Middle East Conflict Rekindles Rate Hike Expectations, Gold Suffers Worst Sell-off in 43 Years

marsbitPubblicato 2026-03-23Pubblicato ultima volta 2026-03-23

Introduzione

Gold suffered its worst weekly decline in 43 years, with spot prices falling for eight consecutive sessions—the longest losing streak since October 2023. Silver also plunged over 15%, while platinum and palladium followed lower. The sell-off was triggered by escalating Middle East conflicts, which drove up oil prices and reinforced expectations of Federal Reserve rate hikes rather than cuts. Market bets on a Fed hike by October rose to 50%, reducing the appeal of non-yielding gold amid higher real rate prospects. 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 situation echoes the 1983 crash when OPEC nations sold gold reserves to raise cash amid an oil price collapse. Despite a 4% year-to-date gain, macro conditions have deteriorated. Rising energy prices may reduce global GDP by 0.3% and lift inflation by 0.5-0.6%, increasing stagflation risks. Gold’s future trajectory hinges on real rates and geopolitical developments—further rate hike expectations could sustain pressure, while any de-escalation may revive safe-haven demand.

Gold recorded its worst weekly decline in 43 years this week, with historical echoes sending chills through the market.

This week, gold posted its largest weekly drop 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, with palladium and platinum also moving lower.

The trigger for this sharp decline was the escalating Middle East conflict, which pushed up energy prices and, in turn, suppressed expectations for interest rate cuts. Market bets on a Federal Reserve rate hike have risen to 50%, fueling this wave of selling in precious metals.

More alarmingly for the market, 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 plummeting oil revenues, were forced to sell their gold reserves for cash, causing the gold price to plunge 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 "sell-gold-for-cash" 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 declining 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 prediction 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 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 metals market this week were concentrated during Asian and European trading hours, consistent with the pattern of dollar shortage pressures first appearing in offshore markets.

Technical Stop-Losses Triggered, Selling Becomes Self-Reinforcing

Amid the sustained decline, gold's technical indicators have 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积累相当的回调脆弱性 (accumulated considerable vulnerability to a correction).

Once prices started to fall, a large number of investors' stop-loss orders were automatically triggered, rapidly forming a self-reinforcing spiral of selling. 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 "Sell-Gold-for-Cash"

The current situation reminds market participants of the oil crisis-induced gold crash 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. Facing a sharp contraction in oil revenues, Middle Eastern oil producers (mainly OPEC members) were forced to sell their gold reserves on a large scale to raise cash, triggering a gold price crash.

Reporting from The New York Times at the time corroborates this. According to a March 1, 1983, New York Times report, traders explicitly stated that sales by Middle Eastern oil producers were the direct trigger for the gold price plunge 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 proceeds from the Middle Eastern sales immediately flowed into Eurodollars and other short-term investment vehicles, causing short-term interest rates to soften, which in turn sent a warning signal to the global gold market. Since February 21 coincided with the US Presidents' Day holiday, with New York markets 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 then by investor enthusiasm, central bank buying sprees, and market concerns about Trump interfering with Fed independence.

However, the current macroeconomic environment has significantly deteriorated. According to a Bloomberg report, Goldman Sachs economist Joseph Briggs expects that rising energy prices will drag global GDP down 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 compressing 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 of the conflict are fading. If the conflict continues, the longer oil prices remain high, the harder it becomes for the "look-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 a 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 persist; whereas, once signals of a easing in geopolitical tensions emerge, whether suppressed safe-haven demand can be released again remains the market's biggest悬念 (suspense).

Domande pertinenti

QWhat was the sharpest weekly decline in gold prices since 1983 triggered by?

AThe sharpest weekly decline in gold prices since 1983 was triggered by escalating Middle East conflicts, which raised energy prices and suppressed expectations for interest rate cuts, leading to increased bets on Federal Reserve rate hikes.

QHow does the current gold market situation parallel the historical event of 1983?

AThe current situation parallels the 1983 event where OPEC members, facing a sharp drop in oil revenue, were forced to sell off their gold reserves to raise cash, causing a historic crash in gold prices.

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

AThe traditional safe-haven logic failed because the war brought inflationary pressure instead of expectations for monetary easing. Rising energy prices increased inflation expectations, making gold, a non-yielding asset, less attractive as real rates rose.

QWhat technical indicator signaled that gold had entered oversold territory during the sell-off?

AThe 14-day Relative Strength Index (RSI) fell below 30, which is a level some traders consider to indicate an oversold market.

QAccording to Goldman Sachs analysis, what is the expected economic impact of rising energy prices?

