Gold, Silver, platinum and copper price plunge today: Gold prices fell 2.59% to $4,966 on February 12, 2026. Silver plunged 9.71% to $75.78. Platinum dropped 5.63% to $2,024. Copper slid 2.78% to $5.80 per pound. This was not a mild pullback. It was a sharp, synchronized sell-off across precious metals and industrial metals. Trading volumes surged. Gold futures saw 130,000 contracts traded. Silver volatility spiked after touching intraday lows near $74.

The sell-off followed stronger US economic data and a rebound in the US dollar. The latest jobless claims came in at 227,000. The January nonfarm payrolls report showed 130,000 jobs added, well above expectations of 70,000. The unemployment rate fell to 4.3%. That data reduced Federal Reserve rate cut expectations.

Gold fell below the key psychological $5,000 level. Silver broke under $80. These technical breaks triggered stop-loss selling and margin calls. The gold-silver ratio widened toward 66:1. Markets saw what traders call a “liquidity flush.” The broader trend remains under debate, but short-term volatility is elevated across commodities.

Why are gold and silver prices crashing today?

The immediate trigger was technical. For days, gold prices had traded in a tight range between $5,000 and $5,100. Silver hovered near $80 to $85. When markets coil like this, stop-loss orders build on both sides.

Gold had heavy stop orders below $5,000. Silver had leverage stacked above $80 after its massive 2025 rally that pushed prices as high as $121 earlier in the year. Once gold slipped below $5,000, automated selling accelerated. Silver followed sharply.

This type of move often happens when liquidity thins and technical levels break. There was no sudden geopolitical shock. The move was largely mechanical.

However, macro data added pressure. Strong US labor numbers reduced the urgency for Federal Reserve rate cuts. That strengthened the US dollar. A stronger dollar weighs on gold, silver, platinum, and copper because they are priced in dollars globally. The US Dollar Index rebounded after recent weakness. The labor market data changed rate expectations quickly. Before the jobs report, markets were pricing higher odds of a March rate cut. After payrolls beat forecasts, those odds fell sharply.

Higher-for-longer interest rate expectations hurt non-yielding assets like gold. When bond yields rise and the dollar strengthens, investors shift toward interest-bearing assets.

Gold is highly sensitive to real yields. Silver is even more volatile because it has both safe-haven and industrial demand exposure.

If upcoming inflation data surprises to the upside, rate cut expectations may fall further. That could keep pressure on metals.

Gold price analysis: Key support and resistance levels

Gold futures (GC00) are now trading near $4,966, down from recent highs above $5,600. The 52-week range remains wide, between $2,844 and $5,626.

The key support zone is $4,880 to $4,900. If that area holds, gold could stabilize. A break below $4,880 opens the door toward $4,800, then $4,700. The major long-term support stands near $4,500.

On the upside, gold must reclaim $5,000 on a daily closing basis. If it holds above that level, buyers may target $5,100 again. That area has acted as strong resistance.

Despite today’s drop, the broader uptrend from 2025 remains intact. Central bank buying continues. China’s central bank has maintained steady gold accumulation. Physical premiums remain elevated in some markets.

For now, the gold price forecast remains neutral with elevated volatility.

Silver price crash: Why was silver hit harder?

Silver fell nearly 10% in one session. That is far more aggressive than gold.

The reason is leverage. Silver experienced a record rally in 2025, gaining more than 140% at one point. Futures positioning became crowded. When prices broke below $80, margin calls triggered forced selling.

Silver’s key support now lies between $74 and $70. This zone aligns with previous consolidation levels. If silver holds above $74 and regains $85, the rally could resume toward $90 or higher.

But if dollar strength persists and risk appetite weakens, silver could test lower support zones.

The gold-silver ratio near 66:1 suggests silver is underperforming gold. Historically, elevated ratios sometimes precede silver outperformance, but timing remains uncertain.

Platinum and copper join the sell-off

Platinum (PL00) fell 5.63% to $2,024. Platinum often trades with both precious metals and industrial demand expectations. Weak risk sentiment and dollar strength weighed on prices.

Copper (HG00) dropped 2.78% to $5.80 per pound. Copper is closely linked to global growth, especially China’s demand. Slowing manufacturing signals and stronger US data created mixed signals.

