Why I'll Continue to Invest in Gold, at Least for Another Year

June 2, 2025 (Maple Hill Syndicate) - About 14 months ago, I wrote a column about gold. I don't think gold is an investment for all seasons, I wrote, but right now, I think it's sensible to hold some.
That turned out to be right. Gold is up about 51% since I made that recommendation, including a 25% gain this year through May 30.
So, what now? Take your golden profits and run? I don't think so. Most of my clients have about 6% of their portfolio assets in gold, and I'm considering increasing that.
Gold doesn't have profits or pay dividends, so evaluating it is harder than evaluating a stock. However, I think there are four major factors that move the price of gold: inflation, real interest rates, the dollar and geopolitics.
Inflation
Gold is traditionally considered a hedge against inflation, because it tends to hold its purchasing power. Today a Big Mac sandwich costs about $6 and an ounce of gold sells for about $3,300. So, one ounce of gold could buy 555 Big Macs.
If inflation worsens and a Big Mac three years from now costs $8, it would not be surprising for gold to command a price of $4,400. Then an ounce of the previous metal would still pay for 555 Big Macs.
Will inflation worsen? After all, a few days ago President Trump said that he had solved inflation. In support of that assertion, he has said repeatedly that the price of gasoline is under $2 a gallon.
I hate to break it to the President, but when I bought gas last week it cost $2.99 a gallon. Meanwhile, Congress appears likely to pass a budget that features a gigantic budget deficit. To finance deficits, the U.S. Treasury may be forced to issue more bonds. Many economists view that as inflationary.
In addition, the tariffs that President Trump has proposed would add to inflation, in my view, by making a variety of goods more expensive.
Real Rates
For gold, low real interest rates are good and high real interest rates are bad. The real interest rate is the rate paid on fixed-income instruments like bonds, minus the inflation rate.
An old rule of thumb was that bond investors want to earn three percentage points more than inflation for example, a 6% interest rate if inflation is running 3%. That rule turned out to be too simplistic, but the general point behind it is valid.
Gold and bonds are competitors: They compete for the dollars of risk-averse investors. If bonds are more attractive, gold is less so.
Ten-year Treasury bonds currently pay about 4.4% interest. Inflation for the year through April was about 2.3%. So, the real interest rate is somewhere in the neighborhood of 2.1%. That's not terrible but it's below the historical average.
The Dollar
The strength of the dollar is partly a gauge of how much faith people in other countries have in the United States. Less faith equals more jitters. More jitters may inspire a flight to gold.
One thing people need dollars for is to buy U.S. goods and services. If trade barriers are erected, people and businesses in other countries have less need for dollars, so the dollar might decline in price relative to the Euro, the yen and other currencies.
What would a weak dollar mean for gold? Historically, gold has generally done well when the dollar was weak, and poorly when the dollar is strong. There are exceptions, notably 2023-2024, when the dollar was strong and gold rose nevertheless.
Ned David Research, an outfit for which I have considerable respect, is predicting a weak dollar and strength in gold for 2025.
Geopolitics
The more stress there is in the world, the better for gold. In the U.S., people worried about geopolitical tensions may buy gold as a defensive holding. That's even more true in China, India and Europe.
Despite sporadic efforts at peace talks, there are two hot wars in progress between Russia and Ukraine, and between Israel and Gaza. In addition, there are at least two notable cold wars, between the U.S. and China, and between the U.S. and Iran.
To me, that geopolitical backdrop most likely signals continued strength in gold.
Bear in mind that most performance information in my column is hypothetical and shouldn't be confused with results I obtain for clients. Also, past performance doesn't predict the future.
Disclosure: Personally, and for most of my clients, I own shares in SPDR Gold Shares (GLD), an exchange traded fund that represents ownership of a fraction of a large store of physical gold.
John Dorfman is chairman of Dorfman Value Investments LLC in Boston, Massachusetts. He or his clients may own or trade securities discussed in this column. He can be reached at jdorfman@dorfmanvalue.com.
This article first appeared on GuruFocus.

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

18 minutes ago

Israel-Iran live updates: B-2 bombers, Tomahawk cruise missiles used in Iran strike

The United States struck three nuclear sites in Iran on Saturday, President Donald Trump announced. B-2 bombers dropped a number of Massive Ordnance Penetrator bombs -- known as "bunker busters" -- during the U.S. mission over Iran, a U.S. official confirmed. A number of Tomahawk cruise missiles were also fired at targets inside Iran from a U.S. Navy submarine, the official confirmed. Following the strikes, Trump addressed the nation, calling it a "spectacular military success." Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth will speak from the Pentagon at 8 a.m. on Sunday.

