Friday 31 January 2014

Is all that glitters gold?

The performance of gold as an asset class is usually assessed in US dollar terms. This approach overlooks differences in currency performance over time, which can significantly distort returns. For example, gold would have been a much better investment in a high-inflation country with a depreciating currency than in a country with low inflation and a stable currency. 

An examination of the gold price over the last 30 years would call into question gold’s largely unquestioned status as a store of value.

This study looks at the Australian dollar gold price, using data from the Perth Mint[1].

Exchange rates and inflation are two big factors that obfuscate the true underlying performance of gold. As the chart below shows, the stellar performance of gold we hear so much about loses a bit of its lustre once exchange rates and inflation are taken into account.


In Australian dollar terms, gold has proven to be quite a volatile commodity over the last 39 years. The chart below shows the inflation-adjusted gold price since the days of the Whitlam prime ministership, with prices rebased to Sept 2013 levels using the ABS inflation series and interpolating inflation rates between quarters.


The most noticeable fact from this chart is that despite the decade-long bull market, we have nowhere near approached the highest recorded modern price of gold when inflation is taken into account. The short, sharp spike in 1980 is generally explained as occurring due to a confluence of extraordinary geopolitical events, such as the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan and the storming of the US embassy during the Iranian revolution.

Looking through this one-off spike and rebasing the series to an index where the gold price on 2 January 1975 is set at 100, the chart below emerges.



This chart makes it easier to see the long periods over which gold did not hold its real value. When the series falls below the x-axis, gold was worth less than its 1975 value. The choice of starting point does not make a big difference. The real gold price at the start of 1975 would be witnessed again in 1979, 1989, 1993, and 2006. Other than the period between 1979 and 1989, gold did not hold its value between those points in time.

The longest such interval is the 13 years someone who bought gold in 1993 would have had to wait for his investment to merely recover its original value. If we ignore the rally in the preceding years, this bear market lasted almost two decades, from 1990. This long underperformance is partly explained as caused by the offloading of gold by central banks. Another likely explanation is that the economic boom that arose off the back of the IT revolution made gold a relatively unattractive investment option. 

Nonetheless, this chart should help dispel the mystical aura that seems to surround gold and its status as a safe haven. An investment that can take up to 16 years to become positive and can fall by up to 30% in a matter of months is not low-risk in my book.

30 years would usually be considered to represent the ‘long term’, as it spans the majority of most people’s working lives. Yet as the chart above shows, since the abandonment of the gold standard, there have been several points when gold investors would not have maintained their initial investment after inflation, even after holding gold for 30 years. Buying and holding gold up to today would have proved very costly if it was bought at one of the peaks in the 80s, especially when opportunity cost is taken into account. 

Of course, historical performance is no guide of future performance, and it is possible that gold may hold its value better in future. But the historical data we have so far from the end of the gold standard is not encouraging. It is also interesting that the volatility of gold has not affected its status as a safe haven.   

In countries with high inflation, the perennial depreciation of the domestic currency makes gold look like a good investment and works as an effective inflation hedge. For example, the Indian rupee has moved in only direction since independence. It has gone from parity with the US dollar in 1947 to more than 60 rupees to a dollar today. Assets priced in foreign currencies, such as gold, have thus held their value, and delivered big returns in local currency terms.

However, simply holding foreign currency may be a safer strategy. Given the difficulty in obtaining and storing foreign currency and the traditional attraction to gold, it is not difficult to see the preference for gold as a popular store of value in countries like India. In the absence of a stable fiat currency, gold continues to play its ancient role as a store of value. In China, negative real returns on savings increase the relative appeal of gold as an investment. Together, India and China represent half of the world's demand for gold.

It could be argued that such monetary settings will provide a support for real gold prices as these countries continue to industrialise. As their populations become wealthier, they may continue to store their wealth in gold. However it should be noted that the Indian government recently slapped a tax on the importing of gold, as it was being blamed for its ballooning current account deficit. It is also questionable whether such monetary settings would be consistent with China’s stated aim of increasing consumption and reducing reliance on exports.

