Gold On Pace For Its Best Year Since 1979 — But One Analyst Thinks Prices Have Peaked

Commodity

Summary:

Gold (GC=F) futures sat near $4,000 per ounce on Friday, remaining steady after last month's sharp sell-off but raising questions over where the precious metal is headed next.

Gold is still on pace for its best year since 1979, driven by central bank purchasing and increased inflows into exchange-traded funds (ETFs), bar and coin purchases. But the yellow metal is off roughly 9% from its all-time high north of $4,350 last month.

Analysts at Macquarie Group said Thursday they believe gold prices have likely peaked, noting that other central banks began cutting rates ahead of the Federal Reserve, which has remained noncommittal about another move in December. Rate cuts typically boost the metal's appeal over yield-bearing assets.

"With global growth beginning to rebound, central bank easing cycles near an end, real interest rates still relatively high and tensions between the US and China easing (at least for now), we suspect the near-term peak is in, with prices likely to fall over the coming year." chief economist Ric Deverell wrote on Thursday.

"However, the decline will likely be slower than seen after previous peaks, with prices remaining well above the end-2023 level through the current US Presidential term," he added. Gold was sitting near $2,000 per troy ounce almost two years ago.

The analysts noted if geopolitical tensions re-escalate or concerns about the size of the US government return, gold may rally further.

Gold saw its biggest daily drop in more than a decade in October, bringing a stunning rally to a sudden stop. It still ended the month with a roughly 5% gain.

A World Gold Council report released earlier this week said that a stronger dollar fueled gold's seesaw from its recent all time high.

"With no long-term momentum 'sell' signals seen thus far, our view is that an October decline will likely provide a healthy and much needed breather in the core long-term uptrend," the report said.

Even if a peak is reached, some Wall Street analysts still expect gold to rise from current levels from end of year.

"Despite the recent pullback in gold to around USD 4,000 an ounce from a peak above USD 4,300/oz, our target remains USD 4,200/oz for the next 12 months; a rise in political and financial market risks could lead gold to our upside target of USD 4,700/oz," UBS analysts said in note on Thursday.

Meanwhile Goldman Sachs analysts predicted last month that gold will reach $4,900 per troy ounce by the end of next year.

"While a correction in speculative upside call options structures likely contributed to the selloff, we believe sticky, structural buying will continue further, and still see upside risk to our $4,900 end-2026 forecast from growing interest in gold as a strategic portfolio diversifier," said Goldman Sachs analysts in October.

Analysts at Macquarie Group believe gold prices have peaked despite the Federal Reserve's recent interest rate cuts, which typically tend to make the yellow metal more attractive to investors against yield-bearing assets. REUTERS/Mariya Gordeyeva/File Photo · Reuters / Reuters

Source: Yahoo Finance

Risk Warnings and Disclaimers

You understand and acknowledge that there is a high degree of risk involved in trading. Following any strategies or investment methods may lead to potential losses. The content on the site is provided by our contributors and analysts for information purposes only. You are solely responsible for determining whether any trading assets, securities, strategy, or any other product is suitable for investing based on your own investment objectives and financial situation.

Add to Favorites

Samantha Luan

Forex

Economic

Key points:

· US says it has regional support for draft UN resolution on Gaza peace plan

· US official: if the region is with us on the text, the Security Council should be too

· Draft text would give two-year mandate for international force to stabilize Gaza

· US official: text gives force authority to disarm Hamas

The United Nations Security Council on Thursday will start negotiations on a U.S.-drafted resolution to endorse President Donald Trump'sGazapeace plan, said a senior U.S. government official, and authorize a two-year mandate for a transitional governance body and international stabilization force.

The U.S. formally circulated the draft resolution to the 15 council members late on Wednesday and has said it has regional support from Egypt, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and the United Arab Emirates for the text.

"The message is: if the region is with us on this and the region is with us on how this resolution is constructed, then we believe that the council should be as well," the senior U.S. government official, speaking on condition of anonymity, told Reuters.

A council resolution needs at least nine votes in favor and no vetoes by Russia, China, France, Britain or the United States to be adopted. When asked when the draft text could be put to a vote, the official said: "The sooner that we move, the better. We're looking at weeks, not months."