Hamilton Spectator

24 minutes ago

• Hamilton Spectator

The Latest: US joins Israeli air campaign and strikes 3 nuclear sites in Iran

The U.S. military struck three sites in Iran early Sunday, inserting itself into Israel 's effort to decapitating the country's nuclear program in a risky gambit to weaken a longtime foe amid Tehran's threat of reprisals that could spark a wider regional conflict. The decision to directly involve the U.S. comes after more than a week of strikes by Israel on Iran that have moved to systematically eradicate the country's air defenses and offensive missile capabilities, while damaging its nuclear enrichment facilities. But U.S. and Israeli officials have said that American stealth bombers and a 30,000-lb. bunker buster bomb they alone can carry offered the best chance of destroying heavily-fortified sites connected to the Iranian nuclear program buried deep underground. President Donald Trump was the first to disclose the strikes. There was no immediate acknowledgment from the Iranian government. Iran's state-run IRNA news agency reported that attacks targeted the country's Fordo, Isfahan and Natanz nuclear sites. The agency did not elaborate. Here is the latest: Flames see at Fordo nuclear site in Iran after US strike, report says Iran's semiofficial Fars news agency has published an account by one of its reporters, saying flames could be seen after the bombs hit the Fordo facility. Fars, which is believed close to Iran's paramilitary Revolutionary Guard, said its reporter heard anti-aircraft fire around 2:05 a.m. local time and explosions two minutes later. 'When I reached the vicinity ... the air defense system was operating intensely, and its activity was clearly visible in the sky,' the reporter said. Later on, the reporter said, 'flames suddenly erupted from the direction of Fordo.' Simultaneously with the flames, a faint trail of smoke and a significant amount of dust rose in the area, Fars quoted the reporter. It offered no photos or video showing the attack Israeli officials lauded the strikes Israeli officials lauded the strikes in sweeping and dramatic language. Israel's president, Isaac Herzog, thanked Trump and said the strikes marked a 'decisive moment between the axis of terror and evil and the axis of hope.' Israel's defense minister congratulated Trump on what he described as a 'historic decision.' US steps up efforts to evacuate citizens from Israel The U.S. is stepping up evacuation flights for American citizens from Israel to Europe and continuing to draw down its staff at diplomatic missions in Iraq as fears of Iranian retaliation again U.S. interests in the Middle East grow. Even before those airstrikes were announced by President Donald Trump on Saturday evening in Washington, the U.S. embassy in Jerusalem announced the start of evacuation flights for American civilians from Israel. Sixty-seven American citizens left Israel on two government flights bound for Athens, Greece on Saturday and four more evacuation flights to Athens were planned for Sunday, according to an internal State Department document seen by The Associated Press. In addition to the flights, a cruise ship carrying more than 1,000 American citizens, including several hundred Jewish youngsters who had been visiting Israel on an organized tour, arrived in Cyprus, according to the document. — Matthew Lee Israel closes airspace in wake of US attacks Israel's Airport Authority announced it was closing the country's airspace to both inbound and outbound flights in the wake of the U.S. attacks on Iranian nuclear sites. The agency said it was shutting down air traffic 'due to recent developments' and did not say for how long. Iran says 'no signs of contamination' after US strikes nuclear facilities Iran said early Sunday there were 'no signs of contamination' at its nuclear sites at Isfahan, Fordo and Natanz after U.S. airstrikes targeted the facilities. Iranian state media quoted the country's National Nuclear Safety System Center, which published a statement saying its radiation detectors had recorded no radioactive release after the strikes. 'There is no danger to the residents living around the aforementioned sites,' the statement added. Earlier Israeli airstrikes on nuclear sites similarly have caused no recorded release of radioactive material into the environment around the facilities, the International Atomic Energy Agency has said. Strikes used 'bunker buster' bombs and cruise missiles The U.S. military used 'bunker-buster' bombs in its attack on Iran's Fordo nuclear fuel enrichment plant, which is built deep into a mountain, a U.S. official said. That official spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss military operations. The 30,000-pound bunker-busting American bomb known as the GBU-57 Massive Ordnance Penetrator uses its weight and sheer kinetic force to penetrate underground and then explode. Saturday's strikes were the first time it has been used in combat. U.S. submarines also participated in the attacks in Iran, launching about 30 Tomahawk land attack missiles, according to another U.S. official, speaking on condition of anonymity to discuss military operations. It was not clear what those missiles were aimed at. Two Iranian nuclear sites besides Fordo were attacked, Isfahan and Natanz. — Lolita C. Baldor Trump called Netanyahu after strikes Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said in a video that Trump called him after the strikes. 'It was a very warm conversation, very emotional,' Netanyahu said. Speaking in Hebrew, he called Trump a friend of Israel like no one before him. 'In my name, and on behalf of all citizens of Israel and on behalf of the entire Jewish world, I thank him from the bottom of my heart.' Error! Sorry, there was an error processing your request. There was a problem with the recaptcha. Please try again. You may unsubscribe at any time. By signing up, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google privacy policy and terms of service apply. Want more of the latest from us? Sign up for more at our newsletter page .

