Bratnia

Any gold, held by anyone, even if bought via the internet, and without a audit trail is at risk of being confiscated, as the proceeds of illicit activities or smuggling. If HMRC inspect a dealers records that will lead them onto individuals who if in turn they are investigated may very well lead to a prize of confiscation. HMRC manual even indicates that if you are the unwitting holder of smuggled gold ... its confiscated and as such each purchase you make should include questioning of how/where it was sourced/funded, name, address ...etc. Any claim of gold having been lost and if it is ever found again ... may very well not be the finders gold, instead being claimed by the Crown or others (museums). As should anyone who makes large sales/purchases of over 10K Euros value (even in multiple smaller amounts and across multiple family members) consider whether they need to register as a high value trader (that costs around £300/year - that helps fund anti-money-laundering activities). Or again potentially fall foul of the law. Perhaps a claim that you didn't register and so were up to no good and your gold (and other wealth/assets) confiscated as the proceeds of illicit activities. The UK seems to be transitioning ever closer to a assumption of guilty until you can prove otherwise state and where that state can financially benefit from pursuits/confiscations. Buy a single paper roll of 10 one ounce gold Britannia coins costing £17K of whatever from a dealership who is later inspected and their records having you also investigated and potentially having that gold, your home, car, savings etc. being seized/confiscated when maybe a few other coins found don't have a full audit trail. So the state is pretty much advocating that even best endevours to be above board can be a risky venture, where you could end up losing everything. And then wonders why so much capital/assets are flighting the UK. When pushed into such corners there's greater incentive to move to the dark side. And not only gold, but Pounds also. Which mid to longer term is likely to be good for the price of gold in Pounds as the currency sinks due to state over-micro-management. Simply the tax rule book/laws are so extensive and vague that the state could likely have anyone they so decided to focus upon being proven as guilty. In reflection of that 'everyone is guilty' mindset they have facial/car number recognition, geolocation tracking, internet/call activities recording, are pushing for all transactions also being fed into their AI systems ... a Open Prison state. A very sad state of affairs. It should also be remembered that Labour in 1968 opted to set the top tax rate to 130%, yep, above a certain amount and for every £1 you earned you owed the taxman £1.30 in tax! And guess who'll likely be in government come the next General Election, with a large enough majority where it can implement even its most wildest of socialist dreams. The Tories as is aren't much different, we basically have a autocracy - just a colour vote of red or blue with much the same government rising to power either way.

Whilst a year of stock and gold both down do periodically occur, there's the prospect that either stock or gold will by up in a year time, where those gains offset the loss in the other asset (and typically more). 50/50 and in a years time rebalance ... and likely you'll end up holding either more ounces of gold, or more stock shares (lower average price per share). So yes. Supplemented with averaging in and out over many years and it all tends to average out well - better than having stayed in cash.

The US treasury bought 8000 tonnes of gold in 1933. Nowadays that lent to the Fed at a $42.222 rate, so at a market price of $2111 the Fed has 50x leverage, that rises if the dollar falls against gold (gold price rises). In turn the Fed can use that 50x leverage to buy (or sell) 123x leveraged paper gold (at recent levels) ... that can be used to direct the price of gold into alignment with the dollar a.k.a dollar aligned to the price of gold. US debt expansion when drawn using log scale Y axis, as you should for longer time periods, is more a straight line, many charts however are drawn using linear scale Y axis, so US debt expansion is often (falsely) claimed to be a unsustainable exponential - whereas it is, the dollar will over time continue to decline relative to the price of gold as the US target a 2% inflation rate (devaluation of dollars). All of that secures the dollar, that in turn others use as a international trade settlement currency instead of gold. Based on a foundation of retaining a large amount of physical gold, but where there are many claims to each ounce of gold. If you can't physically touch the gold your 'own' then any claim is potentially in the same queue as 120+ others. Gold makes for a good alternative to bonds/cash deposits (paper money), a 67/33 stock/gold can broadly compare to all-stock but with less volatility (will rise less during good stock times, fall less during stock bad times). At the end of the day, it is those holding physical gold that get to determine how the 120 claims upon each ounce may be settled. Even funds claiming to be backed by physical gold could see that gold vanish under a gold-rush condition.

Paper to gold ratio indicated as being up to 123.16 from around 122.2 https://usdebtclock.org/gold-precious-metals.html a few weeks back. Around 0.8% more, so with around 200,000 worldwide tonnes in total above ground gold = 1600 tonnes (back of napkin figures) additional paper gold having been created out of thin air, which is around the same amount as the 'unknown' big buyers 1500 tonnes purchase that drove the price of gold to spike. Could be a indicator of a pipeline reversion back down to £1600 former (pre 1500 tonnes purchase) price levels. 25th April Option settlement date (downblip) has now arrived. Next down blip may align with subsequent settlement dates https://www.cmegroup.com/markets/metals/precious/gold.calendar.options.html until getting back down to the £1600 level (give or take £/$ FX and/or rise/fall in world geopolitical fear-factor).