"Russia and China will certainly have their inputs, and we'll take those as they come. But at the end of the day, I do not see those countries standing in the way and blocking what is probably the most promising plan for peace in a generation," the official said.

Trump told reporters later on Thursday that the international force would deploy "very soon." U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio then noted that the countries volunteering to contribute troops "need this U.N. mandate in order to be able to do it."

INTERNATIONAL FORCE WOULD HAVE AUTHORITY TO DISARM HAMAS

The draft resolution, seen by Reuters, would authorize a Board of Peace transitional governance administration to establish a temporary International Stabilization Force in Gaza that could "use all necessary measures" - language for force - to carry out its mandate.

The ISF would be authorized to protect civilians and humanitarian aid operations, work to secure border areas with Israel, Egypt and a "newly trained and vetted Palestinian police force."

The ISF would stabilize security in Gaza by "ensuring the process of demilitarizing the Gaza Strip, including the destruction and prevention of rebuilding of the military, terror, and offensive infrastructure, as well as the permanent decommissioning of weapons from non-state armed groups."

The official said the draft U.N. resolution gives the ISF authority to disarm Palestinian militants Hamas, but that the U.S. was still expecting Hamas to "live up to its end of the agreement" and give up its weapons.

Hamas has not said whether it will agree to disarm and demilitarize Gaza — something the militants have rejected before.

INTERNATIONAL FORCE LIKELY AROUND 20,000 TROOPS

The senior U.S. official said the ISF was shaping up to be around 20,000 troops.

While the Trump administration has ruled out sending U.S. soldiers into the Gaza Strip, it has been speaking to Indonesia, the UAE, Egypt, Qatar, Turkey and Azerbaijan to contribute.

"We've been in steady contact with the potential troop contributors, and what they need in terms of a mandate, what type of language they need," said the official. "Almost all of the countries are looking to have some type of international mandate. The preferred is U.N."

The official said he was unaware if Israel had ruled out any specific countries from contributing troops to the ISF, but added: "We're in constant conversations with them." Israel said last month it would not accept Turkish armed forces in Gaza under the U.S. peace plan.

That 20-point plan is annexed to the draft U.N. Security Council resolution.

"Time is not on our side here. The ceasefire is holding, but it is fragile, and ... we cannot get bogged down in wordsmithing in the council. I think this is a real test for the United Nations," the senior U.S. official said.

Source: TradingView

To stay updated on all economic events of today, please check out our Economic calendar

Risk Warnings and Disclaimers

Add to Favorites

Adam

Economic

OpenAI isn't preparing for a public debut, at least not yet. With complex and seemingly insatiable financial needs, its executives are doubtless content without the obligations, disclosures, and instant quantifiable judgment that come with trading on the open market.

It is doing something in public, however, and at the very least is vying for broad public support as it pitches itself as a national strategic asset that the US government should cherish and protect. And so far, dealing with the public attention from its pitch has been somewhat of an ordeal.

Amid the advocacy, we've already seen a few minor PR snafus seemingly cause major stress for CEO Sam Altman and Co. Leave it to your imagination — or ChatGPT — to paint a picture of what the stress of regular reporting and inspection might do to the ambitious, talented, and financially stretched operation.

On stage at a Wall Street Journal event, OpenAI CFO Sarah Friar said that OpenAI is looking for Washington to provide loan guarantees to the world's largest private company. After a brief backlash, Friar softened her stance in a LinkedIn post, walking back the remarks and clarifying that her use of the word "backstop" muddied the point.

To drive the point home further, Altman gave another C-suite clarification in a lengthy post on X Thursday, again denying his company is looking for a bailout.

So, to recap: OpenAI is now clearly stating it isn't seeking a government backstop for its massive financial commitments.

The reaction to Friar's initial comments and her and Altman's apparent walk-back arrived at a touchy moment for OpenAI. In a podcast released last weekend, Altman was asked by investor Brad Gerstner how his startup could fulfill a pledge to spend more than $1 trillion when it generated roughly $13 billion in revenue this year. Instead of answering, Altman appeared to turn on Gerstner.

