2026年2月初，全球金融市場出現一種極為罕見、也讓投資人高度不安的景象：黃金、白銀、加密貨幣與主要股市幾乎在同一時間大幅下挫，過去常被視為「對沖關係」的資產類別，這次卻同步崩跌。這並不是單一突發事件所造成的結果，而是一連串宏觀政策訊號、企業基本面惡化、技術性槓桿清算，以及地緣政治與經濟預期轉向所形成的「多重利空共振」。

首先引爆市場情緒的，是美國聯準會人事布局所帶來的政策預期劇變。隨著美國總統川普正式提名新一任聯準會主席人選，市場普遍解讀該人選（例如被視為強硬派的Kevin Warsh）立場明顯偏向抑制通膨與維持高利率，這使原本押注2026 年快速降息的資金瞬間失去信心。利率路徑預期的急轉彎，直接推升美元指數與美國公債殖利率，對於不產生利息收益的黃金與白銀形成沉重壓力，也讓高估值、仰賴資金寬鬆環境生存的資產首當其衝。

在這樣的背景下，資金面開始出現明顯的「去風險化」行為。不同於過往危機時期資金會從股市流向貴金屬或加密資產，本輪調整中，投資人選擇的是全面降低曝險，現金與短期美債成為主要避風港，導致金銀與加密貨幣罕見同步遭到拋售。

美股方面，跌勢的核心來自科技股，特別是與 AI 相關的龍頭企業。雖然部分大型科技公司在營收層面仍符合市場預期，但財報揭露的未來支出計畫卻引發新的疑慮。例如Alphabet公布未來一年高達1,850億美元的AI資本支出規模後，市場開始質疑「AI是否已從成長引擎變成吞噬現金的黑洞」，對其變現能力與回收週期產生集體焦慮。這種情緒在半導體族群被進一步放大，AMD財報表現不如預期，股價一度單日暴跌超過17%，迅速拖累整個晶片與軟體板塊，形成科技股的系統性下殺。

更關鍵的是，這次資產同步崩跌並非完全由基本面驅動，市場內部的技術性機制扮演放大器的角色。加密貨幣市場在短時間內出現超過17億美元的槓桿爆倉，比特幣價格一度失守70,000美元整數關卡。由於許多機構投資人與量化基金採取跨市場配置策略，當加密資產出現大規模清算時，這些機構被迫拋售流動性最佳的資產──包括黃金、白銀與大型股票──以補足保證金或填補虧損，進而引發連鎖反應。

隨著價格快速下滑，各國交易所與清算機構同步上調保證金要求，觸發演算法交易的自動減倉與停損指令，使原本可能只是5%左右的技術性修正，短時間內被放大成雙位數的「斷崖式下跌」。市場流動性瞬間枯竭，價格失真現象頻繁出現，進一步打擊投資人信心。

宏觀經濟層面同樣沒有提供任何支撐。美國1月份裁員人數創下自全球金融危機以來的新高，單月裁員超過10.8萬人，這使市場重新評估「經濟軟著陸」是否仍然可行。企業縮減人力與資本支出，被視為景氣反轉的重要先行指標，進一步加深對衰退風險的擔憂。

同時，部分地區的地緣政治緊張局勢出現暫時降溫，原本支撐金價的重要避險溢價開始消退。在缺乏新的風險刺激下，長期持有貴金屬的資金選擇獲利了結，使金價與銀價的下跌更加劇烈。

此外，中國經濟因素也被視為這波大宗商品下跌的隱性推手。作為全球最大的金屬與能源消費國之一，中國需求復甦力道不如預期，加上市場對其政策刺激空間的疑慮，使金、銀以及原油等商品面臨額外下行壓力。這種需求端的不確定性，與西方金融市場的資金撤出形成共振，加速價格修正。

總體而言，這次全球資產的「同步崩盤」並非意味著單一市場或單一資產的結構性崩壞，而更像是一場由政策預期逆轉引發、再被槓桿與技術性機制放大的全面去風險風暴。它清楚地提醒市場，在高利率、地緣政治多變與AI投資回報尚未明朗的環境下，過度集中與高槓桿的投資策略，正面臨前所未有的考驗。

In early February 2026, global financial markets experienced an unusually violent bout of turbulence that deeply unsettled investors: gold, silver, cryptocurrencies, and major equity markets all plunged almost simultaneously. Asset classes that are typically seen as hedges against one another moved in the same downward direction. This was not the result of a single shock, but rather the outcome of multiple negative forces resonating at once, including shifts in U.S. monetary policy expectations, weakening corporate fundamentals, technical deleveraging mechanisms, and changes in geopolitical and macroeconomic outlooks.