Another important question facing Australian gold investors is gold’s relationship with the exchange rate. Gold is priced in US dollars, which means that movements in the exchange rate can lead to a significantly different investment return in Australian dollars, compared to the underlying movement in the gold price. As the first graph reveals, the significant appreciation of the Australian dollar significantly cut the peaks of the gold price bull markets. If two investors in Australia and America had each bought a gold bar in June 1991 in their home currencies, at the peak of the gold bull market, the American would have enjoyed a nominal price appreciation of more than 5 times his initial investment, while the Australian’s return in his home currency would have been well under 4 times.

A study of Australian dollar gold prices and the exchange rate shows that there is a negative correlation between the two, meaning that they tend to move in opposite directions. The monthly return of gold has a correlation coefficient of -0.4 with the change in the exchange rate. This seems logical – being priced in US dollars, all else being equal, the AUD value of gold should rise when the Australian dollar falls and vice versa.

Finally, in exploring gold’s ability to preserve wealth, a logical point of comparison would be the share market. Another tenet amongst investors is that equities outperform other asset classes in the long run. 



A look at the All Ordinaries accumulation index from 1984 shows that shares soundly beat gold as a store of value over the last three decades, despite the 1987 Wall Street crash and the 2007 financial crisis. A dollar invested in the share market was mostly able to hold its real value over extended periods of time. Even if you had bought at the peak just before the Wall St crash in 1987, you would have recovered the purchasing power of your initial investment by 2005, and it would be worth roughly the same today. Of course, we don't know yet how long investors who bought at the 2007 peak will have to wait to recover their investment. 

Yet again, the numbers are sobering when inflation is taken into account. While the All Ords with dividends reinvested is a staggering 7.4 times its 1984 level in nominal terms, in real dollar terms that performance is whittled down to a more modest but still impressive 2.6 times.

The volatility of the All Ords dwarfs the movement in the gold price. A casual observer will be able to notice the daily swings and hence conclude that shares are risky. Yet the graph above indicates that over the long run, the share market is better as a store of wealth. This should not be surprising considering that the sharemarket is an aggregation of an economy's companies, which are generally able to reflect inflation in the prices they charge their customers. 

Fundamentally, economic value arises from the profitable provision of goods and services that are in demand, which is precisely what listed companies do. It is hence empirically sensible that investing in a diversified group of companies providing a strong proxy to economic activity is likelier to be a good store of value. On the other hand, the demand for gold is driven largely by investors and speculators, and its total supply is determined by mining activities. New engineering and scientific breakthroughs may make it easier to mine and refine gold, leading to an increase in supply. 

In conclusion, this short study goes some way in showing that in Australia at least, recorded history in the age of fiat currency does not suggest that gold is a safe store of wealth. It also illustrates just how powerful inflation can be in masking true investment performance.

Wednesday 15 January 2014

Hallowed be thy Name

Today it was reported the Greens want to remove the Lord's Prayer from the opening of Parliament and replace it with a "secular opening statement". Greens Senator Richard Di Natale believes its present status excludes non-Christians:
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/politics-news/greens-want-the-lords-prayer-dumped-from-federal-parliament-sittings/story-fn59nqld-1226801609325

On face value, I must be one of those allegedly excluded people Senator Di Natale is so concerned about. As a Hindu immigrant, I would probably blend nicely into his imagined fabric of a 'multicultural Australia' so threatened by the Lord's Prayer in Parliament. So it may interest the good Senator to know my opinion on the subject.


As a theist (albeit of a very different kind to a Christian), I value the invocation of a higher being and purpose at the opening of Parliament. Even though it probably has no effect, it is a good gesture that politicians at least pretend to be guided by an interest greater than self-interest. If only for a minute, it is a pleasant change to see them bow their heads to a power higher than a factional powerbroker, or an opinion poll. 


Since Australia has always been and continues to be a largely Christian country, the Lord's Prayer is the logical choice for the prayer to be said. It reflects not only the current demographic makeup but also the country's heritage. It echoes the Constitution, which opens with "Whereas the people of New South Wales, Victoria, ... humbly relying on the blessing of Almighty God..."


Fundamental philosophical differences notwithstanding, there is nothing in the Lord's Prayer that a Hindu, or for that matter, a believer of any religion, should find objectionable. There isn't even a mention of Jesus, whose status is a bone of contention amongst the Abrahamic religions.