"Brad, if you want to sell your shares, I'll find you a buyer," Altman responded. "Enough."

The clip, which has been widely shared online and features Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella laughing through the moment, as if to relieve the tension, hasn't reflected well on Altman.

It's important to note this wasn't an adversarial interview between a working journalist and a tech exec, but a friendly podcast between business leaders with common financial interests. The question, and more basic versions of it, have been bouncing around the AI space for a while. How can AI companies spend so much with so little revenue?

Gerstner's prompt was an invitation to explain OpenAI's business plans. But Altman seemed to take it as an accusation and an attack. Maybe the difficult or unfortunate answer explains Altman's stress. Regardless, for audiences watching and sharing the video online, his defensiveness came off as petty and unwarranted and, more broadly, as a key moment in the backlash against the perceived gluttony of AI companies.

"This will be in the documentary," as one observer put it, summarizing the exchange. For a tech movement that feeds off vibes and dreams rather than tangible profits, this stuff matters.

If OpenAI first got into trouble for taking other people's work, and then taking away people's jobs, the next affront could be taking people's money, leaving the government on the hook if the AI party ends, should the "backstop" question reemerge.

In the same interview, Altman said one of the rare instances he'd want OpenAI to be a public company is to tell his haters to short the stock so he might prove them wrong. Meanwhile, Friar said this week that OpenAI isn't working on an IPO just yet, focusing instead on growth.

OpenAI may not want to be a publicly traded company. But it's seeking guarantees that only American taxpayers can provide.

Source: finance.yahoo

To stay updated on all economic events of today, please check out our Economic calendar

Risk Warnings and Disclaimers

Add to Favorites

Daniel Carter

Economic

The preliminary November sentiment index dropped to 50.3, the lowest since June 2022, from 53.6 in the prior month, according to the University of Michigan. That was weaker than all but one estimate in a Bloomberg survey of economists.

A measure of current economic conditions slumped 6.3 points to a record low of 52.3 as anxiety mounted about the impact from the government shutdown. The drop in overall sentiment was broad across age, income and political groups, the report showed.

While spontaneous mentions of high prices increased for a fifth month, inflation expectations eased over the longer term. Consumers saw costs rising at an annual rate of 3.6% over the next five to 10 years, a three-month low. Price expectations for the next year edged up, the data issued Friday showed.

"Consumers perceive pressure on their personal finances from multiple directions," Joanne Hsu, director of the survey, said in a statement. "Consumers also anticipate that labor markets will continue to weaken in the future and expect to be personally affected.''

A measure of current personal finances declined to a six-year low, while buying conditions for big-ticket goods were considered the worst since mid-2022.

Fears about unemployment jumped this month, with 71% of respondents expecting it to rise in the year ahead, more than double the year-ago share.

"Moreover, consumers' expectations over their own probability of job loss worsened this month, reaching the highest reading since March 2025," Hsu said.

On Wednesday, ADP Research Institute reported that US private-sector payrolls rose by 42,000 in October, the first increase in three months. The modest pace of hiring, alongside a series of high-profile layoff announcements from major companies, helps explain why consumers remain pessimistic about the labor market.

The expectations index slid to a six-month low of 49. The longest government shutdown in US history is obscuring the view of the economy as key federal data are delayed. Private-sector sources, including the university's sentiment survey, provide a partial substitute amid the blackout.

The November survey was conducted from Oct. 21 to Nov. 3.

Source: Bloomberg Europe

To stay updated on all economic events of today, please check out our Economic calendar

Risk Warnings and Disclaimers

Add to Favorites

Adam

Commodity

A revaluation of the AI sector could raise volatility and trigger another round of deleveraging – impacting gold and other commodities – but any price distortions will be short-lived and won’t impact gold’s strong fundamentals, according to Ole Hansen, head of commodity strategy at Saxo Bank.

“Over recent weeks, the technology sector—especially AI‑linked names—has begun to show signs of fatigue,” Hansen wrote. “An almost parabolic run pushed forward earnings well above long‑term norms, raising the risk of a reset, and the past week has brought the first meaningful wobble. Despite a modest top‑to‑bottom decline of 4.3% in the Nasdaq 100 future—small against a year‑to‑date gain above 20%—the shift in tone is notable.”