Atlantic

26 minutes ago

• Atlantic

Trump's Two-Week Window for Diplomacy Was a Smoke Screen

Well, he did it. He actually did it. President Trump insisted for months that he wanted the ultimate deal with Iran, one that would put a definitive end to the country's ability to produce a nuclear weapon. As late as Thursday, he suggested that Iran's leaders would have up to two more weeks to negotiate. But at that point, he had already made up his mind: the United States was going to bomb Iran. The president privately communicated his decision to bomb Iran's nuclear sites after a meeting with national security advisers on Wednesday, two people familiar with his decision told us. His statement Thursday, suggesting a two-week window and 'a substantial chance of negotiation' with Iran, was a feint meant to keep the Iranians off guard, four people familiar with the planning told us. (The White House did not respond to a request for comment Saturday night.) Trump declared from the White House Saturday that the strikes hours earlier had left Iran's nuclear facilities 'completely and totally obliterated,' and demanded that Iran abandon any remaining nuclear capability. The assault was the culmination of a nearly two-decade effort to contain or end Iran's nuclear program. It thrusts the United States more deeply into a high-stakes confrontation with a country where members of parliament chant 'Death to America' and quite possibly increases the potential for counterattacks and economic disruption. 'There will be either peace or there will be tragedy for Iran,' he said, standing with Vice President J.D. Vance, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth. The suggestion of a two-week reprieve Trump announced on Thursday came as the U.S. government prepared for a range of scenarios, flying U.S. citizens out of Israel, moving personnel out of American embassies in the Middle East, and dispersing ships and aircraft from bases in the region to prevent damage in any Iranian attack. The administration must now brace for the possibility of Iranian retaliation, which current and former officials said would most likely be aimed at U.S. bases, personnel or facilities in the Gulf, Iraq, or elsewhere in the region. The attacks could also have commercial repercussions if Tehran moves to attack or block shipping in the waterways off Iran. The operation was closely coordinated with Israel, now a week into its own highly effective bombing campaign on Iranian nuclear and military sites, a person familiar with the planning told us. After the U.S. strikes concluded, Trump spoke with Israel Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who has long pushed the United States to act. Trump chose to initiate his air assault after he was impressed by the success of Israel's offensive, which has further eroded Iran's air defense capability, and came to believe that 'a little push from us would make it incredibly successful,' an ally of the president who spoke to him about the decision told us. U.S. officials said Trump genuinely wanted to strike a nuclear deal with Iran—seven years after he ripped up the agreement reached by former President Barack Obama—but came to an impasse with the Iranians over the issue of the enrichment of uranium. Washington demanded that Tehran give up enrichment entirely, or else submit to strict American and international supervision. Iran refused these conditions. Some officials held out hope that U.S. bombing would change Iran's calculus and force its leaders to negotiate on the full dismantlement of the nuclear program. In the short term, however, they predicted that Iran would resort to asymmetric warfare, deploying cyberattacks and other operations that could potentially draw the United States further into the conflict. Retired General Joseph Votel, who served as CENTCOM commander during the Obama and first Trump administrations, said the United States would now employ aerial surveillance, mapping, and signals intelligence to assess the damage to Iranian nuclear sites. 'It's not as great as putting your own eyeballs on it,' Votel told us, 'but it's pretty good.' Trump's announcement of U.S. strikes on Saturday evening came about 90 minutes after the White House told reporters following the president that there would be no more news for the night, and they could go home. European leaders were meeting with an Iranian delegation as recently as Friday, in an effort to further negotiations. It was not clear that the United States told even its closest allies that, all the while, Trump had already made up his mind to strike. Precisely what persuaded Trump that Iran was close to making a weapon remains mysterious. For years, including when Trump was last in office, the U.S. intelligence community has publicly stated that Iran was not trying to build a nuclear weapon. Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard reiterated that bottomline conclusion during congressional testimony in March. But Trump dismissed her statement and the information behind it. 'She's wrong,' Trump told reporters on Friday, days after he had already made the decision to bomb Iranian nuclear facilities. Iran had gathered 'a tremendous amount of material,' he continued, apparently referring to the enriched uranium necessary to create a bomb. Earlier in the week, Trump had said he thought Iran was 'very close to having' weapons. The U.S. intelligence community also had said Iran was enriching uranium that could potentially be used in a weapon, and was stockpiling highly enriched uranium far in excess of what would be needed for a civilian energy program. But crucially, U.S. intelligence agencies had long ago determined that Iran's supreme leader had suspended the weapons program in 2003. Enriching nuclear material is just one component of a weapon. A nuclear warhead has to be fitted onto a ballistic missile capable of surviving reentry into earth's atmosphere and landing on its target–not a trivial feat of engineering. In an apparent attempt to make U.S. intelligence analysis adhere more closely to Trump's own judgments, Gabbard on Friday said that her comments before Congress that Iran was not trying to build a weapon had been deliberately misinterpreted by 'dishonest media.' 'America has intelligence that Iran is at the point that it can produce a nuclear weapon within weeks to months, if they decide to finalize the assembly,' she said in a post on X. She offered no additional information to explain that conclusion. In a statement after the U.S. strikes, Senator Mark Warner of Virginia, the top Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee, argued that Trump had made his decision 'without regard to the consistent conclusions of the intelligence community.' Trump fervently hoped for a negotiated deal but grew angry at what he perceived was Tehran's reluctance to seriously talk. He was also impressed with the media coverage of Israel's early successes and wanted to be associated with that win, according to two people familiar with the matter. He was convinced that Iran had never been weaker and would not be able to retaliate in a meaningful way, they told us. 'Iran was in trouble,' one said, 'and now was the moment to pounce.'