As a quick study in comparative religion, I go through every line of the Lord's Prayer below to describe how a Hindu could read the Lord's Prayer:


"Our Father" 

Hindu literature generally uses the phrase paramapita (supreme father) to refer to Brahma, the deity of creation, who is presided over by Vishnu, the Ultimate God (i.e. the God with the capital G). Nonetheless, the depiction of God as a heavenly father would be familiar to Hindus and other theists, as it is an image commonly used at the earlier stages of religious understanding. 

"Which art in heaven,"  

Well, also in heaven. Hindus believe God is omnipresent, which would imply He is everywhere, of which heaven would be a small subset. I thus find this a limiting turn of phrase, but not an objectionable one.

"Hallowed be thy Name"

Amen! Theists of all faiths should unite in making this prayer in our increasingly godless and sceptical society.

"Thy kingdom come"

Like their Christian brethren, Hindus are also awaiting their day of redemption, when divine rule will be restored. They look back to Rama-Rajya (rule of God when He descended as the avatar Rama), and look forward to His next avatar as Kalki, who will destroy evil from the earth and usher in a new age of virtue. 

"Thy will be done, in earth as it is in heaven."

Redundant, but cute. This is the will of God we're talking about. It will be done, not only in heaven and on earth, but everywhere. That is the very definition of God being omnipotent. If you believe God is omnipotent (which Christians claim to), it is quite pointless to pray for His will to be done, in earth or anywhere else. 

Perhaps a more meaningful prayer (or interpretation) would be to pray that we have the humility and strength to accept whatever His will is, even if we fail to understand it, as we usually do. 


Nonetheless, the sentiment is one of submission to God's will. It is cute in a way, to use your limited mental resources to pray for God's will to eventuate.


As it stands, this is line philosophically redundant, but the sentiment behind it is encouraging. 


This is where the philosophical differences end, and from which point on the prayer could just easily be a Hindu one. Or for that matter, of any meaningful religion.


"Give us this day our daily bread."

This reminds us that our daily bread, and life itself, is a daily blessing not to be taken for granted.

"And forgive us our trespasses, as we forgive them that trespass against us."

The Hindu will be in complete agreement. This is not merely a prayer of penance, or a call to charity. It is also a reminder of the pithy, universal summary of morality: to "do unto others as you would have them do unto you." This is a universal philosophy which would resonate with theists of all religions, as well as atheists with a sense of morality. 

"And lead us not into temptation; but deliver us from evil. For thine is the kingdom, the power, and the glory, for ever and ever. Amen."
All meaningful religions seek to resist the temptation to commit evil, and to tread on the narrow path of righteousness (or the path of dharma, in Eastern religions). Hinduism shares the belief that God is the source of all power and glory. It goes even further, teaching that that is also the essence of God: 
"I am the intelligence of the intelligent, the glory of the glorious, the ascetism of the ascetics, the strength of the strong" - Bhagavad Gita 7:10-11

So it can be said that the Lord's Prayer is a simple and broadly universal prayer. Much of it resonates with Hinduism (and probably other religions), and none of it is offensive to or excludes any religion. 

Now some Christian fundamentalists will disagree, and argue that this prayer is indeed meant to exclude unrepentant sinners like me. Hence, they will for once in their life agree with the Greens. They will also claim I have no right to compare the true 'Christian God' with my 'false god', and that doing so is blasphemy. 

My answer to that is there is only one God. We differ strongly on our understanding of the nature of God, but that's all it is - our understanding. Hindus believe God is infinite, so vast and boundless that He is essentially unknowable to our limited human intellect. Any man who believes he knows everything about God is a fool. 

When a child prays to God, his understanding of God is incomplete. Yet we do not say children pray to a 'false god'. As we develop our spirituality, our understanding merely becomes less incomplete. But to think that we have fully understood God only reveals the depths of our ignorance, and our ignorance of our ignorance. It devalues God to say you know all there is to know about Him. It would be as if a musician claimed he had discovered and composed everything there was to know and create in music. No true artist ever claims to have reached perfection. The better they get, they discover newer and greater depths they never knew of before. So it is with spirituality.