He said that the combination of “elevated valuations, narrow market breadth, circularity in AI investment flows, and heavy concentration in a handful of mega‑cap names, alongside warnings from major bank CEOs of a potential 10–20% equity drawdown” has added near-term unease, and warned that an otherwise orderly correction “can become disorderly if too many investors try to exit at once, driving volatility higher and forcing leveraged traders to reduce exposure across the board.”

“Episodes of sharp volatility remain one of the most underestimated transmission channels between equity market stress and commodity price action,” Hansen said. “When a stock-market correction causes volatility to rise abruptly, the knock-on effects can extend far beyond equities. The key reason is mechanical: a large share of institutional portfolios now targets a specific level of volatility or risk. When that volatility jumps, these mandates must cut exposure, and they typically do so across the board, and even positions supported by strong fundamentals are temporarily pulled into the downdraft.”

He said that under many institutional trading strategies, when volatility rises, the amount of allowable leverage falls. “That reduction must be executed regardless of whether the underlying positions are profitable or loss-making,” he noted. “During stress, investors sell what is liquid and sizeable, not necessarily where the risk originated. As a result, the dash-for-cash leaves no position unscathed with the most liquid ones being treated as sources of immediate cash rather than strategic holdings.”

“This is why deleveraging tends to hit every corner of the portfolio simultaneously, including commodities.”

Hansen said that while gold is currently consolidating after its sharp rally, “the market has yet to test levels that would signal a deeper corrective phase or an end to the structural bull trend.” But this doesn’t mean gold can’t see short-term liquidations if volatility spikes.

He pointed to the volatility shock in early April as a clear recent example. “Following a round of surprise U.S. tariff announcements, the CBOE Volatility Index (VIX) almost tripled from around 21% to 60% within three days, while the S&P 500 dropped roughly 15% over the same window,” Hansen noted. “With bond-market volatility also surging, every liquid asset became a candidate for raising cash. Gold fell 6.6% from top to bottom, despite entering the episode with strong bullish momentum. Silver, with its partial dependence on industrial demand, tumbled 17%. Yet both metals recovered rapidly once volatility stabilised. Gold printed fresh highs within a week—an illustration of how quickly fundamentals can reassert themselves once forced flows subside.”

Hansen believes the current equity environment has the potential to trigger another volatility event. “However, with precious and industrial metals—two of the most popular and therefore most exposed sectors—already having undergone a meaningful correction, the risk of a sudden volatility‑driven liquidation shock has eased somewhat,” he said. “Even so, they remain vulnerable to brief, mechanically driven selling but typically recover quickly once the volatility impulse fades.”

“In the near term, the key risk to monitor is a decisive revaluation of the AI complex, which could spill over into broader equity benchmarks, lifting volatility and triggering another round of deleveraging,” he warned. “For commodities, the implication is straightforward: even markets supported by solid fundamentals but carrying elevated speculative length may face temporary downsides driven by forced flows rather than any material shift in their underlying outlook."

“For gold and other investment metals, the core support remain unchanged: fiscal uncertainty, sticky inflation, steady central-bank and investor demand, a gradual drift toward lower real rates, and persistent geopolitical hedging,” Hansen wrote. Meanwhile, industrial metals “continue to benefit from structural demand tied to deglobalisation, electrification, grid expansion and the rapid build-out of data-centre infrastructure spiced with persistent underinvestment in new mine capacity.”

“The message is simple: volatility events temporarily distort price signals across commodities, but they rarely alter the underlying trajectory of markets that enjoy robust macro and micro foundations.”

Source: kitco

Risk Warnings and Disclaimers

Add to Favorites

Justin

Economic

Government Shutdown Weighs on U.S. Economy

White House Advisor Kevin Hassett has stated that the U.S. economy recovery will begin as soon as the government reopens. The current government shutdown, which has affected several federal agencies and services, is believed to be dampening economic activity. Hassett emphasized that while the economy remains fundamentally strong, the uncertainty caused by the shutdown is delaying growth and market confidence.