Consumer/retail price inflation is slowed by productivity/technology. Asset price inflation incorporates that growth element (more having surplus capital). On another measure gold has moved into mild/moderately relatively expensive territory. Early 1970's gold was very cheap, late 1970's had become expensive, by the end of that millennium had moved back to being very cheap again. UK house/gold ratio is very much a similar looking chart. As the gold/silver ratio has increased, silver is perhaps the better value, but as ever its far far easier to make a judgement with hindsight, much less so (if not impossible) at the time, what can seem expensive (cheap) can become even more expensive (cheap). Much capital has flighted to the US$ (fear), the dollar is relatively strong. As fear subsides and capital flows elsewhere (to where greater reward potentials are seen), so the dollar might weaken - gold rise in US$ terms. As might the relatively weak current Pound gain in strength - gold decline in Pound terms. That gold might rise for Americans doesn't mean a mirroring of that will occur for Brits.

Looks fine from Australia

67/33 stock/gold yearly rebalanced (yellow line) ... worked well. Swap out half of that stock+dividends for home+imputed rent, thirds each home/stock/gold ... and the broad rewards are inclined to be similar. Leave the home value as non-rebalanced (impractical to rebalance) and rebalance the stock/gold (50/50). For currency diversification UK £ home, US$ stock, gold is a reasonable choice. Currency diversification of £/$/gold, asset diversity of land/stock/gold, income diversity of imputed rent/dividends/SWR. Some swear by just stocks alone, but you can broadly achieve similar overall rewards but with less volatility with such a thirds each home/stock/gold asset allocation. Otherwise known as a better risk-adjusted-reward.

https://www.portfoliovisualizer.com/backtest-asset-class-allocation?s=y&sl=7huwWjpOVwHVbDmHzHn4DG US data, where the chart has been rotated a little. Red line is gold, blue line is stock total returns. Inflation adjusted data (and log scaled). .... As a indicator of the tendency of a inverse correlation between US$/stocks and gold

1980 247.12 1981 208.75 1982 277.49 1983 262.98 1984 265.69 1985 226.61 1986 264.57 1987 259.88 1988 227.55 1989 249.84 1990 203.01 1991 188.58 1992 220.17 1993 263.69 1994 244.57 1995 250.13 1996 217.38 1997 174.72 1998 173.42 1999 180.09 Gold price in £. Many wont have the patience to persist across two decades of nominal price declines (even more in inflation adjusted terms) and repeated rebalancing from stocks that are doing great, to add to 'losing' gold, and end up having accumulated multiple more ounces of gold in their safe acquired at a low average price. But for those that have that temperament - that then paid dividends in the 2000's when stocks faltered/gold did well. 1970's gold did well/stocks poorly, 1980/1990's stocks did well/gold poorly, 2000's gold did well/stocks poorly. Providing you're investing (in it for the longer term and continue to persist) it all washes out well. Many however don't have the patience, are perhaps just profit chasing and will jump into whatever is in vogue at the time, repeated buy-high/sell-low is a losers game-play, where more often you'd have been better off with just a simple cash deposit/savings account. You want to be on the other side of those traders, provide them with the liquidity and take their losses as your gain.

Depends upon why and how you trade, and how large/small your portfolio is. Perhaps physical gold as deep storage (ten x 1oz single trades at a time (near £20K value more recently) is inclined to have smaller spreads), paper gold for more frequent trading (tight spreads, maybe £10 round trip brokerage cost (£5 each way) - so on a £5K round trip a little over 0.2%).

Lots of US stock earnings reports this week. It's unusual for the S&P500 to have six consecutive days of declines Gold declines are perhaps a indicator of expectations of a S&P500 up day/maybe some good earnings reports.

Silly girl. She'll spend ten years of her life doing that - in order to spend a extra 10 years in a dementia care home (at considerable cost). Could instead have spent the same on booze and smokes.

Similar might be applied to stocks, Dow/Gold ratio. In 1980 a ounce of gold near bought a single Dow stock index share, by the end of 1999 a Dow stock index share bought 40 ounces of gold. https://www.macrotrends.net/1378/dow-to-gold-ratio-100-year-historical-chart