Copper had traded above $6 earlier this year. Today’s drop reflects both technical pressure and macro uncertainty.

Industrial metals tend to fall when investors anticipate tighter financial conditions.

Was this a delayed reaction to strong jobs data?

Some traders believe today’s move was a delayed reaction to the strong nonfarm payrolls report. The dollar initially struggled to hold gains after the data. But as rate expectations reset, metals came under pressure.

Unemployment fell to 4.3%. Wage growth surprised on the upside. Those factors reduce immediate pressure on the Federal Reserve to ease policy.

Jobless claims at 227,000 did not dramatically change the narrative. Markets are now focused on upcoming CPI data. A stronger inflation reading could support the dollar further.

The metals sell-off occurred alongside weakness in energy markets. WTI crude oil fell 2.99% to $62.70. Brent crude dropped 2.84% to $66.31. Unleaded gasoline and heating oil also declined. Natural gas was the exception, rising more than 3%.

This suggests a broader risk reset rather than an isolated gold event.

What happens next for gold, silver, platinum, and copper?

Short term, volatility remains high. Gold must defend $4,880. Silver must hold above $74. Platinum needs stability above $2,000. Copper must protect the $5.70 to $5.80 area.

If US economic data continues to surprise on the upside, metals may face further pressure. If inflation cools and rate cut expectations return, gold and silver could rebound sharply.

Today’s crash appears technically driven but reinforced by macro shifts. The longer-term bull case tied to central bank demand, inflation hedging, and industrial use remains intact.

For now, investors should expect sharp two-way moves in gold prices, silver prices, platinum prices, and copper prices as markets adjust to shifting Federal Reserve expectations in early 2026.

FAQs:

Why are gold and silver prices crashing on February 12, 2026?

The massive price plunge is primarily driven by a “liquidity flush” triggered by unexpectedly strong U.S. labor data. With January payrolls jumping by 130,000 and unemployment falling to 4.3%, the market has abruptly repriced Federal Reserve interest rate expectations. This data reduced the urgency for rate cuts, causing the U.S. Dollar to rally and pressuring dollar-denominated metals. The crash was accelerated by technical factors as gold breached the critical $5,000 support level, triggering a massive wave of automated stop-loss orders and margin calls for leveraged traders.

What is the current status of the gold and silver price outlook?

Despite today’s $132 drop in gold and 10% cratering in silver, many institutional analysts view this as a necessary consolidation of an “overheated” market. While short-term volatility is expected to persist, the structural bull case remains supported by a sixth consecutive year of silver supply deficits and aggressive gold accumulation by global central banks. However, the immediate gold forecast is neutral-to-bearish until prices can reclaim and hold the $5,000 mark.

Why did copper and platinum also fall today?

Industrial metals like copper and platinum are suffering from a “risk-off” sentiment and fears of high-for-longer interest rates. Copper dropped to $5.80 as traders worried that restrictive Fed policy could dampen global manufacturing demand, particularly as markets await fresh inflation data. Platinum’s 5.6% slide reflects its high sensitivity to industrial project financing costs and a broader retreat from “green” commodities as the U.S. dollar regains its dominance.

What are the key support levels to watch for a recovery?

For gold, the $4,880 to $4,900 zone is now the must-hold line to prevent a deeper slide toward $4,500. Silver investors are looking for stability around the $75 mark, as a failure to hold this level could see the metal retest January’s lows near $65. Tomorrow’s Consumer Price Index (CPI) report is the next major volatility catalyst; a “cool” inflation print could spark a relief rally, while “hot” data may deepen today’s sell-off.

