Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: NeoCaveman
Those poor people are only up 50% the poor things. When instead they could be down at least 20% in the stock market.

That depends upon the when they brought and sold. If they brought gold in 1981 as a long-term investment, the investment would have would have grown about 50% over 29 years or about 1.72% per year, which means that gold lost money after factoring in inflation. For example, a $10,000 investment in gold in 1981 would be worth about $15,000 today before the effects of inflation.

The S & P 500 index, in contrast, had an average annual return during that time period of approximately 12.5%, and a $10,000 investment in the Vanguard S & P 500 Index Fund in 1981, would be worth about $190,000 today before the effects of inflation. Since March 2009, many stock mutual funds, including the Vanguard S & P 500 Index are up over 40% and many funds are up 60% or more, but unlike gold, these funds can be brought and sold with a few clicks of the keyboard without paying a commission of any kind.

I really hate to disappoint you, but just because Rush, Mark, and Glen hawk gold on their shows, doesn't make gold a good long-term investment.

38 posted on 05/11/2010 2:54:04 PM PDT by Labyrinthos
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]


To: Labyrinthos

I was using the time frame mentioned in the article. Since 2007.

Yes. Past performance is not necessarily indicative of future performance.

Believe it or not, I’m neither stupid nor gullible nor financially illiterate. If you had invested in the Neikkei in 1989 you’d still be down 75%. The US market (in dollars) has been flat for a decade and more than a decade if you used foreign currency to buy it.

If the last decade taught us anything is not to trust the guys on Tout TV talking their book and preaching buy and hold.

We had a generation bull market, that was from 1982 to 2000. Maybe a decade from now, but probably two, the S&P might be ready for a replay but right now the market is expensive based on any historical metric (P/E, dividend yield, etc.)


45 posted on 05/11/2010 5:39:06 PM PDT by NeoCaveman (we now live in a post-Obamapacolyptic world)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies ]

To: Labyrinthos
And yes, if you bought Nasdaq in early 2000 you would be looking at a decline of 50%. Not sure what kind of return that would be but I would not want any part of it. By the way I bought my gold coins in 1959 at $38.00 per oz. Put it away and never even thought about trading It is now close $1250 per oz. Maybe the return is not that great over the years but I will settle for it. Also would like to relate that in Vienna in last two weeks the Austrian Mint sold 243,500 one oz coins. Historically this type of purchase will not be offered on the market again.
56 posted on 05/12/2010 12:30:26 PM PDT by brydic1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson