31/10/20: Gold Coins Market is Still Hedging Residual Covid Risk

Sales of the U.S. Mint gold coins have moderated off their pandemic highs, but remain elevated by historical standards, especially controlling for higher gold prices:

Since hitting a pandemic-period high of 216,500 oz in March 2020 (the highest sales volume since April 2013), the demand has moderated through June, topped 145,000 in July and 149,000 oz in August, and has been around 91,500 through the four weeks of October. This puts October sales above the last three years' average.

Average gold weight per coin sold remains relatively elevated and is co-trending with price per oz, most likely indicating lasting FOMO effect (herding by investors). The correlation is weaker than during prior episodes of major crises and recessions, suggesting that the pandemic-period demand is probably less influenced by the herding effects than in prior crises.

Annualized data through October also confirms precautionary, but not 'flight to safety' type of demand:

As the pandemic re-accelerates, it will be interesting to see how seasonality (uplift in end-of-year sales) plays out against the pandemic-related hedging positioning of investors.

13/6/20: Gold Coins Sales are Up, and the Markets are Screaming Something New

Some interesting movements in demand for gold coins in recent months, worth watching:

Price is up, and volume of sales is quite volatile. Still, sales are hitting highs.

• Following weaker y/y January and February, March 2020 sales rose almost x10 y/y in volume and average coin sold size rose from 0.5 oz in March 2019 to 0.674 oz in March 2020. 
• April 2020 sales were x3.25 times sales in April 2019 by volume, with average coin size rising to 1.0 oz. May saw a major fall-off in demand m/m but still posted sales x2.26 time those of May 2019, with average coin sold size down to 0.538 oz per coin. 
• Through June 13, June monthly sales are already x2.75 times higher than sales for the entire month of June 2019, with average coin size sold so far this June running at 0.985 oz per coin, against 0.625 oz per coin in June 2019. 

It seems investors still showing little signs of moderating safe haven demand for gold, despite robust performance in the financial markets until this week profit-taking blowout. 

Gold can be seen as both a hedge and safe haven against a range of key financial and political risks, but it can also be viewed as a long-run wealth storage tool, and, given its liquid nature, as a precautionary savings instrument for tail risks. If the current demand remains robust in the face of rising gold prices, we are likely witnessing a risk-return relationship/expectations shift amongst the savers and investors, away from considering trend-driven investment strategy of thee recent years and in favour of investing against a major concern for significant tail risks driving the markets in months and years ahead.

23/5/17: U.S. Mint Gold Coins Sales 1Q 2017

Updating, with a lag, my data for U.S. Mint sales of gold coins, here is 1Q 2017 in its full glory.

Total sales of U.S. Mint gold coins stood at 221,500 oz in 1Q 2017, down from 363,000 oz in 4Q 2016 and down on 305,500 oz in 1Q 2016. However, 1Q 2017 sales were better than 1Q sales in both 2014 and 2015.

Total number of coins sold by the U.S. Mint stood at 438,000 in 1Q 2017, down on 647,500 in 1Q 2016. In terms of number of coins sold, 1Q 2017 was the slowest of all 1Q periods since 1Q 2012.

Average weight per coin sold was 0.5057 oz/coin, stronger than in 1Q 2016 (0.4718 oz/coin) and stronger than 1Q average coin weight for 2014 and 2015.

Monthly data, plotted alongside historical and period averages shows that more recent months (especially April) posted weak sales performance.

Meanwhile, a look at quarterly aggregates indicates that while 1Q was weaker than 4Q 2016, it is still in line with the generally upward trend that has been present (with some serious volatility) since the end of 2013.

Both, the monthly series and the quarterly aggregates indicate relatively stable and strong negative correlations between the price of gold and the demand for U.S. Mint coinage over the last 6 months within the range of -0.62 and -0.84.

13/3/17: Bitcoin v Gold: Volatilities and Correlation

On foot of the previous post, a reader asked me for some analysis of comparatives between Bitcoin volatility and Gold price volatility. It took some time to get to the answer. One of the reasons is that Bitcoin is traded continuously, while gold prices are listed for specific markets trading dates. So it takes some time to reconcile two data sets.

Here is the analysis. Starting with daily returns volatilities for log-log returns:

Several things are obvious from the above chart:

1. Overall Bitcoin price volatility is magnitudes greater than volatility of gold prices almost always. Historical standard deviation in daily returns is 2.663% and Gold price (log daily returns) volatility is 0.466%, which means that historically, gold daily returns are less volatile than Bitcoin daily returns by a more than a factor of 5. 
2. There are, broadly speaking three key periods of Bitcoin volatility: the period from September 2011 through December 2012, when volatility was extreme and declining, the period from January 2013 through February 2015, when volatility in Bitcoin was characterised by severe spikes and elevated base, and the period from March 2015 on, when both the spikes in volatility and the base of volatility abated. These three periods are associated with the following comparatives between gold volatility and Bitcoin volatility: period through December 2012: gold daily returns volatility 0.520% against Bitcoin daily returns volatility of almost 6 times that at 3.00%; period from January 2013 through February 2015, when Bitcoin returns volatility (3.27%) was almost 7.5 times gold returns volatility (0.479%), and the current period from March 2015, where Bitcoin daily returns volatility (1.421%) was over 3 times daily returns volatility for gold (0.412%). Note: these are log-log returns, so much of extreme volatility is smoothed out and this benefits the Bitcoin.
3. There is a long-term trend difference between gold returns volatility and Bitcoin returns volatility, as shown by polynomial (power 6) trend lines for both. In fact, even in terms of trend, Bitcoin is much more volatile than gold and Bitcoin's volatility is less stable than volatility of gold. 

In very simple terms, Bitcoin volatility is vastly in excess of Gold's volatility, albeit the former is starting to moderate in more recent years.

Now, for the last bit of observations. I also mentioned that Bitcoin is distinct from Gold in terms of its financial properties. And guess what, I did not provide any evidence. Well, here it is. Bitcoin returns and Gold returns are not correlated, or in other words, they neither co-move with each other nor countermove against each other. Here's a chart to prove this:

Average 30-days running correlation for Bitcoin and gold in terms of daily log-log returns is 0.03025 historically, which is statistically indifferent from zero. Across the three periods of Bitcoin volatility structure (defined above), average correlation between Bitcoin and gold log-log returns was 0.0147, 0.0182 and 0.0529 respectively. All of these are statistically indifferent from zero. In history of the Bitcoin, there were only 7 occasions on which daily returns were correlated positively with gold price with correlation in excess of 0.5. and 5 with negative correlation in excess of -0.5 in absolute value None with correlation in excess of 0.65 in absolute value for either positive or negative correlations. 

Bitcoin comparatives to gold hold about as much water as a colander hit by a shrapnel shot.

12/3/17: Bitcoin Pop: Nothing too Dramatic by Historical Comparatives

Few days back, I posted a quick note about the erroneous nature of Bitcoin-Gold comparatives. And yesterday, we had one of those events that highlights the same.

In summary of the event, SEC rejected an application for a Bitcoin ETF.  And Bitcoin crashed. Inter-day volatility shot up through the roof. Which would have been bad enough, except it is the norm for Bitcoin

You can see just how unsurprising the current volatility is for the BTC, consider the following charts:

Pretty much by every metric of volatility, Bitcoin's latests wobble is minor, despite it being dramatic enough to set @Reuters and @Bloomberg folks all hopping with excitement. Thing is, folks, Bitcoin's volatility is in the league of financial widow-makers.

