2026-01-14 04:30:14

Goldman Sachs just dropped some interesting takes on where markets are headed. Yes, they're sounding the alarm on valuations—they're at historically elevated levels right now, no sugar-coating that. But here's the thing: they're not banking on a bear market showing up in 2026.

The setup is tricky. You've got rich valuations priced in across multiple asset classes, which typically spells caution for traders. Yet the investment bank's view suggests the broader macro backdrop might not crack hard enough to trigger a full-blown bear cycle next year.

This kind of analysis matters because it sits right at that intersection where traditional market cycles meet real-world catalysts. Are we heading into a correction? Possibly. A full bear? Apparently not on their radar for 2026. It's the kind of nuance that separates casual market chat from serious portfolio thinking.

This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.

11 Likes

Reward
11
4
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

MEVictim

· 2h ago

Warning of overvaluation has sounded, but Goldman Sachs says there’s no sign of a bear market in 2026... They’re literally warning about risks with one hand and saying it’s all good with the other. --- Same old rhetoric again, valuation at a historic high but macro can support it, how come the more I hear this, the more suspicious it sounds? --- There might be a correction, but no bear market? GS’s words sound like they’re betting on a black swan not to come, a bit vague. --- Such a huge asset bubble and still dare to say there won’t be a bear market, they’re probably just trying to boost their confidence haha. --- I’d only believe there’s no bear market in 2026 if I’m really gullible, Goldman’s approach is really old school. --- Valuations are off the charts but they still dare to say that, either their information channels are awesome, or they’re just betting wrong. --- Brothers, this is probably the difference in thinking between investment banks and retail investors, they do see further than us. --- Honestly, Goldman Sachs’s analysis is quite clear-headed, they’re not completely bearish nor overhyped. --- I believe in the correction, but no way a bear market at all? Don’t be ridiculous, we’ll see in 2026.

View OriginalReply0

GasOptimizer

· 01-14 05:00

High valuation + not bearish on 2026... This logic is a bit like saying high valuation but not necessarily crashing. The data indeed supports this view. However, historical data shows that every time this is said, the fluctuation range is actually the largest, and arbitrage opportunities are the hardest to capture.

View OriginalReply0

MevShadowranger

· 01-14 04:58

High valuation warning but not bearish on next year? GS's move is pretty good. Basically, they're betting that the macro won't collapse too badly. Overvaluation is real, but to say it's a complete bear market? Nah, they’re not so sure either. These days, those who tell stories make money, while those who just look at data get caught out. What will happen in 2026? Who the hell can say for sure? I'll just keep dollar-cost averaging into my coin. It's called nuance in a nice way, but harshly speaking, it's sitting on the fence... However, such a stance is quite safe for GS.

View OriginalReply0

Whale_Whisperer

· 01-14 04:58

Buddy, GS's recent comments are pretty decent. The valuation is indeed outrageous, but they don't bet on a bear market next year? I feel like they're just leaving themselves an escape route. I've heard this kind of "possible pullback but no bear" argument too many times, and each time it gets slapped down. There will definitely be short-term volatility, but to bet everything on it? No guts for that. Let's see how the market performs at the end of the year; macroeconomics isn't that simple. GS as well, always saying half and leaving half unsaid—that's the art of Wall Street.

View OriginalReply0