The initial trigger for the market sell-off was a sharp change in expectations surrounding U.S. Federal Reserve leadership and future policy direction. After U.S. President Donald Trump formally nominated a new candidate for Fed chair, market participants widely interpreted the choice—figures such as Kevin Warsh were frequently cited—as signaling a distinctly hawkish stance focused on inflation control and maintaining higher interest rates. This abruptly undermined earlier bets on rapid rate cuts in 2026. The sudden repricing of the interest-rate path pushed up the U.S. dollar index and Treasury yields, placing immediate pressure on non-yielding assets such as gold and silver, while also hitting high-valuation assets that depend heavily on a loose liquidity environment.

Against this backdrop, a clear wave of risk-off behavior emerged. Unlike past crises, when capital often rotated from equities into precious metals or cryptocurrencies, this episode saw investors reducing exposure across the board. Cash and short-term U.S. Treasuries became the preferred safe havens, leading to the rare phenomenon of simultaneous sell-offs in gold, silver, and digital assets.

In U.S. equities, the downturn was led by technology stocks, particularly companies closely associated with artificial intelligence. While several major tech firms met revenue expectations, their disclosed forward-looking spending plans raised fresh concerns. Alphabet, for example, announced AI-related capital expenditures totaling as much as USD 185 billion for 2026, prompting investors to question whether AI had shifted from being a growth engine to a massive cash sink. Doubts about monetization speed and return on investment spread quickly. These fears were amplified in the semiconductor sector after AMD reported disappointing results, with its share price plunging as much as 17% intraday and dragging down the broader chip and software segments in a wave of systemic selling.

Crucially, the synchronized collapse across asset classes was not driven solely by fundamentals. Technical market mechanisms played a powerful amplifying role. In the cryptocurrency market, leveraged positions worth more than USD 1.7 billion were liquidated in a short period, with Bitcoin briefly falling below the USD 70,000 level. Because many institutional investors and quantitative funds employ cross-market allocation strategies, forced liquidations in crypto compelled them to sell highly liquid assets—such as gold, silver, and large-cap equities—to meet margin calls or cover losses, triggering cascading effects across markets.

As prices fell rapidly, exchanges and clearing institutions raised margin requirements, activating automated deleveraging and stop-loss algorithms. What might otherwise have been a routine 5% technical correction was quickly magnified into double-digit, cliff-like declines. Liquidity evaporated, price dislocations became frequent, and investor confidence deteriorated further.

Macroeconomic conditions offered little support. In the United States, January layoffs surged to their highest level since the global financial crisis, exceeding 108,000 in a single month. This prompted markets to reassess whether a “soft landing” remained achievable. Corporate cutbacks in staffing and capital expenditure were widely interpreted as early warning signs of an economic downturn, reinforcing recession fears.

At the same time, easing geopolitical tensions in certain regions reduced the risk premium that had previously supported gold prices. In the absence of new shocks, long-term holders of precious metals moved to lock in profits, intensifying the decline in gold and silver.

China-related factors were also seen as a subtle but important contributor to the downturn in commodities. As one of the world’s largest consumers of metals and energy, China’s weaker-than-expected demand recovery, combined with uncertainty over the scope and effectiveness of future policy stimulus, placed additional downward pressure on gold, silver, and oil prices. This demand-side uncertainty resonated with capital outflows from Western financial markets, accelerating the overall correction.

Taken together, this episode of synchronized global asset sell-offs does not necessarily signal structural collapse in any single market. Rather, it resembles a broad-based risk-off shock triggered by a reversal in policy expectations and magnified by leverage and technical dynamics. It serves as a stark reminder that in an environment of high interest rates, shifting geopolitics, and still-uncertain returns on AI investment, strategies reliant on heavy concentration and high leverage are facing unprecedented stress tests.