Economists agree that prolonged shutdowns can disrupt both public and private sector operations. Key government data releases, regulatory approvals, and even payroll processing for federal workers are affected, all of which create ripple effects across the economy.

Optimism for a Quick Rebound

Despite the ongoing disruption, Hassett remains optimistic. "As soon as the government reopens, we expect economic indicators to bounce back quickly," he said. This suggests that policymakers believe the current slowdown is temporary and not reflective of deeper structural issues.

The White House is reportedly focusing on resolving the shutdown swiftly to avoid long-term damage. Financial analysts say that investor sentiment is closely tied to political developments, and a resolution could restore momentum in sectors like tech, transportation, and federal contracting.

What This Means for Americans

For everyday Americans, the shutdown means delayed services and economic anxiety. However, if Hassett's forecast holds true, a reopening could lead to increased consumer spending, job activity, and overall confidence in the economy.

The situation underscores the close link between political stability and economic performance. As talks to reopen the government continue, businesses and citizens alike are watching closely for signs of progress.

Source: CryptoSlate

To stay updated on all economic events of today, please check out our Economic calendar

Risk Warnings and Disclaimers

Add to Favorites

Samantha Luan

Political

Economic

Several senior Russian officials have gone on the record to warn that NATO is preparing for war.

Russia is accusing NATO of practicing a blockade of the country during recent large-scale exercises in the Baltic Sea, as well as preparing for a conflict with Russia.

Relations between Russia and NATO have deteriorated to an alarming degree following Moscow's decision to launch a full-scale invasion of Ukraine nearly four years ago.

Russia Thinks NATO Is Becoming More Aggressive

Recently, several senior Russian officials have gone on the record to warn that NATO is preparing for war with Russia.

Russian deputy foreign minister Alexander Grushko accused NATO of preparing to blockade Russia through the Baltic Sea.

"During the alliance's exercises, scenarios such as blocking the Kaliningrad region are being practiced. The [Baltic] region is undergoing active militarization, with an influx of coalition forces and resources," the senior Russian official stated.

Kaliningrad is a Russian enclave between Lithuania and Poland. It offers Moscow a second gate to the Baltic Sea. The other point of access is to the north at St. Petersburg.

But the Russian deputy foreign minister was not the only senior Russian official to accuse NATO of preparing to strike.

Sergei Naryshkin, the head of SVR, the Russian foreign intelligence service, also accused NATO of preparing for military operations against Russia.

The chief of the SVR said that NATO is "rapidly mobilizing military resources and shaping public opinion to justify conflict."

"The task has been set to rapidly equip NATO's designated Allied Response Forces with all necessary resources," Naryshkin added.

Russia's head spy said that NATO and the European Union have embarked on a "multiple-fold increase in the production of military equipment," and are also conducting active mobilization training.

Grushko's and Naryshkin's remarks are part of a broader set of accusations directed by Russian officials at NATO.

NATO and the European Union have indeed increased military spending and have engaged in more and larger military drills. But not without reason.

Causation

The Russian officials ignore key cause-and-effect considerations. NATO increased its spending and readiness in response to Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine. Motivating countries to spend more on their defense is not easy. It is particularly difficult during peacetime and without an evident threat. It is even more difficult during troublesome economic times after a global pandemic like COVID-19. But Russia succeeded in uniting NATO and Europe with the threat of war and prompted them to invest more in their collective defense and military capabilities.

These senior Russian officials' statements are quite concerning. The Kremlin has a history of preparing the way before engaging in military operations.

For example, before fully invading Ukraine on February 24, 2022, the Kremlin had repeatedly made its case that Ukraine is nominally part of Russia and that Russian-speaking people in Ukraine were suffering under Kyiv's authoritarian control. It later became apparent that the Kremlin was preparing the ground to justify its "special military operation." It could be doing the same again.

The Kremlin knows how to conduct psychological operations and how to shape the information environment in a way to justify its actions. Accusing NATO of warmongering could very well be the spark for more intense competition between Russia and the transatlantic military alliance.