Oil Price Outlook – WTI CL=F And Brent BZ=F Around $65–$70 As Risk Premium Rebuilds

WTI Crude CL=F – $65 Holds Despite A 13.4 Million Barrel U.S. Inventory Build

WTI crude CL=F is trading near $65.01 per barrel, up $1.05 on the day for a 1.64% gain, with front-month futures earlier marked around $64.85 in European trade. The contract is sitting in a tight band around $65 even after the American Petroleum Institute estimated a huge 13.4 million barrel build in U.S. crude inventories for the week ending February 6, reversing the prior week’s 11.1 million barrel draw. On pure fundamentals, a double-digit stock build would normally pressure prices, but the tape shows the opposite: the market is willing to pay higher flat prices because the driver today is risk premium, not immediate scarcity. That tells you the marginal barrel is being priced on geopolitical risk around flows, not on the comfort of tanks onshore in the U.S.
U.S.–Iran tension is the core trigger for that premium in WTI CL=F. Washington is considering seizing sanctioned tankers carrying Iranian oil and has openly discussed sending a second aircraft carrier if negotiations break down. In parallel, Israel’s prime minister is in Washington, seeking strict limits on Iranian uranium enrichment, ballistic missiles and support for Hamas and Hezbollah. The combination of carrier threats, tanker-seizure talk and nuclear diplomacy is exactly what pushes risk models to reprice the odds of disruption in the Gulf. The key point is that none of this has yet removed barrels from the market, but it forces traders to assign a higher probability that something goes wrong in the shipping lanes that matter for Atlantic Basin balances.
The clash between a 13.4 million barrel U.S. build and a 1.64% gain in CL=F defines today’s structure: physical balances are comfortable for now, but paper markets are unwilling to ignore the geopolitical tail risk. That caps the move for WTI in the mid-$60s rather than launching it into an immediate breakout, but also prevents any slide back to the low-$60s while the Gulf situation remains unresolved.

Brent Crude BZ=F – Just Under $70 As Tanker And Sanctions Risk Lift The Global Benchmark

Brent crude BZ=F is trading close to $69.82 per barrel, up $1.02 or about 1.48% on the day, with earlier prints around $69.69. The benchmark is repeatedly testing, but not convincingly clearing, the $70 level. That price action tells you the market is repricing risk, not panicking. Traders are adding a measured premium for shipping lanes, sanctions and refinery targets, but they do not yet see a genuine supply shock that would justify pricing $80 or more in the front month.
A string of policy and sanctions headlines reinforces that premium in BZ=F. EU authorities are escalating oil sanctions with a broader ban on shipping services. Washington is targeting tankers that keep Iranian barrels moving, while Ukraine’s strikes on Russian refineries underline how quickly product supply can be hit when critical assets are damaged. At the same time, the U.S. is allowing domestic firms to provide services for Venezuelan oil, a move that could eventually normalise part of Venezuela’s export stream. The net effect is a constant reshuffling of flows rather than a clean increase or decrease in total supply, which naturally feeds into Brent’s status as a global pricing anchor.
Brent’s failure to break decisively above $70, despite a solid 1%–1.5% intraday rally, also shows that positioning still respects downside scenarios. If U.S.–Iran talks stabilise, if tanker seizures do not materialise, or if alternative barrels from Russia, Venezuela and others reroute efficiently, some of today’s premium can disappear quickly. That is why BZ=F is grinding higher in a controlled way rather than pricing a crisis.

Physical Benchmarks – Murban, OPEC Basket, Louisiana Light And Mars US Confirm A Controlled Risk Repricing

Murban crude is marked around $69.89, up $0.87 or 1.26%, tracking Brent BZ=F almost one-for-one and confirming that Middle Eastern light sweet barrels are reflecting the same geopolitical premium without yet signalling a real shortage. The OPEC Basket at roughly $66.65, up $1.71 or 2.63%, is actually outperforming both WTI and Brent in percentage terms, which indicates that the group’s diversified mix of grades is gaining relative value as sanctions, tanker risk and route reconfiguration push buyers towards barrels under the OPEC+ umbrella.
On the U.S. side, Louisiana Light is trading close to $65.94, up $2.99 or about 4.75%. That is a much sharper move than WTI’s 1.64% gain and reflects both its quality and its export positioning out of the Gulf Coast. These barrels are priced directly off seaborne demand into Europe and the Americas, so they respond more aggressively when seaborne risk premium rises. In contrast, Mars US, at about $69.79 and down $0.88 or 1.25%, shows pressure on heavier sour grades, where refinery demand, sour differentials and specific refinery maintenance cycles matter more than headline geopolitics.
Refined products are aligned with, but not amplifying, the crude move. Gasoline is quoted around $1.982 per gallon, up $0.022 or 1.14%. That is a modest gain compared with Louisiana Light’s 4.75% but broadly in line with the 1%–2% move in CL=F and BZ=F. The absence of a disproportionate spike in gasoline suggests that the rally is still centred on crude risk premium, not on a sudden panic about product availability.