There are three sources of rewards/gains, price appreciation, income (dividends/interest) and volatility. Volatility is commonly seen as being a risk, and only by taking on exposure to risk might you be rewarded. The high volatility of stocks and gold are a good thing, especially when there's a tendency towards a element of inverse correlations. If you want slow and steady go with cash deposits - but as the volatility is low so also are the rewards. 50/50 in volatile assets such as stocks and gold and if stocks double/gold halves one period and then gold doubles/stocks halve over another period, individually they yield 0%, as a 50/50 pair you make a >50% gain. Gold and stocks will have a decade or more of relatively bad outcomes, but what drives stocks to have a bad decade can see gold have a good decade and vice-versa. 1970's and gold good/stocks bad, 1980's stocks good/gold bad ... and the same again in the 1990's. 2000's gold good/stocks bad. Across 1980 to 1999 and gold prices halved in nominal terms, lost even more in real (after inflation) terms. 50/50 with stocks however and you ended up with 6 or 7 times more ounces of gold in your safe just via yearly rebalancing, without having added a single additional penny. In the 2000's when gold did well ounces of gold in your safe were moved over into buying more stock shares (at relatively low prices as stocks did poorly). Volatility isn't a risk when combined with both rebalancing and averaging in/out that smooths down that volatility to a broader overall average that incorporates the risk-premium for having taken on the 'risk' of volatility.

Of course it would be condemned but that in itself might not be sufficient. If the 300 missiles had caused 1000 deaths then the western elements of the international community would have rallied around Israel, but not to the extent of Israel not still feeling a sense of being isolated and potentially opting for a non-lethal demonstration nuclear retaliatory strike, somewhere remote within Iran, accepting of the condemnation and isolation - in feeling of already being isolated (a sense that if Iran missiles Israel now, that it may also do so in future once it has nuclear missiles). From there Iran would retaliate, and the situation escalate, but where outside of that all sides condemn the situation in order to avoid broadening - but falling upon deaf Israeli ears. Initially non-lethal/remote, subsequently some deaths and Iranian nuclear development sites targeted, then onward/upwards. 1000 initial Israeli deaths, then 10,000 then all out kill or be killed survival/extinction and in total disregard of what others might be saying at the time. Wars are all too easily started, difficult to end, and once one nuke has been thrown the second is more easily thrown.

Iran launched over 300 missiles at Israel, launched from Yemen, Lebanon, Syria, Iraq and Iran, and were threatening to launch another barrage of 3000. Clearly intended to cause much damage and deaths, a thwarted extermination attempt, de-escalated by the attempt failure and Israel having nuclear weapons and the capacity to deploy those if Iran persisted with its extermination attempts. Russia and Iran sit alongside North Korea as pariah states. Had those 300 missiles impacted then more likely the international community would have rallied around Israel.

UK debt cost less in real terms now than in 2007, its government that is messed up. Supply driven inflation is easing and government spending on war benefits (some) stocks. 1941/42/43 and UK stocks gained +23%, +17%, +11%; US stocks 1942/43/44/45 in Pound adjusted terms gained +23%, +20%, +21%, +44%. Difficult to tell what gold did over those years, but silver also did very well (so might assume gold also would have done well). WW1 and Britain pretty much bankrupted itself/Commonwealth with the amount capital the state threw at anyone that could supply a big bang.

I see it going the other way. Failed attempt to cause widespread deaths/damage by Iran upon Israel, Israel not having nuked Iran in return, and I would imagine Iran is reconsidering its supply of its proxies. Better for it to calm things down - giving Iran time to evolve into a nuclear power state. With US congress now having approved the $61Bn funding for Ukraine that will quickly see arms supply into Ukraine (much of that money goes directly to US firms that manufacture and supply the weapons), move back more to being a stalemate/static situation rather than a Russian advance. Fear (rising/high gold) somewhat calmed. More a directional push towards higher stock prices/lower gold prices.

Israel were intending a immediate strong response, a.k.a massive nuclear strike against Iran, but as pretty much all of the 320 missiles thrown its way were intercepted or permitted to hit just sand its anger was talked/calmed down. Had say only 50% been intercepted and the others were hitting populated areas causing many casualties !!! So yes, Iran's irresponsible large scale launch against Israel was near a cause of a nuclear strike. Iran did try hard to cause much damage, shielding its ballistic attacks with drones (attempted to flood the iron dome shield, a tactic that has proved to be successful in Ukraine) i.e. had every intent to cause mass deaths/destruction. 220 drones, 110 ballistic. They also launched the attacks from Yemen, Lebanon, Syria, Iraq and Iran, so missiles were coming in from north, south and east directions. If Israel had endured many deaths/destruction and retaliated with a nuclear strike against Tehran I suspect that others would talk that down, not launch against each other, outside of that and ... not been too bad/widespread. Israel has hundreds of nukes and would have demonstrated actual use if confronted.

