Gold is no safe haven – but you should still own some

By MoneyWeek Editor John Stepek Aug 08, 2012

John Stepek

Share with
friends:

Comments (16) Print this article

“Sell gold”.

That’s the message from FT columnist Peter Tasker, a Tokyo-based analyst with Arcus Research. As far as he’s concerned, gold’s bull market is over.

I’m a fan of Tasker’s writing. He often talks a lot of sense. And I normally agree with him.

I even agree with many of the points he makes about gold.

But not quite all of them…

Why hasn’t gold soared during the eurozone crisis?

If gold is such a ‘safe haven’ asset, then why hasn’t it rocketed during the euro crisis ?

This has become one of the key arguments of gold bears. And it’s one that Peter Tasker makes in his latest column for the FT. “Where is the haven that offers protection against the turbulence of markets? Guess what: there isn’t one”.

He’s absolutely right. The term ‘safe haven’ is lazy shorthand used to describe any asset that people pile into when they are feeling scared. But there is no such thing as a consistently ‘safe’ haven.

For example, UK gilts, US Treasuries, and German bunds have all variously been described as ‘safe havens’. But they are among the most overvalued assets on the planet. And their prices fluctuate on a daily basis, so they don’t offer any sort of guaranteed protection against capital loss.

See also

A beginner's guide to investing in gold
From coins, bullion and bars, to stocks and ETFs, MoneyWeek's guide to the basics of investing in gold.

And let’s be very clear – gold isn’t a ‘safe haven’ either. Try telling anyone who bought it in 1980 that gold protects the value of your money, and you’ll probably be greeted with a sardonic laugh. It might do so over the very long-term, but a 20-year bear market is enough to test the patience of even the most ardent goldbug.

What most people outside the financial world understand by the word ‘safe’, is that an asset provides a guaranteed safeguard against a nominal loss of capital (ie ignoring inflation).

The only asset that does that is cash. And unless you keep it under a mattress, even that guarantee is only as good as the government-backed deposit insurance scheme that stands behind your bank account. More to the point, it will do nothing to protect you against currency devaluation, debasement, or general inflation.

The real question: why has gold held up so well?

So why hasn’t gold performed spectacularly during the eurozone crisis? Here’s why. If the eurozone collapses, the outcome that people fear most is deflation. That explains partly why so much money has piled into bonds that yield very little.

During deflation, cash becomes more valuable. If prices are falling, a fixed amount of cash will buy more. So as long as you’re holding on to the right currency, you can do very well. Even a minimal yield on a bond issued by a reliable government, will be a big improvement on the complete absence of yield offered by gold. 

In fact, I’d argue that the real wonder is that gold has held up so well during the eurozone crisis, particularly when you compare it to most other commodities.


Compare the UK's leading gold brokers Gold

If you're interested in buying gold, our up-to-date directory of the foremost gold brokers and ETF funds makes essential reading.

Gold broker comparison table


The answer to why gold has held up so well? Well, if deflation is allowed to have its way with the eurozone, then you can expect mass defaults across the globe. That would be very bad news for the global financial system. In turn, that would increase physical gold’s appeal, because it’s one of the few assets that isn’t anyone else’s liability. Its value may rise and fall, but it will never go to zero.

The alternative - and I’d say more likely - scenario is that whatever lies directly ahead, the end game of this crisis involves central banks printing a lot more money. Again, that scenario is good news for gold.

The biggest threat to gold, as far as I can see, is if central banks start to hike interest rates. That time may not come for quite some time. And when it does, it’ll probably be in response to rising inflation, which tends to be good news for gold in the early stages in any case.

Gold is not the only investment – but you should hold some

That doesn’t mean that gold is the only thing that should be sitting in your portfolio. It would be stupid to have 100% of your money in gold, just as it would be stupid to have all of your money in any single asset class.

And gold is certainly not as cheap as it was 10 or 11 years ago, when it was self-evidently undervalued. As Tasker puts it, “some assets offer more value than others”. He cites stocks in Japan and Europe, both of which I’d happily add to my portfolio just now. You can read more about ways to play cheap European markets in this week’s issue of MoneyWeek magazine, which comes out on Friday. (If you’re not already a subscriber, you can get your first three issues free here.)

Tasker also notes that US house prices are very low relative to the price of gold. Again, if you’re going to consider buying property somewhere in the world, I’d agree that the US looks more promising than most places (as our regular contributor James Ferguson discussed in MoneyWeek earlier this year: A once-in-a-generation opportunity to pick up prime US real estate).