AGoldman Sachs economists estimated that rising energy prices would reduce global GDP by 0.3 percentage points over the next year and raise overall inflation by 0.5 to 0.6 percentage points, increasing stagflation risks.

Letture associate

Wall Street's Most Famous 'Cassandra' Now Has His Sights Set on Nvidia

Michael Burry, the famed "Big Short" investor, has once again captured Wall Street's attention with a series of short positions against major tech and semiconductor stocks, most notably Nvidia. In late June and July, through his "Cassandra Unchained" newsletter, Burry disclosed short bets against Nvidia, Tesla, Applied Materials, Caterpillar, the SOXX semiconductor ETF, and later, Micron Technology. His core thesis revolves around potential distortions in the AI infrastructure boom, specifically questioning whether extended depreciation schedules (e.g., 6 years vs. a realistic 2-3 years for AI chips) by cloud giants like Microsoft and Google artificially inflate profits. He also raises concerns about possible "off-balance-sheet circular financing," where chip demand might be propped up by vendor-backed funding to clients. Nvidia's stock experienced volatility following these disclosures, briefly dipping but largely holding near Burry's reported entry points, leaving his positions roughly flat or slightly underwater as of late July. This move is part of a pattern for Burry, whose track record since his legendary 2008 bet is mixed. He has faced notable losses, such as on Tesla in 2021, while scoring on broader market turns like the 2020 pandemic crash. His methodology focuses intensely on free cash flow and scrutinizing original financial documents to spot overvaluation and structural risks, but it often struggles with timing the market. The article contrasts Burry's stance with other prominent investors. Steve Eisman, another "Big Short" figure, is not shorting Nvidia, citing strong fundamentals but expressing nervousness about sustainability. Jim Chanos agrees with the broad "accounting mismatch" concern—comparing it to the dot-com bubble—but targets financial leverage in private equity firms rather than the chip stocks themselves. While Nvidia's short interest remains relatively low at 1.3-1.4% of float, the massive stock size means absolute short losses have been significant, exceeding $5 billion earlier this year. The piece concludes that for ordinary investors, the key takeaway is not replicating specific short bets but learning from the critical frameworks these investors use: questioning rosy accounting, identifying structural vulnerabilities, and maintaining skepticism during market euphoria, even if pinpointing the exact catalyst for a downturn remains elusive.

marsbit26 min fa

Wall Street's Most Famous 'Cassandra' Now Has His Sights Set on Nvidia

marsbit26 min fa

Weekly Selection丨Epic Stock Market Volatility, Changxin Tech's IPO Reshapes Storage Landscape, Saylor Aims to Re-Anchor STRC Around September 8th

PANews Weekly Digest: Market Turmoil, Tech Breakthroughs, and Crypto Developments. The week saw significant volatility across global markets. South Korea's KOSPI index experienced extreme turbulence, including multiple trading halts, largely driven by sharp declines in AI hardware stocks like SK Hynix. In contrast, China's Changxin Xinqiao (CXC) achieved a landmark IPO with a market cap surpassing 4 trillion yuan, marking a major success for the domestic DRAM industry after a decade of losses. In the crypto and Web3 space, several key narratives emerged. AI is driving demand for new infrastructure, with projects like AI agent wallets and programmable payments gaining traction, attracting interest from firms like Coinbase. The Bitcoin mining sector is pivoting, with companies like MARA focusing on energy management as electricity becomes a core AI-era asset. Meanwhile, the RWA (Real World Assets) sector faces a "utilization puzzle," with hundreds of billions in on-chain assets remaining dormant. Notable market movements included a historic single-day surge of over 17% for the KOSPI index and a significant migration of $16.5 billion in staked ETH within the Lido ecosystem. Michael Saylor announced a target to re-peg the STRC stablecoin around September 8th. Other highlights include discussions on Ethereum's ambitious 2030 roadmap for scaling and privacy, analysis showing high protocol revenues not always translating to token price gains, and warnings from Citi about potential extreme commodity price shocks by late 2026.

marsbit31 min fa

Weekly Selection丨Epic Stock Market Volatility, Changxin Tech's IPO Reshapes Storage Landscape, Saylor Aims to Re-Anchor STRC Around September 8th

marsbit31 min fa

When the Market Begins to Question AI Capex: A Full Analysis of Q2 Earnings Reports from Five Tech Giants