Natural Gas – Pricing Around $3.155 Supports A Broad Energy Bid Without Distorting The Oil Signal

Natural gas is trading near $3.155, up $0.040 on the day for a 1.28% increase. The scale of that move is almost identical to the gains in WTI CL=F and Brent BZ=F, signalling that macro risk appetite and cross-commodity flows are lifting energy as an asset class. However, the drivers are clearly different. Gas is reacting to weather patterns, LNG trade and power demand, while crude is being remapped around geopolitical stress in the Gulf and evolving sanctions.
The key point is that there is no major divergence inside the energy complex. Gas is not collapsing while oil rallies, and refined products are not decoupling from crude. This coherence across contracts strengthens the interpretation that today’s move is a rational repricing of risk, rather than speculative dislocation in one corner of the market. For directional positioning in CL=F and BZ=F, it means the geopolitical premium is not being contradicted by hostile signals from gas or products.

Geopolitics – U.S.–Iran Confrontation, Gulf Shipping Risk And The Diplomacy Premium In CL=F And BZ=F

The geopolitical layer driving WTI CL=F around $65 and Brent BZ=F around $70 is straightforward: the probability of disruption in the Gulf has risen, and the futures curve is recalibrating. U.S.–Iran negotiations remain fragile. The White House is weighing more aggressive enforcement on sanctioned Iranian crude, including the option of seizing tankers. Israel’s leadership is pressing in Washington for stricter limits on Iran’s nuclear and regional activities, while Iran has a history of responding asymmetrically through harassment of shipping and pressure on strategic chokepoints.
The U.S. president’s signal that a second aircraft carrier could be deployed if talks fail raises the odds of miscalculation at sea. The market does not need actual damage to infrastructure to reprice; it only needs a credible trajectory towards higher insurance costs, longer routes and a higher chance that marginal barrels are delayed or stranded. The fact that WTI and Brent are both up over 1% even with a 13.4 million barrel U.S. crude build shows that traders are consciously paying for that diplomatic uncertainty.
At the same time, the market is well aware that risk premium can evaporate if a deal is struck or if enforcement softens. That is why the move is contained to the mid-$60s for CL=F and just shy of $70 for BZ=F, rather than a runaway spike into the $80s. Price today is simply the midpoint between comfortable supply and elevated political stress.

Policy, Sanctions And Flows – Venezuela, Russia, India And The Global Crude Map Behind Prices

The policy tape matters because it reshapes flows even if total supply does not change overnight. Washington’s decision to allow U.S. firms to provide services for Venezuelan oil opens the door for gradual rehabilitation and higher reliability of Venezuela’s output, which has been constrained by years of underinvestment and sanctions. Parallel to that, EU measures targeting shipping services and U.S. enforcement moves against tankers carrying Russian or Iranian barrels increase the friction cost of moving those barrels, even if they still find buyers through alternative routes.
India is at the centre of this reshuffling. On one side, it is signalling plans to slash imports of Russian oil after a U.S. trade deal, while on the other it is raising purchases from the Middle East and West Africa to avoid over-dependence on discounted Russian barrels. China, meanwhile, continues to hoard crude and has been a key backstop for Russian flows, keeping a floor under exports despite Western sanctions. Every one of these shifts affects freight rates, voyage times and differentials, which feed back into Brent BZ=F as the clearing benchmark for seaborne barrels.
For WTI, the implication is that U.S. crude must stay competitive on a netback basis into export markets while still clearing domestic inventories. A 13.4 million barrel build shows that, for now, inland supply is comfortable. But as sanctions and trade deals change who can buy Russian, Iranian and Venezuelan barrels at what discount, U.S. exports can either accelerate or slow, influencing how long CL=F can hold $65 without a deeper drawdown in stocks.