But I’d also hang on to gold. My view is that 5-10% is about right, but your exact allocation would come down to your own circumstances. It’s there to protect you against extreme financial risks, and there’s still a good chance that we’ll see more of those in the near future.

Also, I’d keep a close eye on the gold price over the coming months. As my colleague Dominic Frisby has pointed out on several occasions, gold’s bull market has followed a fairly reliable pattern of hitting new highs, then consolidating for periods of around 18 months.

The last peak came in late summer of 2011. So we’re not far off the 18-month mark now. If the pattern holds, 2013 could be a very profitable year for investors in gold.

On that point, we recently ran a cover story on investing in gold miners. The writer Simon Popple will be launching a precious metals mining newsletter shortly – look out for it. In the meantime, you can read his piece here: Gold still looks good – but miners look even better.

Follow John on Twitter || Google+ John Stepek

• This article is taken from the free investment email Money Morning. Sign up to Money Morning here .

Our recommended articles for today

Is this a buying opportunity for Standard Chartered?

Standard Chartered's share price has plunged after a US regulator accused it of helping firms in Iran launder money. So is this a buying opportunity, or should you steer well clear? Matthew Partridge investigates.

An intrepid small-cap miner to watch

With gold is in hot demand and short supply, this intrepid penny share is using the latest technology to root out the yellow metal from Australia's forgotten mines. It’s an interesting play, says Tom Bulford.

Comments (16)

Share with
friends:

Comments

  • 1. Jim

    (08 August 2012, 11:23AM)  Complain about this comment

    5% - 10% of portfolio????????????

    Are you crazy?

    Fed, BoE and ECB are all backed into a corner, their keynesian strategies are not working but rather than accept the inevitable they will all continue to print. Inflation will soar along with gold and related assets until the eventual bust if far worse than if we had taken the medicine a few years ago.

    Portfolios should be 70% - 80% in gold/gold shares, who would you rather listen to Jim Rogers, Marc Faber etc or a hack from the FT?

  • 2. Bhagwhan

    (08 August 2012, 12:10PM)  Complain about this comment

    Eh? Faber and Rogers are recommending 70%-80% bullion/shares? When did they exactly come up with this? Please point me in the right direction as I must have missed something here. Its certainly not in Faber's latest market commentary

  • 3. JREwing

    (08 August 2012, 12:23PM)  Complain about this comment

    Can't say I agree entirely. Gold "front runs" inflation. If gold is up six times in the last decade, be afraid, be very afraid. Eventually the cost of bread will also catch up. This is how it has always been.

    Of course, you cannot turn your savings into bread but can turn it into gold. So for the average investor, there is no other way to protect himself against rampant monetary debasement. If you're an average ínvestor and you haven't bought any gold, it may soon be too late. You will be paying six times for a loaf of bread without ever having protected your money against inflation by buying gold when it was "lower."

  • 4. HL

    (08 August 2012, 02:25PM)  Complain about this comment

    JR Ewing is right, incontrovertibly right.

    Furthermore, all the sniggering, anti-gold nonsense about "you can't eat gold" can be countered in a second by the question "Can you eat paper money ?"

    Let's be clear. Gold is money that no government can print. That is what makes it safer than dollars or pounds or euros or . . .

  • 5. jrj90620

    (08 August 2012, 04:54PM)  Complain about this comment

    Have to agree with JREwing.I think gold got ahead of itself,by rising faster than overall inflation.Gold is holding steady until overall inflation can catch up.Then we will see gold,once again,leading price inflation.Inflation,here in the U.S.,is much higher than govt will admit.They can't release honest numbers or people and investors would abandon their fiat currency,like they did in the late 1970's,when govt used honest inflation statistics.This would force govt to raise real interest rates to above actual inflation.Would cause an instant depression.

  • 6. DTG

    (08 August 2012, 05:39PM)  Complain about this comment

    As far as a safe haven as you say.... "The only asset that does that is cash"

    Totally disagree and I am sure anyone from Zimbabwe would agree here.

    It's not the currency at fault it's the accumulation of debt, paper money is simply paper money albeit a high and expensive quality of paper......... I also see that the newly minted BofE coinage is no longer recognised by vending machines, they must have substituted a high value metal with a lower value metal to keep the mint production costs down....... Oh wait a minute, didn't the Roman Empire do the same during its demise with the silver denarius???

    History repeats because man in power always think it will be different the next time around.

