access to its latest flagship models, Claude Fable 5 and Claude Mythos 5, to comply with a U.S. government export control order. The next day, Zhipu AI announced it would open access to its latest open-source flagship model, GLM-5.2, under the permissive MIT license. The Anthropic incident highlighted a critical issue beyond raw model capability: the risk of sudden, unpredictable loss of access to advanced AI models, especially for developers and enterprises deeply integrated with them. This has shifted industry and market focus toward factors like stability, sustainable access, and controllability. Zhipu's move, promoting "frontier intelligence for all," positions its openly available model as a reliable and accessible alternative. The GLM-5.2 model emphasizes "Long Horizon Task" capabilities with a 1M context window, targeting complex, multi-step coding and engineering workflows where maintaining context is crucial. Analysts note this event exposes the risk of dependency on closed-source models subject to single jurisdictional controls, potentially accelerating a shift toward domestic base models and localized deployments. The market's reaction signals a new valuation dimension in AI: providers who can offer stable, long-term, and sustainably accessible AI capabilities are gaining strategic importance.

marsbit1h ago

Following US Ban on Fable 5, Zhipu AI's Stock Soars 47%

marsbit1h ago

Fully Entering the AI Era: Alipay Bets on Conversation, WeChat Holds Fast to Social

In May 2026, Alipay announced over 300 million AI payment transactions. Shortly after, WeChat opened its mini-programs for AI integration, sparking controversy by requiring developer source code access. This highlights their diverging approaches to AI integration. Alipay is testing "Project Treasure," an optional AI-native interface replacing traditional app grids with a conversational window. Users can command complex tasks (e.g., "book a ride and order coffee") handled end-to-end by AI. This shift follows an abandoned standalone AI app, focusing instead on enhancing its existing user base. For unmodified mini-programs, Alipay's AI uses "screen-reading" to simulate user interactions, bypassing the need for developer overhaul. It also introduced "Token Pay" for micro-transactions and "AI Wallets" for autonomous agent spending. WeChat, prioritizing its core social function, is taking an embedded approach. Its AI agent will operate within existing contexts like group chats and official accounts, assisting without a separate interface. To enable this, WeChat offers developers two paths: granting source code access for direct AI control ("Automatic Mode") or manually encapsulating services into standardized "Skills." Both place significant burden on developers. Key differences emerge in handling legacy services: WeChat demands developer cooperation (code or labor), while Alipay's screen-reading offers immediate, if potentially less stable, compatibility. Alipay's 3 billion AI transactions demonstrate user acceptance of AI-driven commercial actions. The divergent strategies may reshape mini-program ecosystems—Alipay passively "AI-fying" services, WeChat potentially favoring resource-rich developers—and set competing technical standards. Ultimately, the competition centers on where users entrust the command to "help me get things done."

marsbit1h ago

Fully Entering the AI Era: Alipay Bets on Conversation, WeChat Holds Fast to Social

marsbit1h ago

Trading

Spot
Futures
活动图片