3/3/17: Gold vs Bitcoin: Prices vs Values

Marketwatch reported earlier that Bitcoin is currently being priced at above the price of gold in USD terms: http://www.marketwatch.com/story/bitcoin-is-now-worth-more-than-an-ounce-of-gold-for-the-first-time-ever-2017-03-02?siteid=bnbh

The comparative is somewhat silly, because, as Marketwatch article notes, Bitcoin market cap is much much smaller than that for gold, which implies that any valuation of Bitcoin to-date incorporates a hefty liquidity risk premium compared to gold. In addition - unmentioned by the Marketwatch - Bitcoin lacks key financial properties of gold, including:

1. Established safe haven properties: gold acts as a safe haven instrument against large scale or systemic risks. Bitcoin is yet to establish such property with any conviction. There are some indications that Bitcoin may be seen in the markets as a hedge against some systemic risks, e.g. capital controls in China, but this property is yet to be fully confirmed in data. Beyond such confirmation, there is no evidence to-date that Bitcoin acts as a safe haven for other systemic risks (e.g. sovereign debt crisis risks in the Euro area, or political risks in the EU, etc).
2. Hedging properties: Bitcoin shows no hedging relationship to key asset classes, in contrast to gold.

The above points mean that in addition to liquidity risks, Bitcoin price is also factoring in premium for lacking the broader safe haven and hedging properties.

While the continued evolution of Bitcoin is a great thing to watch and take part in, immediate valuations of Bitcoin are subject to severely concentrated risks, including the currently extremely elevated risk of Bitcoin demand being severely skewed to China (http://trueeconomics.blogspot.com/2017/01/18117-bitcoin-demand-its-chinese-tale.html) and the supply and legal rights issues with Bitcoin. Hence, as it says on the tin: the comparative to gold is silly, even if entertaining.

6/1/17: U.S. Mint Gold Coins Sales in 2016: One Solid Year for Hedging

Updating the data set for U.S. Mint sales of Gold coins (covering both Buffalos and Eagles) for 2016, here is the end-of-the-year data:

• In 2016, U.S. Mint sold 1,204,500 oz of gold coins, which is 17.9% increase on 2015. Remember that in 2015, sales of U.S. Mint gold rose 45.6% y/y. The series are generally quite volatile, but 2016 total sales by volume marked the best year of U.S. sales since 2010 and the third best year on record (since 2006).
• Sales of coins totalled 2,188,000 coins in 2016, up 6.2% y/y, following a 55.8% jump in sales in 2015. 2016 marked the busiest year on record for the U.S. Mint in terms of number of coins sold.
• Despite increase in the number of coins sold, average weight of coins sold came in at impressive 0.551 oz/coin in 2016, up on 0.496 oz/coin in 2015 and the highest average weight sold over the last three years.

Chart below illustrates the trends:

Gold prices tend to have very insignificant impact on demand for U.S. Mint coins, as much of purchasing of these assets is non-speculative and used for longer term store of wealth function. There is, statistically, zero relationship between changes in gold prices and changes in demand for gold coins. To see this, here is an updated chart plotting log-change (m/m) in demand for gold coins from the U.S. Mint against log-change (m/m) in gold prices:

Overall, 2016 has been a strong year for sales of gold coins.

While some of the improved demand is quite possibly being driven by increased interest in gold as a store of value and a longer term safe haven against such matters as increased geopolitical tensions, monetary and currency wars etc, much of this increase in demand is probably also down to more prudent savers taking some of their cash and putting it into the U.S. coinage.

Which, in turn, implies that gold is acting as a counter-cyclical buffer: taking out surplus savings during the period of recovery and setting these aside against potential larger scale risks.

Exactly as it should be, thus.

22/101/16: Cashless Society: Efficiency 1 : Privacy 0

My comments on the dangers associated with the idea of the 'cashless society' where traditional money is replaced by fully captured (by data flows) and de-privatized electronic accounts: http://www.gold-eagle.com/article/cashless-society-%E2%80%93-risks-posed-war-cash.

15/1/16: Gold Bullion as Risk Diversifier: 2015 Overview

A note of mine covering 2015 Gold market and the continued role of gold bullion & coins as risk diversifiers in current environment is now available on GoldCore page here: http://www.goldcore.com/us/gold-blog/gold-bullion-retains-key-role-of-a-major-diversifier-dr-gurdgiev/.

26/12/15: A Trendless World of 'Recovery'?

Anyone watching financial markets and economics in 2015 would know that this year was marked by a huge rise in volatility. Not the continuous volatility along the established trend, but a 'surprise' volatility concentrated on the tails of distributions of returns and growth numbers. In other words, the worst kind of volatility - the loss and regret aversion type.

Here are two charts confirming the said pattern.

Starting with asset classes:

Source: BAML

In the 'repaired' world of predictable monetary policy with well-signalled forward guidance, 2015 should have been much calmer, as policy surprises were nowhere to be seen (Bank of Japan continued unabated flooding of money, while ECB embarked on its well-in-advance-flagged QE and the Fed 'cautious rates normalisation' switched was anticipated for months, amidst BOE staying put, as predicted by everyone every time London committee met). Alas, that was not the case and 2015 ended up being a year of more extreme shifts into stress than any other year on record.

Likewise, the U.S. economic growth - the most watched and most forecasted series in the global economy - produced more surprises for forecasters:

Source: Goldman Sachs

Per above, 2015 has been a second consecutive year with U.S. GDP growth surprising forecasters to the downside. Worse, yet, since 2001, U.S. GDP growth produced downside surprises compared to consensus forecasts in 12 out of 15 years.

In the past cycles, the early 1990s recession produced an exit from the downside cycle that resulted in 2 consecutive years of upside surprises in growth; for the exit from the 1980s recession, there were five consecutive periods of upside growth relative to the forecasts. Even in the horrific 1970s, the average forecast over-optimism relative to outrun was closer to zero, against the current post-recessionary period average surprise to the forecast being around -0.5 percentage points.

In other words, if you need a confirmation that four years after the 'recovery' onset, the world of finance and growth remains effectively 'trendless', have another look at the charts above...

20/11/15: Gold's 'Road Back'?

No love for gold from Europe...

7/11/15: U.S. Mint Sales of Gold Coins: October

Total sales of U.S. Mint gold coins came in at 44,500 oz per 94,500 coins sold (including both Eagles and Buffalos). This marked a significant decline in sales y/y, with volume by weight down 49.7% y/y and the number of units sold down 33.7%. Average weight of coin sold was down 24.2% y/y to 0.4709 oz per coin.

As chart above indicates, October fall-off in demand came after the end of 3Q that saw total volume of coding gold sold by the U.S. Mint rising incredible 234% y/y (compared to 3Q 2014) by weight and 305% y/y in terms of number of units sold. 

At a total of 471,000 oz sold over 934,500 units in 3Q 2015, last quarter was the best one since 2Q 2010 in terms of volume by weight sales and the best in history of the series (from 1Q 2006) in terms of number of coins sold.

Not surprisingly, scale fall off in demand in October can be explained by the moderation in demand back to cyclical normal. As shown in the chart above, overall October sales figures came in below the period average for May 2013 through present. However, stripping out three main outlier peaks in demand, the average comes to 49,978 oz - closer to the October reading of 44,500 oz. In historical comparatives, demand for gold coins in October was 38th lowest by total weight and 56th lowest by coins counts for any month from January 2006 though present.

Another point worth making is seasonality. Over 2006-present horizon, October saw significant decline sin demand for gold coins in seven out of 10 years, with insignificant changes m/m recorded in one month. In other words, October tends to be a more bearish month of U.S. Mint coins sales.

Final point worth making is that correlation between demand for U.S. Mint coins (by total oz weight) continued to show negative 12 months correlation with gold price. In October, this correlation stood at -0.58, slightly less in absolute value than in September (-0.59) and below -0.72 correlation in October 2014. Overall, negative correlation remained in every month from April 2014 on, suggesting stable demand interest from investors on foot of gold price declines.