 

Santos ASX: STO – Gas-Heavy 2P Reserves, 17-Year Life And CCS Capacity In A Transitioning Energy Mix

The Santos Limited (ASX: STO) reserves update slots into the oil narrative as a reminder that long-duration gas and carbon capture are becoming structural pillars next to liquid crude. Santos closed 2025 with 1,484 million barrels of oil equivalent (mmboe) of proved plus probable (2P) reserves. Before accounting for 88 mmboe of production, 2P reserves increased by 13 mmboe, mainly from the Cooper Basin and Papua New Guinea. On a reported basis, the headline 2P number is lower than the 1,559 mmboe in 2024, but the underlying story is one of steady resource maturation and portfolio optimisation rather than depletion.
Proved reserves (1P) are 913 mmboe, with a 95% 1P replacement ratio, while the 2P replacement ratio stands at 15%, reflecting a year focused on turning resources into developed barrels more than chasing large new finds. Gas dominates the book, representing 83% of 2P reserves versus 17% for liquids. Developed reserves now account for 62% of the 2P total, up sharply from 40% a year earlier, which improves visibility on future cash flows. At 2025 production rates, the 2P reserve life is 17 years, a significant planning horizon in a world where many buyers are signing long-dated LNG offtake agreements.
On the contingent side, 2C resources have eased from 3,338 mmboe to 3,212 mmboe after the divestment of the Petrel and Tern fields offshore Northern Australia, partially offset by additions in the Cooper Basin, Western Australia and Alaska. In parallel, Santos is building a sizeable carbon capture position. Proved plus probable CO₂ storage capacity has declined to 8 million tonnes after 1 million tonnes were injected, but 2C CO₂ storage resources have grown by 24 million tonnes to 202 million tonnes, entirely in the Cooper Basin. That supports expansion of the Moomba CCS project and gives Santos a credible route to monetise decarbonisation demand from industrial clients and LNG buyers.
Financial guidance reinforces the cash-flow orientation. Santos expects about $4.94 billion in product sales revenue for 2025, with cost of sales between $3.25 and $3.30 billion, net finance costs of $250–$265 million and an effective tax rate around 31%. Impairment charges, including additional second-half hits, are flagged at roughly $137 million. Put together, this is a gas-anchored, long-life reserve base with increasing CCS leverage—exactly the kind of profile that will interact with oil demand over time by influencing gas-for-oil substitution in power and industry.

Saudi Aramco – iktva 70% Local Content, $280 Billion GDP Contribution And Supply Chain Control Behind Brent

Saudi Aramco’s progress on its In-Kingdom Total Value Add (iktva) program explains part of the structural confidence in long-term supply behind Brent BZ=F. The company has reached 70% local content in its procurement, meaning that seven out of every ten dollars spent on goods and services now goes to Saudi-based suppliers. The target is to lift that figure to 75% by 2030, deepening domestic industrial capacity in parallel with upstream and downstream expansion.
The scale is material. Since iktva’s launch, Aramco estimates that it has contributed more than $280 billion to Saudi GDP, attracted $9 billion in inward investment and catalysed over 350 investments from 35 countries. Forty-seven strategic products are being manufactured locally for the first time, and the program has identified more than 200 localisation opportunities across 12 sectors, representing about $28 billion of annual market potential. That spend is concentrated in manufacturing, services and energy-related equipment that underpin upstream, downstream and chemicals projects.
For the global oil market, the key implication is supply chain resilience. By anchoring critical manufacturing and services in-Kingdom, Aramco reduces its exposure to global logistics bottlenecks, shipping shocks and imported cost spikes—the very disruptions that rattled energy supply during the pandemic and subsequent geopolitical crises. A more self-sufficient supply chain raises confidence that Saudi Arabia can deliver on its role as the world’s leading swing producer, adjusting production in line with OPEC+ strategy without being constrained by external fabrication or equipment lead times.
This industrial base also positions Saudi Arabia as a regional manufacturing hub for oilfield services and heavy equipment, with implications for international service companies that lack a local footprint. For Brent BZ=F, a credible long-term capacity and project-execution story in Saudi Arabia stabilises the back end of the curve. It signals that while front-month prices will move with risk premium, the structural ability to expand or maintain supply remains intact.

