What evidence exists for large silver shipments from Shanghai to Western vaults in late 2025 and how are those movements documented?
Executive summary
Public reporting points to substantial physical silver flows out of Shanghai vaults and into Western markets during late‑2025, evidenced by large SGE/SHFE withdrawal tallies and wide China–London basis spreads, but direct, independently verifiable shipping manifests for specific “shipments” to Western vaults are scarce in the public record [1] [2] [3]. Price and lease signals—big Shanghai premiums, backwardation on near‑dated contracts, and elevated London lease rates—corroborate a story of physical tightness and cross‑border movement, while some claims of huge, named shipments or bank leases rely on industry commentary and partial reporting rather than primary freight documentation [4] [5] [6].
1. Vault withdrawals are the clearest public evidence of east‑to‑west metal migration
Weekly SGE/SHFE vault reports showing large net withdrawals—figures like 387 tonnes withdrawn in October and Shanghai vault balances falling to multi‑year lows—are cited repeatedly as primary evidence that physical silver left Shanghai custody in late‑2025 [1]. Those inventory metrics are the most direct, auditable public numbers available and form the backbone of the “silver leaving Shanghai” narrative [3] [1].
2. Price signals and basis spreads trace where demand and metal are moving
Sharp premiums in Shanghai relative to LBMA/COMEX prices—reports of single‑digit to double‑digit dollar per ounce premiums and a China–LBMA basis of several percent—plus near‑date backwardation on SHFE contracts indicate immediate delivery scarcity and incentivize physical movement toward buyers paying those premiums [2] [4] [7]. Elevated London lease rates and collapsing deliverable COMEX 1,000‑oz bar piles are presented as complementary market evidence that Western deliverable inventories were also being drawn down around the same period [5].
3. Reported export tallies and notable claimed transfers—but with varying degrees of verification
Some market reports assert exceptionally large exports—one analysis cites 660 tonnes exported from China to London in October—as well as anecdotes that major banks leased or moved thousands of tonnes via bilateral arrangements [7] [6]. Those figures, when reported, are influential, but they often come from market analysts or secondary reporting rather than published shipping manifests or customs disclosures in the public sources provided here [7] [6].
4. How movements are documented in public markets and where opacity remains
Movements show up in SGE/SHFE weekly inventory data, in LBMA and COMEX registered stocks and ledger changes, and in price/lease‑rate feeds that reflect physical availability—these are the documented trails analysts use to infer shipments [3] [5] [2]. However, direct freight documentation, customs export approvals, or vault‑to‑vault transfer manifests are not reproduced in the cited reporting, leaving a gap between observable inventory deltas and line‑item proof of specific containered shipments [3] [7].
5. Competing explanations, policy drivers and possible agendas
Alternative interpretations exist: some analysts emphasize regional hoarding, industrial demand and regulatory changes (China export controls or VAT adjustments) as drivers of withdrawals rather than systematic exported shipments to Western vaults [8] [9]. Market‑facing commentators and bullion dealers have incentives to emphasize scarcity to attract flows or political attention, while state or institutional actors may favor opacity around strategic metal movements; those biases are visible in how sources frame export‑control policy and premium narratives [8] [9].
6. Bottom line: strong circumstantial evidence, limited shipment‑level transparency
The weight of public evidence—large SGE/SHFE withdrawal figures, record‑high Shanghai premiums, backwardation and stressed lease markets—points to meaningful physical silver leaving Chinese vault inventories and contributing to Western market tightness in late‑2025 [1] [2] [4] [5]. Yet, the sources provided do not include unambiguous, independently verifiable shipping manifests or customs records tying named Shanghai vault withdrawals to individually identified Western vault receipts, so the precise scale and routing of “large shipments” remains inferred rather than exhaustively documented in the public reporting [3] [6].