16/10/15: Gold and Bitcoin: Adjacency and Hedging Properties

This week, I spoke at a joint Markets Technicians Association and CAIA seminar hosted by Bloomberg, covering two recent research projects I was involved with on the role of Gold and Bitcoin as safe havens and hedges for other assets.

Here are my slides (omitting section division slides):

The first section was based on the following paper: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1057521912001226

A caveat to the above, we are seeing increasing evidence that Gold's hedging properties may be changing over time, especially due to increased financialisation of the asset. In this context, it is worth referencing a recent working paper by Brian M. Lucey et al linked here that I also cited at the seminar.

The Bitcoin section is based on a work-in-progress paper with Cormac Ennis: "Is Bitcoin like Gold? Hedging and Safe Haven Properties of the Virtual Currency". The results of presented below should be treated with serious caution as they are extremely preliminary.

Note: we are extending data set to cover longer period, although even with this extension data coverage for Bitcoin is still suboptimal in both duration and quality. Many thanks to the seminar participant for pointing out two key caveats to the overall data coverage:

1. The 'lumpy' nature of demand around Cypriot banking crisis; and
2. Potential effects on data quality reported for Bitcoin from a small number of high profile pricing events, such as technical glitches and supply/demand shifts linked to large exchanges-linked events (e.g. MtGox).

 Summarising the two papers findings:

1/10/15: Of global equities and Gold

Bloomberg's @M_McDonough just posted a fresh chart for major global stocks indices rebased to the start of 2015:

The scary bit is that this is in own-currency terms and that the rot is well beyond the EMs and China.

I cover some of these issues in a guest contribution to GoldCore's quarterly review for 3Q - read in full here.

28/8/15: Gold & Silver: Does technical analysis beat the market?

An interesting piece of research co-authored by Brian Lucey on efficacy of technical analysis in gold & silver markets: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2652637.

"This paper studies whether intraday technical trading rules produce significant payoffs in the gold and silver market using three popular moving average rules."

And the conclusions are (emphasis is mine): "The initial results show that the SMA, WMA and EMA trading rules generate significant negative payoffs using the parameters common in the literature in the high-frequency gold and silver markets. This suggests that there is no significant profit to be gained from technical trading in the gold and silver markets. However, our parameter sweep results show that there are a number of parameter combinations that generate significant profit in the gold market, but none in the silver market. Further, the best performing rules have different parameters to those used the existing literature. We show that longer run averages should be used by investors on intraday data and that investors need to employ different parameters when utilising technical analysis on daily and intraday data. In order to examine whether investors could have actually utilised the best performing rules, we perform an in- and out-of-sample test and show that only the SMA rule for gold generates significant profits in the in-sample as well as the out-of-sample period. All of the other best rules in the in-sample period generate either insignificant or negative payoffs in the out-of-sample period."

5/5/15: US Mint Gold Coins Sales: April 2015

April sales of U.S. Mint gold coins came in at 39,500 oz, down 29.5% y/y. Over the first 4 months of 2015, total sales of U.S. Mint gold coins (by volume) is down 8.9% y/y. In terms of number of coins sold, April sales stood at 71,500 units, down 39.7% y/y and the first four months of 2015 cumulative sales are down 9.1% y/y. Meanwhile, average volume of coin sold in April stood at 0.552 oz per coin against 0.473 oz/coin a year ago. Still, average weight of coin sold in the first 4 months of 2015 is down 1.4% y/y.

As the chart above shows, current reading is well below the post-crisis period average of 58,542 oz and only marginally above the pre-crisis average of 38,016 oz. Historical average is 79,825 oz, and current reading is statistically below the historical average.

12 months dynamic correlation between prices and volume of U.S. Mint gold coins sales has remained negative in April, albeit at -0.08 not statistically significant. This means that over the last 12 months - from April 2014 through April 2015, investors and savers tended to purchase more U.S. Mint coins gold against falling prices, and less against rising prices. Historically, average 12mo correlation between gold prices and coins demand is -0.03.