What's inflation? If you keep around equal value measures of stocks and gold as the 'currency' in your (e)wallet then buying stuff (consumption goods/products/services) have historically declined at over a -4% rate Yes you have the bother that you have to convert that 'currency' (stock and/or gold) into Pounds in order to make a transaction, but a credit card can in-fill those days before the T+2 typical stock/gold sale time completes. Oh, I see 'inflation' is the rate at which keeping Pound currency in your wallet is inclined to lose purchase power over time. Surely you'd have to be a masochist to do that, Pounds are only for money you intend to spend very soon. Cash deposits/savings accounts aren't much better, they might pay a interest that compares to 'inflation', but then the state wants to tax those 'gains' !!! Be a wise shopper, spend using your credit card and then at the end of the month when that bill is due compare to see whether converting gold or stocks is the better choice for paying off that bill.

To me that's too anonymity cropped/blurred to be able to comment. Do they have blue hair? !!

A dealership may ask/record whether you're buying gold for someone else, even if so you might say no, and then later opt to privately sell that gold for 0% gain/loss on to another shortly thereafter. i.e. end up with gold bought in someone else's name and address/id, along with additional private sale/purchase/transfer records. For self insured/storage security reasons that might be good practice, no record of photo/id/address of where the gold might be being stored, but does leave the purchaser who used their ID to buy the gold potentially exposed to risks. Thinking along the lines of two brothers, one buys the gold using their ID/address, and then passes/sells that gold on to their brother who then stores it at their separate/different address. If HMRC have records of transactions/gold purchases stolen/lost and a thief visits the brother who purchased the gold in their name, opening the safe when a sharp pencil is held up to a loved ones eye would reveal a sale record/note ... no gold, sale proceeds ... spent, just a couple of grand in cash within the safe. The UK has transitioned to where it cares little for citizens safety, more a case nowadays of buyer beware, the state gives illegal migrants more care/security than the population those illegal migrants mix into even though they may have past criminal records ...etc. Very much a case of having to best secure ones own safety/security. Call the Police and they might be able to book you in to attend in several days time, if at all. Or if they do attend they send out maybe a pair of barely five foot tall WPC's that can do little if confronted with a gang of six foot burly beasts.

Just to add that I am a private/amateur investor with no affiliations. Just outlining basically my own investment approach, and where personally I prefer US stocks over UK FT All share stocks, as that has a third in UK £ home value, a third in US$ stocks, a third in global currency/commodity (gold). Income sourced via imputed rent, dividends, SWR (that in a number of years will be further supplemented with pension income).

Some retired (drawdown) investors use a 'safe withdrawal rate' (SWR) method of drawing a income from the total return of their portfolio. With SWR you draw a percentage amount of the total portfolio at the start, say 1.5% SWR, and thereafter each year you increase that £££ amount by inflation as the amount drawn as income in subsequent years, so a nice inflation adjusted yearly income. Other investors just hold stocks and spend the dividends, but where the dividend value is volatile, might in some years halve down, later double up .. etc. is more inconsistent. In the chart below I compare the final portfolio value after 30 years for all years since 1950, where one just spends the dividends, so FT All Share price only stock index with 0% SWR, and compare that to 50/50 stock/gold with a 1.5% SWR, so as though the gold half had provided a 3% net dividend via (usually tax efficient) capital gains. Dividends tend to be treated as income and taxed accordingly, so a 4% historic average dividend might have provided a 3% net dividend after a average 25% taxation rate. For the statistically minded 50/50 stock/gold provided the better risk-adjusted reward, had a lower standard deviation/better Sharpe Ratio. Also the income was more diversified, sourced from both stock dividends and SWR, was inclined to be less variable. Broadly the rewards were similar, better for stocks if you use a 'average' measure, better for stock/gold if you use a 'median' measure. In a small number of cases stocks were much better, had a maximum of 5.635 i.e. you ended with over five times more inflation adjusted portfolio value than at the start after 30 years, but is more a case of a lucky-few, who started at a time when stocks were very low/cheap. If you own your own home, and also retire with a state pension that might be considered as a form of 'bonds', and alongside those hold a 50/50 stock/gold asset allocation where around half of the income that provides is sourced from stock dividends, and half from SWR, then you have considerably broad overall exposure to multiple assets, currencies and sources of income. Where the average outcome is generally good-enough. To better align with that average you might average-in and average-out rather than lumping all-in/all-out at single points in time. As does rebalancing 50/50 stock/gold serve as a form of averaging-out of both stocks and gold. Fundamentally with the right style/asset allocation you can spend many years in a "don't worry, be happy" lifestyle/mindset. So what if gold or stocks rise or fall a lot. Just keep plugging away with averaging in/out and there's a good chance you'll be OK/do-well.

Just accept/take what's given. US data and 2021 stocks up +25%, gold down -4%, rebalancing to 50/50 had you selling some stocks to buy more ounces of gold. 2022 stocks down -20%, gold down -1% ... selling some gold to buy more stocks. 2023 stocks +26%, gold +13% ... selling some stocks to buy more ounces of gold. Helps average-out both stocks and gold, and with averaging in and out in general over many years ... you're more inclined to achieve the broad overall average outcome that is good-enough.