Title: 美国私募信贷基金“全行业踩踏危机”：如果无法赎回，“净值”究竟该是多少？ | BestBlogs.dev
URL Source: https://www.bestblogs.dev/article/96977bcb
Published Time: 2026-04-05 11:12:00
Markdown Content: Skip to main content Toggle navigation menu Toggle navigation menuArticlesPodcastsVideosTweetsSourcesNewsletters
⌘K
Change language Switch ThemeSign In
Narrow Mode
美国私募信贷基金“全行业踩踏危机”：如果无法赎回，“净值”究竟该是多少？
华 华尔街见闻 @华尔街见闻
One Sentence Summary
This article provides an in-depth analysis of the valuation dilemma facing the U.S. private credit fund industry, pointing out that exceptions in accounting standards regarding NAV lead to a divergence between book value and market reality, thereby exacerbating the risk of redemption stampedes.
Summary
The article explores the trust crisis in the U.S. private credit fund industry triggered by a wave of redemptions. The core conflict lies in the fact that when the underlying assets held by a fund cannot be fully redeemed, current accounting rules still allow the fund to be valued at its official Net Asset Value (NAV). This 'NAV exception clause' leads to a systematic divergence between book value and actual realizable value. Citing institutions like Cliffwater and Blue Owl, the author points out that this valuation opacity not only masks liquidity risks but may also trigger investor panic, leading to industry-wide redemption stampedes.
Main Points
* 1. Systematic Divergence Between Valuation and Market RealityCurrent accounting rules allow funds to continue using official NAV pricing even when the underlying assets have limited liquidity, causing book values to fail to reflect true market values and masking potential liquidity risks. * 2. The Gray Area of Accounting Standards Is MagnifiedThe 'NAV exception clause' was originally intended to provide convenience for investors lacking independent valuation capabilities, but under current redemption pressures, it has become a tool to mask the true value of assets and mislead investors. * 3. Valuation Opacity Triggers Industry Trust CrisisThis valuation discrepancy has sparked widespread investor skepticism regarding the reliability of assets across the entire private credit industry, further accelerating redemption stampedes and creating a vicious cycle.
Metadata
AI Score
80
Website mp.weixin.qq.com
Published At Today
Length 1676 words (about 7 min)
Sign in to use highlight and note-taking features for a better reading experience. Sign in now
张雅琦 2026-04-05 19:12 河北
赎回潮正在美国私募信贷基金行业形成连锁反应，一场关于资产估值真实性的信任危机浮出水面。
据媒体报道，Cliffwater旗舰私募信贷基金近期遭遇大规模赎回申请，而该基金同时持有同样深陷赎回压力的其他私募信贷基金份额，其中包括Blue Owl Capital旗下产品。
据华尔街见闻此前文章，Blue Owl本周宣布再度限制旗下一只基金的赎回规模，导致寻求退出的投资者实际到手金额不足申请金额的四分之一。
这一局面将整个行业推至一个根本性的估值困境：当一只基金无法足额赎回所持有的另一只基金份额时，它是否仍可按后者报告的官方净资产价值（NAV）对该持仓进行账面计价？现行会计规则允许这一做法，但批评者指出，这意味着账面数字与市场现实之间存在系统性背离，正在进一步动摇投资者信心，加速赎回踩踏。
NAV例外条款：规则漏洞还是实用捷径？
会计准则通常要求基金以"公允价值"计量对其他基金的持仓，即市场参与者实际愿意成交的价格。然而，规则专门为持有私募基金份额的投资者设有例外条款——允许其直接沿用被持仓基金披露的官方NAV。立法初衷在于，投资者往往缺乏独立进行公允价值测算所需的信息，采用官方NAV是一种务实的简化处理。
问题在于，当某只基金已明确削减赎回配额，其官方NAV与投资者实际可变现的金额之间便出现了显著偏差。按照现行规则，基金管理人在已知NAV数据过时或存在缺陷的情况下，"应当考虑"是否有必要进行调整，但规则并不要求其采取任何实质性行动——"考虑"二字是全部义务所在。 这一灰色地带正在被逐渐放大。其他投资基金甚至曾以截然不同的方式利用这一漏洞：在二级市场以大幅折价买入私募股权基金份额，随即将持仓价值调升至官方NAV，部分案例中单日账面收益率超过1000%。
Cliffwater的连锁暴露
Cliffwater Corporate Lending Fund是这一估值困境的典型案例。截至去年底，该基金净资产规模达316亿美元，其投资组合中有28%配置于其他私募投资工具，相关估值均依赖各基金管理人提供的NAV。在已知持仓中，截至2025年12月31日，Cliffwater持有约1620万股OCIC，账面价值1.512亿美元，较成本高出约1%，估值依据为Blue Owl提供的官方NAV。同期，该基金还持有约380万股Ares Strategic Income Fund，账面价值1.049亿美元，较成本高出约5%，同样采用官方NAV计量。此后，Ares基金也已将赎回上限压降至流通股的5%，而股东的赎回申请比例超过11%。
Cliffwater首席投资官Blake Nesbitt在接受采访时表示，迄今为止，Cliffwater尚未针对非交易型BDC未能足额兑付赎回申请的情况对NAV进行调整。他同时表示，Cliffwater以每日频率更新NAV，且在其他因素上会定期进行调整。Nesbitt还透露，Cliffwater今年未再增持上述两只基金的股份——其中OCIC持仓始于2021年，Ares基金持仓始于2022年。
估值可信度遭受质疑