Overall, the trend toward lower post-crisis sales for the U.S. Mint gold coins compared to the crisis period sales has been in place now since start of H2 2013 and remains in place. However, the trend is still to the upside compared to the pre-crisis period. Data from Q3 2014 on suggests some renewed weakening in demand trend, but confirming this will require more months coming in at below the post-crisis average reading. 

The reason for being cautious about calling the short-term trend change in Q4 2014 is that data for Gold Eagles sales (we have many more years worth of these sales) suggests a different signal to total U.S. Mint gold coins sales. Specifically, as can be seen in the chart below, there is actually some potential positive growth trend emerging in the Eagles sales data for Q2 2014-present.

1/1/2015: US Mint Gold Coins Sales: 2014

End of 2014 and Q4 2014, so time to update my relatively infrequent coverage of data for US Mint sales of gold coins. Here's the data for the sales of American Eagles and Buffalo coins.

Starting with quarterly data:

• Sales of US Mint gold coins in Q4 2014 reached 183,500 oz up on 141,000 oz in Q3 2014 and the highest reading since Q1 2014. However, y/y Q4 2014 sales were down 4.2% having posted a rise of 24.2% y/y in Q3 2014. There is quite a bit of volatility in Q4 sales. For example, Q4 2013 sales were down 29.5% y/y and Q4 2012 sales were up 74% y/y.
• Sales of US Mint gold coins also fell in terms of average coin weight. In Q4 2014, average coin sold carried 0.57 oz of gold per coin, down from 0.61 oz in Q3 and down from 0.71 oz/coin average in Q4 2013. Still, Q4 2014 reading was second highest in oz/coin sales terms in 2014.

Chart below illustrates.

Monthly trends were less favourable in December. Volume of gold sold via coinage sales by the US Mint fell well below the period average and the series have now been trending below historical averages (both across 2006-2014 range and 2012-2014 averages) since May 2013.

The same dynamics: falling oz/coin average, and falling number of coins sold can be traced in full year sales figures, as illustrated in the chart below.

As above clearly shows, the decline in total number of coins sold has been relatively moderate, compared to historical trend, with sales of 1,322,000 coins in 2014 running very close to 2006-2013 average of 1,361,625 coins. But sales in oz terms have been poor: in 2014 total sales of US Mint gold coins run at 702,000 oz against the 2006-2013 average of 983,250 oz. Thus 2014 was the third worst year on record (since 2006) in terms of sales of coinage gold, but ono the fifth worst year on record in terms of sales of coins by numbers. The average coin weight at 0.53 oz per coin in 2014 was the poorest on record.

Year on year full-year dynamics were poor as well: total coinage gold sold by oz fell 36% y/y in 2014 and there was a decline of 22% in the number of coins sold. Meanwhile price of gold declined (based on month-end USD denominated prices) by 9.94% y/y.

Most of the poor performance in US Mint sales took place in H1 2014, when coinage gold sales in oz terms fell from 790,500 oz in H1 2013 to 377,500 oz in H1 2014.

In the end, 2014 was a poor year for US Mint sales. Even stripping out the sales of the American Buffalo and looking at the American Eagle sales alone - thus allowing the data to cover 1986-2014 period - the trend remains to the downside for both oz sold and coin numbers, with oz sold under-performing the downward trend.

That said, sales of American Eagles remain above the averages for both coin numbers and gold volumes once we strip out 1998-1999 anomalies.

All in, the explanation for 2014 performance is continued decline in demand for gold coins from shorter-term investors seeking safe haven. In general, this is expected and is likely to continue: gold coins are normally the domain of collectors and longer-term long-only investors. We are witnessing a moderation in demand trends toward 1987-1997 and 2000-2008 averages. 