In late July 2026, five major US tech giants—Alphabet, Intel, Microsoft, Meta, and Apple—released their Q2 earnings reports. While all companies exceeded revenue and profit expectations, driven by strong AI-related business growth, investor reactions diverged sharply due to concerns over escalating AI capital expenditures (capex) and their impact on free cash flow. Alphabet reported strong revenue growth and a surging cloud business, but its stock fell after announcing a doubled year-on-year capex and negative quarterly free cash flow for the first time. Intel posted its strongest revenue growth in over 15 years, but its stock experienced volatile trading after significantly raising its full-year capex guidance. Microsoft saw its stock surge after beating estimates and, crucially, lowering its capex forecast while projecting positive free cash flow. Meta faced the most severe sell-off as its profits declined despite revenue beats, with free cash flow plunging over 90% and its capex guidance raised. Apple reported record June-quarter results, but its stock plummeted after providing Q4 revenue guidance that fell short of expectations, citing supply chain constraints and forex headwinds. The overall takeaway is that the market's focus has shifted from validating AI demand to scrutinizing the timeline for returns on massive AI investments. Companies demonstrating a clearer path to managing capex and preserving free cash flow, like Microsoft, were rewarded, while those signaling continued aggressive spending faced investor skepticism.

Odaily星球日报40 min fa

When the Market Begins to Question AI Capex: A Full Analysis of Q2 Earnings Reports from Five Tech Giants

Odaily星球日报40 min fa

a16z: From Companies to DAOs, DUNA May Become the Next Generation Organizational Form

This article, "From Companies to DAOs: How DUNA Could Become the Next Organizational Form," traces the 500-year evolution of business collaboration. It begins with medieval structures like the *commenda* and Florentine *compagnia*, which exposed partners to personal risk. The modern corporation, exemplified by the Dutch East India Company (VOC), was a revolutionary leap, enabling large-scale, capital-intensive ventures by offering limited liability and reducing coordination costs. However, corporations introduced new challenges like principal-agent problems and bureaucratic overhead. The piece argues that software and internet-native protocols are now reducing these traditional overheads. Decentralized Autonomous Organizations (DAOs) emerged as a new model for coordination without centralized management. Yet, DAOs face a significant legal vacuum: they lack legal recognition, leaving members exposed to unlimited personal liability, and their tokens are vulnerable to being classified as securities under unclear regulations (e.g., the Howey Test). This has forced projects into suboptimal workarounds like offshore foundations. The article identifies the Decentralized Unincorporated Nonprofit Association (DUNA) as a potential solution. Recently legalized in states like Wyoming, the DUNA provides a legal wrapper for decentralized networks. It grants key protections—legal personality, limited liability, and perpetual existence—to a group without imposing a traditional hierarchical management structure. This allows token-holder communities to govern, hold assets, and contract as a single legal entity, aligning with their decentralized nature. While DUNA doesn't solve all governance challenges or magically resolve securities law questions, it represents a crucial step. It fills the legal recognition gap, offering a native legal form for internet-scale, decentralized collaboration and extending the separation of personal risk from organizational venture into a new domain.

marsbit1 h fa

a16z: From Companies to DAOs, DUNA May Become the Next Generation Organizational Form

marsbit1 h fa

2026 Mid-Year Report On-Chain RWA: Tokenized Stock Market Cap Doubles in a Year, But 90% of Rights Are Hollow Shells

The 2026 Mid-Year Report on On-Chain RWA highlights a significant growth in tokenized stock market capitalization, which nearly doubled from $951 million in March to $1.89 billion by July. However, the report reveals a fundamental contradiction in this "layer 2.5" ecosystem: products with the strongest legal foundation (like regulated U.S. infrastructure) lack liquidity and distribution, while freely tradable offshored wrapper products often lack substantive ownership rights. The increase is driven largely by a few products (SECZ, FGRS, STRCx) and platforms (Ondo, xStocks, Securitize collectively hold over 85% share). While distributed value across networks like Ethereum, Solana, and BNB Chain has grown, the market remains fragmented. Products referencing the same underlying asset (e.g., Apple stock) are distinct legal liabilities with different intermediaries and jurisdictional rules, offering varying degrees of legal claim. The report cautions that headline numbers are misleading, as they reflect changes in distributed token value—driven by issuance, conversions, and price movements—not pure investor inflows. True "canonical shares" with legal ownership, wide wallet distribution, institutional liquidity, and independent on-chain price discovery do not yet exist at scale. Tokenized treasuries show stronger product-market fit, and ETFs may be easier to scale than single stocks. The core takeaway is a trade-off: legal certainty versus liquidity and composability.

marsbit2 h fa

2026 Mid-Year Report On-Chain RWA: Tokenized Stock Market Cap Doubles in a Year, But 90% of Rights Are Hollow Shells

marsbit2 h fa

Trading

Spot
活动图片