  • 7. JREwing

    (08 August 2012, 05:54PM)  Complain about this comment

    Some additional points: there is a great deal of misunderstanding about how inflation works (and a lot of confusion about "deflation"). These confusions go to the heart of misunderstandings about what is money and what is not money. Credit is not money, for example. Things that are levered on credit can collapse in value if credit contracts. This does not, however, automatically mean that all prices will fall. Were this the case, we would have had continuously falling consumer prices since Lehman - but we haven't. US consumer price inflation is running at around 7 percent, UK inflation is probably higher. This is due to the fact that while assets levered on credit (like stocks and houses) can fall in value, goods that are essentials (food and energy) can rise in price if the supply of base money is being increased - this can happen, and has happened, simultaneously.

  • 8. JREwing

    (08 August 2012, 05:54PM)  Complain about this comment

    "Stagflation" is another moronic term invented by academic Keynesians who have been proved wrong countless times. Did Zimbabwe just experience "stagflation"? It experinced hyperinflation AND economic contraction (or collapse). They go together. Confusing economic growth with inflation and vice versa is the sort of nonsense that is so deeply ingraned in modern economic thought that it will probably never be purged. Check Germany "Wirtschaftswunder" after WWII. They experienced 25 percent annual GDP growth with zero inflation. Isn't that supposed to be impossible in the Keynesian world?

  • 9. Aidan

    (08 August 2012, 05:58PM)  Complain about this comment

    I think both faber and rogers are predicting a big correction in gold, faber is saying he would not sell any but at the same time he would not buy any more gold. Alot of other assets like japanese and european stocks and some real estate markets are very cheap now, therefore it is better to invest in these than in gold at the moment when the direction that gold could take is now very uncertain, it is no longer the convincing case it was 10 years ago. Also do most gold investors really believe that the global financial system will collapse, i dont think they do, they are in gold like any other investment to make money

  • 10. Turbo

    (08 August 2012, 11:38PM)  Complain about this comment

    Aidan - I think you misread the faber comment. Faber said he won't be buying any at that point (i.e. a couple of months back) but he would with both hands when he believed this correction was over. Both predict that we are nearing the end of a big correction in gold, which may head lower in the event of a market crash, but even then only briefly. More likely the crash will be averted by monetary easing by Fed or some form of LTRO by ECB, and this will propel gold higher from this basing pattern of multi-month lows. Bottom line, there may be a little more downside in this correction, but not much, and I suggest it would be wise to load up on a little gold before the next leg higher.

  • 11. Ellen

    (09 August 2012, 07:27AM)  Complain about this comment

    The structural problems with most major economies, particularly those of the US and EU, have not gone away. Governments and central banks tried to solve the global banking crisis by taking on more debt. Until we get to grips with how all this debt is going to be dealt with, I still think gold is worthwhile holding.

  • 12. bhagwhan

    (09 August 2012, 08:50AM)  Complain about this comment

    Turbo, Aidan et al

    If you read Faber's monthly market commentaries he buys gold each month with his recommended portfolio being 25% bullion 25% cash 25%equities 25% bonds

  • 13. JREwing

    (09 August 2012, 09:13AM)  Complain about this comment

    @ Aidan - "do most gold investors believe that the financial system will collapse"? No they don't. If this became a widespread belief the system wouldn't collapse in five years but collapse today. We now have 1 QUADRILLION US Dollars worth of derivatives on the books of the TBTF banks in the US and Europe. Do you honestly believe this is a sustainable state of affairs?

  • 14. Beta adjusted

    (12 August 2012, 10:06AM)  Complain about this comment

    Don't forget - money *is* debt. Its an IOU from the central bank ... we are so used to thinking of money as wealth but our faith is misplaced. Whether you think 'wealth' is property or land or gold or tobacco stocks is debatable, but one thing is for sure: cash it aint.

  • 15. Mustafa

    (14 August 2012, 03:17AM)  Complain about this comment

    Gold is no more an instrument that is there to hedge inflation. Now markets dynamics have changed over the past decades. Developed economies and shrewed investors are using other hedging instruments like commodities, bonds to play against inflation. In prevailing situation most of the investor prefer liquid position. So alternate investment played the pivitol role in holding gold prices.

  • 16. Jammy21

    (02 October 2012, 03:00AM)  Complain about this comment

    Very in-depth debate Chaps !
    I am still trying to rationalise Warren Buffet not liking Gold as it has 'No Utility'.

Leave a comment

This will be the name displayed with your comment.

This helps us verify comments are genuine. It will not be displayed anywhere on the site and is stored confidentially.

Please keep your comment within 1,000 characters and relevant to the main topic. We encourage healthy debate, but we don't allow insults or bad language. Anything off topic or unpleasant, we'll remove. Enjoy the conversation! Thank you.

captcha To prevent spam-related comments please enter the characters shown in the 'Captcha' box to the left.

By leaving a comment you accept our terms and conditions.


>