20/5/2014: Q1 2014 Gold Demand Report

Q1 2014 Gold demand report is out today. Highlights are:

1. Jewellery demand grew 3% year-on-year to reach 571 tonnes, the largest Q1 volume since 2005, as consumers responded positively to lower average gold prices. Geographically, demand was wide-spread; however it was China that posted the largest volume increase, rising by 18 tonnes from Q1 2013.
2. Shifts in the components of investment cancel out: net investment demand little changed, down 2%. Q1 investment demand of 282 tonnes was just 6 tonnes below Q1 2013. Bar and coin demand was down 39% from last year's elevated levels, while outflows from ETFs slowed to a virtual halt compared with outflows of 177 tonnes in Q1 last year.
3. All segments of technology saw a 4% decline in the first quarter, resulting in overall demand for the sector of 99 tonnes. The fall was primarily driven by continuing substitution to cheaper alternatives as manufacturers remained under pressure to reduce costs.
4. First quarter demand from central banks once again topped the 100 tonnes level, reaching 122 tonnes, and marked the 13th consecutive quarter of net purchases. The desire to diversify holdings in an uncertain global environment continues to underpin this source of demand.
5. The supply of gold in Q1 2014 saw a marginal year-on-year increase of 1%. Increased mine production was offset by a fall in recycled gold coming onto the market, leading to a total supply figure of 1,048 tonnes.
6. Total demand was down at 1,074.5 tonnes in Q1 2014 compared to 1,077.2 tonnes in Q1 2013

Summary chart:

Report is here.

Compared to 5 year averages:

• Jewellery demand was up at 570.7 tonnes against 5 year average of 512.0 tonnes
• Technology demand was down at 99.0 tonnes against 5 year average of 108.3 tonnes
• Total Investment demand was down at 282.3 tonnes against 5 year average of 367.6 tonnes. Of this, Bar & Coin demand was down to 282.5 tonnes relative to 5 year average of 338.2 tonnes; ETFs and similar products demand was net -0.2 tonnes compared to 5 year average of +29.5 tonnes
• Central Banks net purchases demand was up at 122.4 tonnes against 5 year average of 72.7 tonnes
• Overall demand was up at 1,074.5 tonnes against 5 year average of 1,060.5 tonnes

Top 10 official reserves:

15/1/2014: BusinessInsider's Investment Ideas For The Next Decade

BusinessInsider is running a 10-year investment suggestions from some analysts...
http://www.businessinsider.com/best-investment-ideas-for-the-next-decade-2014-1#ixzz2qUatCHZj

Warning: my suggestion is at number 17.

I should put some disclaimers around this - in my view, one should aim to hold a diversified portfolio of investments, structured to match your life-cycle objectives and risk preferences, as well as reflecting income and wealth specifics, etc. Hence, my contribution should be looked at in this context, as food for thought...

The idea of 10 years-out outlook gave me a bit of a thought... and although I am not known for providing trading ideas, here are my 5 cents on 15 and 30 year horizons:

For the next 15 years: A basket of precious metals: Both monetary conditions and physical demand dynamics suggest that a non-speculative (cost-averaging-based) accumulation of these within a balanced portfolio will provide a reasonable long term hedge against upcoming risks and demand pressures. This is not a speculative bet, but a view that long-term, small fixed share of a balanced portfolio should be maintained in the gradually accumulated precious metals positions.

For the next 30 years: arable land with substantial water rights in Northern US and Central Canada. A combination of rising global temperatures, declining fresh water reserves and rising pressures on food production make it a compelling investment case. Opening up of the Northern Sea Route and generally increased accessibility of Northern Territories, coupled with stable institutional and legal environments are making it a good risk hedge for potential geopolitical risks that logically likely to accompany the aforementioned pressures.

3/12/2013: GoldCore research note on deposits bail-ins

GoldCore have published an insightful guide to banks bail-ins of depositors that the EU is rapidly falling toward as a default policy for resolving future banks crises.

Here's an inforgraphic from the report:
http://dzswc0o8s13dx.cloudfront.net/goldcore_bloomberg_chart1_03-12-13.png

And the link to the report itself:
http://info.goldcore.com/what-savers-and-depositors-need-to-do-to-protect-their-savings-and-deposits-from-bank-bail-ins