Sentiment, Positioning And Verdict – CL=F And BZ=F Skewed Buy-Biased At $65–$70 With Clear Event Risk

Putting the numbers together—WTI CL=F around $65.01, Brent BZ=F near $69.82, Murban at $69.89, the OPEC Basket at $66.65, Louisiana Light at $65.94, Mars US at $69.79, gasoline at $1.982, natural gas at $3.155, a 13.4 million barrel U.S. crude stock build, Santos with 17 years of 2P reserves and 202 million tonnes of 2C CO₂ storage, and Saudi Aramco at 70% local content targeting 75% by 2030—the structure is clear. The world is not short of hydrocarbons today, but it is short of certainty about how those barrels move and how sanctions, diplomacy and conflicts will interact with shipping lanes and refineries.
On the supportive side, you have a 1%–1.6% rally in CL=F and BZ=F, an OPEC Basket up 2.63%, Louisiana Light surging 4.75%, persistent U.S.–Iran tension, threats of tanker seizures, and a sanctions landscape that keeps several million barrels per day under legal or logistical pressure. On the limiting side, you have a large U.S. inventory build, pockets of weakness in specific grades such as Mars, and the clear possibility that negotiations or policy shifts knock dollars off crude if they de-escalate the Gulf.
At $65–$70, the balance of probabilities favours a Buy-biased stance on both WTI CL=F and Brent BZ=F, rather than a Sell or flat call. The upside scenario—negotiations fail, sanctions tighten, or a shipping incident occurs—would likely push the front of the curve significantly higher from current levels. The downside scenario—diplomatic progress or softer enforcement—would remove part of the premium but is cushioned by robust demand, OPEC+ management and the time it takes for new barrels from places like Venezuela to stabilise. In other words, the market is paying for a higher risk premium, but not yet for a crisis, leaving room for further upside if the geopolitical path deteriorates from here.

That’s TradingNWES

• Gold remains within the weekly range between $5,000 and $5,1000.
• The US Dollar found support following the strong US Nonfarm Payrolls data.
• XAU/USD´s bullish trend remains intact, although momentum has faded.

Gold (XAU/USD) is trading practically flat at the top of the weekly range on Thursday, with bulls capped right below February’s peak in the $5,100 area. Precious metals remain in a consolidating mood for the third consecutive day, as the strong US Nonfarm Payrolls report failed to provide a significant impulse to the USD.

Nonfarm payrolls data released on Wednesday showed 130K net jobs in January, almost twice the 70K market consensus, with the Unemployment Rate falling unexpectedly to 4.3% and wage inflation growing at a steady pace.

These figures have prompted investors to pare back bets of immediate rate cuts by the US Federal Reserve (Fed), although the impact on the US Dollar has been moderate. The strong concentration of January’s payrolls in the healthcare sector, and the sharp downward revision of last year’s employment growth has weighed on investors’ optimism.

Technical Analysis

The 4-hour chart shows XAU/USD trading within a narrow range, with upside attempts capped below $5,100. Technical indicators are mixed. The Moving Average Convergence Divergence (MACD) histogram is showing a mild bearish pressure while the Relative Strength Index (RSI), at 55, highlights a neutral-to-positive tone.

Price action remains above the 100-period SMA, which supports the view that the pair is on a C-D leg of a Gartley pattern aiming for the 78.6% Fibonacci retracement level of the late January sell-off, at the $5,340 area.
On the downside, a bearish reversal between the mentioned 100-period SMA, now around the $5,000 level, and Tuesday’s lows, in the area of $4,995, would increase pressure towards the February 6 low, at $4,655.

(The technical analysis of this story was written with the help of an AI tool.)

The GBPJPY pair surrendered to the negative factors, to resume the previously suggested negative attack, to notice breaking the targeted support at 209.10, forcing it to suffer extra losses by reaching 207.65 as appears in the above image.

 

Note that the continuation of the price stability below 209.10 level, which might form a strong barrier will force the price to resume the negative trading, to expect reaching 207.00 followed by the next support base at 205.10 level, while its rally above 209.10 will increase the chances of activating the attempts of recovering the losses by its rally gradually towards 209.75 and 210.45.

 

The expected trading range for today is between 207.00 and 208.80

 

Trend forecast: Bearish