“Gold has no role in portfolio of wealthy clients” said the chief investment officer of Goldman Sachs’ private wealth management in the week that gold in US dollars went up by over $100 and made a new high of $1,984.
Many found this statement puzzling as another Goldman department previously has told clients not to sell anything gold.
The CIO went on to say: “Our view is that gold is only appropriate if you have a very strong view that the US dollar is going to be rebased. We don’t have that view.”
THE IMPLODING DOLLAR
So here we have a dollar that has lost 85% against gold in this century and 40% since 2018. How can the CIO of the mighty GS say that the dollar is not being rebased. History certainly tells us that she is not telling the truth. Or does she believe that the dollar won’t go down in coming years. As CIO she can clearly see what everyone is seeing namely that the prospects for the dollar are doomed with what is happening in the US economy causing surging deficits and unlimited money printing.
The truth clearly lies elsewhere. No asset manager is interested in protecting their clients’ assets by investing in the ultimate form of wealth preservation which of course is physical gold. The reason is very simple. Goldman’s private wealth management like all other asset managers are not interested in holding physical gold for their clients for the simple reason that the bank can’t earn sufficient revenue on just holding client gold. Instead they want to put expensive proprietary products and their own managed funds into client portfolios and also buy and sell shares regularly to churn commissions.
No bank, managing client portfolios, tells their clients that in the last 20 years gold has outperformed all major asset classes including stocks. The Dow for example has lost 70% against gold since 1999 (excluding dividends).
Instead asset managers stick to their conventional portfolios of stocks, bonds and some alternative assets. The Dow – Gold ratio is now 13 on its way to at least 1 to 1 as in 1980 and probably 0.5 to 1 as I discussed in last week’s article.