尽管OCIC和Ares的持仓合计仅占Cliffwater基金资产的极小比例，但其信号意义不容低估：一旦投资者发现部分持仓的NAV与市场现实明显背离，便有理由对同类持仓的可靠性产生更广泛的质疑。
私募信贷管理人此前已承受多重压力，包括对其在易受冲击的软件公司方面的敞口、信息披露不透明以及资产标价主观性等方面的担忧。OCIC的赎回申请高达21.9%，本身即是投资者认为其官方NAV存在虚高的强烈信号。
对于普通投资者而言，当前的困境在于：在现行会计框架下，基金有权以另一只基金的官方NAV为持仓定价，即便这一定价明显脱离实际可变现价值。这意味着，整个投资链条上的账面数字未必反映真实情况，而依赖NAV构建的其他资产估值，也可能受到隐性价格偏差的侵蚀。
私募信贷基金的赎回浪潮正向踩踏态势演变。而现行允许管理人自主选取估值基准的规则，正在为投资者加速出逃提供额外动因。 ⭐星标华尔街见闻，好内容不错过⭐****
本文不构成个人投资建议，不代表平台观点，市场有风险，投资需谨慎，请独立判断和决策。
华 华尔街见闻 @华尔街见闻
One Sentence Summary
This article provides an in-depth analysis of the valuation dilemma facing the U.S. private credit fund industry, pointing out that exceptions in accounting standards regarding NAV lead to a divergence between book value and market reality, thereby exacerbating the risk of redemption stampedes.
Summary
The article explores the trust crisis in the U.S. private credit fund industry triggered by a wave of redemptions. The core conflict lies in the fact that when the underlying assets held by a fund cannot be fully redeemed, current accounting rules still allow the fund to be valued at its official Net Asset Value (NAV). This 'NAV exception clause' leads to a systematic divergence between book value and actual realizable value. Citing institutions like Cliffwater and Blue Owl, the author points out that this valuation opacity not only masks liquidity risks but may also trigger investor panic, leading to industry-wide redemption stampedes.
Main Points
* 1. Systematic Divergence Between Valuation and Market Reality
Current accounting rules allow funds to continue using official NAV pricing even when the underlying assets have limited liquidity, causing book values to fail to reflect true market values and masking potential liquidity risks.
* 2. The Gray Area of Accounting Standards Is Magnified
The 'NAV exception clause' was originally intended to provide convenience for investors lacking independent valuation capabilities, but under current redemption pressures, it has become a tool to mask the true value of assets and mislead investors.
* 3. Valuation Opacity Triggers Industry Trust Crisis
This valuation discrepancy has sparked widespread investor skepticism regarding the reliability of assets across the entire private credit industry, further accelerating redemption stampedes and creating a vicious cycle.
Key Quotes
* This means there is a systematic divergence between book figures and market reality, which is further shaking investor confidence and accelerating redemption stampedes. * Once investors discover that the NAV of certain holdings significantly diverges from market reality, they have reason to cast broader doubts on the reliability of similar holdings.
AI Score
80
Website mp.weixin.qq.com
Published At Today
Length 1676 words (about 7 min)
Tags
Private Credit
Asset Valuation
NAV
Redemption Crisis
Financial Risk
Related Articles
* Goldman Sachs Analysis: Claude Cowork Becomes the First "Credible Case for Agentic Workflows," OpenClaw Shows the Future of Human-Computer Interaction * Jensen Huang Pens Rare Long-form Article * Jensen Huang Deep Dive: The 'Token Economy' Explosion, AI Computing's Share of GDP to Rise 100x, NVIDIA's $10 Trillion Valuation is Inevitable * A Repeat of the 1970s? Market Buzz: Will the U.S. Impose an 'Oil Export Ban'? * The 2028 Global Intelligence Crisis: Who Pays the Price? * The HALO Trade Sweeps Wall Street: The New Asset Class Targeted by Capital After Copper Mines and Power Grids asset allocation framework, arguing that energy storage power stations, with their infrastructure attributes, stable cash flows, and long lifecycles, should be included in this framework, while emphasizing the decisive role of high-quality battery cells in asset value.") HomeArticlesPodcastsVideosTweets